La présentation est en train de télécharger. S'il vous plaît, attendez

La présentation est en train de télécharger. S'il vous plaît, attendez

Visioconférence transfrontalière Cross-border Videoconférencing -Journées européennes dinformatique juridique, Paris 22-23 novembre, 2012 Aki Hietanen,

Présentations similaires


Présentation au sujet: "Visioconférence transfrontalière Cross-border Videoconférencing -Journées européennes dinformatique juridique, Paris 22-23 novembre, 2012 Aki Hietanen,"— Transcription de la présentation:

1 Visioconférence transfrontalière Cross-border Videoconférencing -Journées européennes dinformatique juridique, Paris novembre, 2012 Aki Hietanen, Ministère de la Justice, Finlande

2 Videoconferencing – perfect tool for E-Justice? -Slow justice vs. E-Justice -Videoconferencing is a multipurpose tool (technology suitable for many purposes, not only for court sessions) -Finance: the savings can be easily identified (costs of transporting prisoners) Efficiency: speeds up the process, no need to postpone hearings Security (court staff, witnesses) Humane (vulnerable witnesses)

3 Pourquoi visioconférence? Lutilisation de la visioconférence en matière judiciaire offre de multiples avantages Finance Efficacité Securité Humain Nationale + transfrontalieré

4 Videoconferencing – current status There is no exact information on how frequent is the use of videoconferencing in cross-border hearings or at the national level between courts, prisons, police and prosecutors Many experts are convinced that videoconferencing could be used much more often There are several EU level legal instruments supporting the use of videoconferencing The challenge – many know the benefits and the broad legal basis, but the actual use is at a low level

5 Legal instruments for VideoC Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters between the Member States of the European Union (Convention of 29 May 2000, the 2000 MLA Convention, Article 10) Council Regulation (EC) on cooperation between the courts of the Member States in the taking of evidence in civil and commercial matters (No 1206/2001 of 28 May 2001, Article 10(4)) Council Directive relating to compensation to crime victims (2004/80/EC of 29 April 2004, Article 9(1)) Regulation (EC) of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a European Small Claims Procedure (No 861/2007 of 11 July 2007, Articles 8 and 9(1)) Council Framework Decision on the standing of victims in criminal proceedings (2001/220/JHA of 15 March 2001, Article 11(1)) European Convention on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters (April 10,1959), second additional protocol Directive 2010/64/EU on the rights to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings (implementation by ) Directive 2011/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2011 on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims, and replacing Council Framework Decision 2002/629/JHA For most EU Member States these instruments are already applicable. + National legislation => Increasing number of legal instruments

6 Refus dutiliser la visioconférence Visioconférence - Matière pénale Refus dutiliser la visioconférence: lÉtat membre requis consent à laudition par visioconférence pour autant que le recours à cette méthode ne soit pas contraire aux principes fondamentaux de son droit et à condition quil dispose des moyens techniques permettant deff ectuer laudition. Convention du 29 mai 2000 relative à lentraide judiciaire en matière pénale, larticle 10, paragraphe 9, prévoit que le recours à la visioconférence peut être étendu aux personnes poursuivies pénalement. Chaque État membre peut décider en toute liberté sil accepteranon dexécuter les demandes relatives à ces auditions. Visioconférence - Matières civiles et commerciales Refus dutiliser la visioconférence: la juridiction requise défère à cette demande, à moins que cela ne soit incompatible avec le droit de lÉtat membre dont elle relève ou en raison de difficultés pratiques majeures.

7 Videoconferencing – legal and practical aspects There is a solid legal basis for using videoconferencing in cross-border cases BUT: No detailed rules concerning the practical arrangements of videoconferencing BUT: No rules have existed concerning the interpretation, e.g. agreement between the EU and Japan on mutual legal assistance in criminal matters: at the request of the requesting State or the person to be heard, the requested State will ensure, if necessary, that the person is assisted by an interpreter; A new era starting: EU Directive 2010/64/EU on the right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings

8 Interpretation in Videoconferencing EU Directive 2010/64/EU on the right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings Where appropriate, communication technology such as videoconferencing, telephone or the Internet may be used, unless the physical presence of the interpreter is required in order to safeguard the fairness of the proceedings. Preamble of the directive: (28) When using videoconferencing for the purpose of remote interpretation, the competent authorities should be able to rely on the tools that are being developed in the context of European e-Justice (e.g. information on courts with videoconferencing equipment or manuals). -Information on the use of interpreting in criminal proceedings has been collected in AVIDICUS projects -http://www.videoconference-interpreting.net/Avidicus.html

9 Videoconferencing and Human Rights? There are only a few European Court of Human Rights judgments concerning the use of videoconferencing or other techn in court proceedings. Viola 27/11/2007 (§67) « la participation de laccusé aux débats par vidéoconférence nest pas, en soi, contraire à la Convention » Lawyer Partner 16/06/2009 (§54) « Quant à l'argument avancé par les juridictions internes selon lequel elles ne disposaient pas du matériel nécessaire pour traiter les actions de la requérante, la Cour rappelle que la possibilité de communiquer des documents par voie électronique figurait dans le droit interne depuis » Sakhnovski 2/11/2011 « la communication par visioconférence na pas offert la confidentialité nécessaire entre lavocat et son client. » Conclusions: CEDH considère que la visioconférence est compatible avec le droit à un procès équitable mais elle est attentive aux garanties qui entourent son utilisation.

