This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/law/2018/jul/16/reporting-restrictions-prevent-scrutiny-of-economic-crimes
The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 2 | Version 3 |
|---|---|
| Reporting restrictions 'prevent scrutiny' of economic crimes | Reporting restrictions 'prevent scrutiny' of economic crimes |
| (about 2 months later) | |
| Excessive court reporting restrictions, inadequate listing information and difficulties in obtaining documents are preventing scrutiny of economic crimes and bribery cases, according to a report by Corruption Watch UK. | Excessive court reporting restrictions, inadequate listing information and difficulties in obtaining documents are preventing scrutiny of economic crimes and bribery cases, according to a report by Corruption Watch UK. |
| A high proportion of hearings are effectively being heard in private because of tight legal controls, and fraud trials are disproportionately affected by such court orders, the study said. | A high proportion of hearings are effectively being heard in private because of tight legal controls, and fraud trials are disproportionately affected by such court orders, the study said. |
| The majority of foreign bribery cases that have come to court in the past two years have been subject to reporting restrictions, according to Corruption Watch. | The majority of foreign bribery cases that have come to court in the past two years have been subject to reporting restrictions, according to Corruption Watch. |
| Cases involving unexplained wealth orders – introduced in January as instruments for targeting illicit and corrupt wealth in the UK – are proceeding in secrecy without adequate monitoring of how they are used, the report said. | Cases involving unexplained wealth orders – introduced in January as instruments for targeting illicit and corrupt wealth in the UK – are proceeding in secrecy without adequate monitoring of how they are used, the report said. |
| The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) is currently unable to publicise two major corporate guilty pleas because of blanket reporting restrictions, it said. | The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) is currently unable to publicise two major corporate guilty pleas because of blanket reporting restrictions, it said. |
| Closed justice: how British courts are still keeping the public in the dark | Rob Evans | Closed justice: how British courts are still keeping the public in the dark | Rob Evans |
| Court lists add to the problems, the report said, because they lack sufficient detail to highlight the significance of cases, are usually only available the afternoon before hearings at the earliest, and their distribution online has been partially privatised, “undermining open justice”. | Court lists add to the problems, the report said, because they lack sufficient detail to highlight the significance of cases, are usually only available the afternoon before hearings at the earliest, and their distribution online has been partially privatised, “undermining open justice”. |
| Corruption Watch said it found that despite the court of appeal ruling that court documents should by default be accessible to the public, they could not usually be obtained in criminal cases without instructing counsel. | Corruption Watch said it found that despite the court of appeal ruling that court documents should by default be accessible to the public, they could not usually be obtained in criminal cases without instructing counsel. |
| “In civil cases,” the report said, “it usually takes weeks to obtain a single document, a process that involves multiple trips to the courthouse and can cost upwards of £50. Transcripts of hearings are also prohibitively expensive, often costing more than £20,000 for a three-week trial. Generally, a UK-based reporter can more easily access documents from any US federal court than London’s Royal Courts of Justice.” | “In civil cases,” the report said, “it usually takes weeks to obtain a single document, a process that involves multiple trips to the courthouse and can cost upwards of £50. Transcripts of hearings are also prohibitively expensive, often costing more than £20,000 for a three-week trial. Generally, a UK-based reporter can more easily access documents from any US federal court than London’s Royal Courts of Justice.” |
| Rahul Rose, a senior researcher at Corruption Watch, said: “There are countless rulings from senior members of the judiciary highlighting the vital importance of transparency and openness for the justice system. However, for most members of the public, including experienced journalists, the courts feel Kafkaesque and opaque. | Rahul Rose, a senior researcher at Corruption Watch, said: “There are countless rulings from senior members of the judiciary highlighting the vital importance of transparency and openness for the justice system. However, for most members of the public, including experienced journalists, the courts feel Kafkaesque and opaque. |
| “The lack of open justice in the court system is having a worrying effect on anti-corruption enforcement with many bribery trials receiving no contemporaneous coverage, and significant hearings routinely proceeding in private.” | “The lack of open justice in the court system is having a worrying effect on anti-corruption enforcement with many bribery trials receiving no contemporaneous coverage, and significant hearings routinely proceeding in private.” |
| Law | Law |
| Serious Fraud Office | Serious Fraud Office |
| Court of appeal | Court of appeal |
| news | news |
| Share on Facebook | Share on Facebook |
| Share on Twitter | Share on Twitter |
| Share via Email | Share via Email |
| Share on LinkedIn | Share on LinkedIn |
| Share on Pinterest | Share on Pinterest |
| Share on WhatsApp | Share on WhatsApp |
| Share on Messenger | Share on Messenger |
| Reuse this content | Reuse this content |