{"id":343,"date":"2006-09-30T12:39:23","date_gmt":"2006-09-30T12:39:23","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2006-09-30T12:39:23","modified_gmt":"2006-09-30T12:39:23","slug":"cameras-in-court-no-nearer","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.sixthform.info\/lawblog\/?p=343","title":{"rendered":"Cameras in court no nearer"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>No decision on TV cameras in courts has been made 2 years after it was put up for discussion. The Department for Constitutional Affairs said it was not a priority. In August 2004 Lord Falconer announced a pilot scheme to film proceedings at the Royal Courts of Justice, saying that the time was &#8220;ripe for a debate&#8221; over filming the courts in England and Wales. The scheme excluded juries, witnesses and the dock from being filmed, but the proposals would allow broadcasters to screen the summing up of cases by a judge. A similar consultation for cameras in Parliament took 20 years to be made. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>No decision on TV cameras in courts has been made 2 years after it was put up for discussion. The Department for Constitutional Affairs said it was not a priority. In August 2004 Lord Falconer announced a pilot scheme to film proceedings at the Royal Courts of Justice, saying that the time was &#8220;ripe for [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-343","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.sixthform.info\/lawblog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/343","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.sixthform.info\/lawblog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.sixthform.info\/lawblog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.sixthform.info\/lawblog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.sixthform.info\/lawblog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=343"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.sixthform.info\/lawblog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/343\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.sixthform.info\/lawblog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=343"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.sixthform.info\/lawblog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=343"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.sixthform.info\/lawblog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=343"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}