10 Videoconferencing in the e-Justice portal Information on general videoconferencing policy; A booklet prepared by the Council of the EU, containing information on the legal framework, technical issues and good practices in cross-border videoconferencing A manual providing more detailed information for practitioners (e.g. judges, court clerks, and court technicians); Information on national facilities - enables practitioners to find out whether VC equipment is available in a specific court in another Member State; Dynamic forms that currently concern only cross- border proceedings in civil and commercial matters (according to Council Regulation of 2001). They enable the requesting court to fill in requests online, to check whether a request is complete, to print, save, translate into the language of the requested court and such documents.

11

12 Videoconferencing more flexible 1. Less bureaucracy – more flexilibity in the legal instruments on legal aid etc. 2. More flexible technical equipment (portable equipment for hearing witnesses in hospitals, etc.) 3. Raise the awareness of judges, prosecutors, advocates and court staff on the advantages of videoconferencing 4. Improve the availability of interpreters and utilize public registers of interpreters 5. Build-up of trust in the preparations (the roles of participants) 6.Training of judges, prosecutors and advocates is needed 7. Collect and share good practices 8. Prepare easy-to-use national guidelines with legal and technical tips 9.Use of uniform standards in the equipment promotes interoperability 10.Promote future visions – court-to-court, true to life, IP-to-IP via a cross-border booking system

13 Videoconferencing more flexible (2) More flexilibity in the legal instruments on legal aid and taking of evidence in civil and criminal matters 1.Clarify the contents in the relevant articles of the 2001 Regulation and of the MLA Convention of Enable the use of videoconferencing in future EU legal instruments and in the reform of existing legal instruments 3. Easy-to-use online dynamic forms for requests (now only in civil matters) 4. Enable direct contacts between courts (nowadays not in criminal matters) 5. Possibility to send the request and the reply by e- mail (nowadays not possible in most EU member states)

14 Videoconferencing more flexible (3) More flexilibity in the use of technical equipment Finland has started installing different kinds of videoconferencing equipment for different purposes. For the courtrooms, there is a complete set, with high-definition (HD) quality of picture in cameras and screens. For the preliminary hearings, these is a separate set for meeting rooms. For hearing witnesses is a basic set with a terminal, camera and microphone. For mobile use, e.g. in social centres, hospitals, asylum centres etc. is the portable version, including a laptop with software and a camera.

15 Videoconferencing more flexible (4) - Build-up of trust in the preparations of videoconf. -> Clarify the roles of participants - Who is in charge of the hearing - Participants need to be made aware how the court session will proceed and which courts or other locations are connected - Information on where the participants are located - Role of the interpreter (especially in remote interpreting, simultaneous/consecutive) - Role of technical staff Article 6 of the directive 2010/64/EU: Member States shall request those responsible for the training of judges, prosecutors and judicial staff involved in criminal proceedings to pay special attention to the particularities of communicating with the assistance of an interpreter so as to ensure efficient and effective communication.

16 Visioconferencé – Futurs projets des liens vers les législations de l'Union et des États membres régissant le recours à la visioconférence; des informations compilées sur toutes les juridictions disposant d'équipements de visioconférence dans les États membres; des outils destinés à l'organisation pratique des visioconférences (formulaires électroniques, éventuellement un système de réservation dans le long terme); des liens vers des instructions ou manuels nationaux, s'il en existe; une rubrique présentant des exemples de visioconférence dans des procédures transfrontalières et un recueil de bonnes pratiques; des renseignements sur les formations et des modules de formation en ligne; un lien vers les bases de données d'interprètes interconnectées.

17 Getting Connected – the Future Infrastructure Touch-panel PC Gatekeeper Secondary gateway ISDN Primary gateway IP gateway WAN Finnish authorities Courts Prisons Prosecutors External calls IP gateway WAN European authorities

18 What could be done? The Study on the Application of the Taking Evidence Regulation 2001 proposed already in 2007: Creation of a body within the justice administrations entrusted with strategic planning and implementation of videoconferencing Installation of the appropriate equipment in the selected court buildings Programme to provide legal practitioners with training and information Preparing a list of courts with videoconference facilities Establishment of specific legislation regulating cases in which videoconferencing can be used, and the conditions governing its use, at EU level. This would contribute towards its normalisation and would foster its use.

19

20 Visioconferencé - Finlande Finland has experience in the use of videoconferencing in cross-border court proceedings –First experiences with Estonia fifteen years ago –All courts, prisons and prosecutor offices with videoconferencing equipment –Challenging experiences: hearing of witnesses in Rwanda genocide case in 2010 and in football & money laundering case in Sambia in 2011 –First experiences with hearing witnesses from Russia (a booklet has been prepared by Finland for Russian authorities)

21

22 Visioconférence – Obligations Le recours à la visioconférence impose aux Etats de nombreuses obligations : Obligation de mise à disposition des moyens nécessaires, Obligation de vigilance à la fois pour prévenir les incidents techniques et pour veiller au respect des droits de la défense, Obligation aussi, de formation des acteurs de la justice à ces techniques de communication. Aide Pratique: Le Portail européen E-Justice https://e-justice.europa.eu -Guide sur la Visioconférence dans les Procédures judiciaires transfrontiéres -Livret: La Visioconférence dans le cadre de la Justice en Ligne européenne

23 Le Guide et le Livret

24 Questions? aki.hietanen(a)om.fi

25 Merci Beaucoup!


Télécharger ppt "Visioconférence transfrontalière Cross-border Videoconférencing -Journées européennes dinformatique juridique, Paris 22-23 novembre, 2012 Aki Hietanen,"

Présentations similaires


Annonces Google