Trial by Zoom? The Response to COVID-19 by Canada's Courts

Author:

Puddister KateORCID,Small Tamara A.

Abstract

COVID-19 has made videoconferencing a regular occurrence in the lives of Canadians. Videoconferencing is being used to maintain social ties, run business meetings—and to uphold responsible government. On April 28, 2020, Members of the House of Commons sat virtually using Zoom. The virtual sitting was the first of what will become a stand-in for regular proceedings, allowing the Members to fulfill some of their parliamentary duties while complying with physical distancing (see Malloy, 2020). As the legislative and executive branches look to digital technology to allow the business of government to continue, what about the judicial branch of Canada's government? Courts are an essential service. This is best articulated by the Chief Justice of Nova Scotia: “The fact is, the Courts cannot close. As the third branch of government, an independent judiciary is vital for our Canadian democracy to function. It is never more important than in times of crisis” (Wood, 2020). In this analysis, we seek to understand how courts have responded to COVID-19 and the challenges of physical distancing through the use of digital technologies. This is accomplished through a systematic review of COVID-19 statements and directives issued from all levels of court across Canada. We briefly compare Canada to the United States, a jurisdiction that demonstrates greater openness to technology.

Publisher

Cambridge University Press (CUP)

Subject

Sociology and Political Science

Reference20 articles.

1. Texas Judicial Branch. 2020. “Coronavirus (COVID-19) Court Operation Guidance: Chief Justice Issues New Emergency Order Renewing, Clarifying and Amending Previous Emergency Orders.” Texas Judicial Branch, April 27. https://www.txcourts.gov/media/coronavirus-covid-19-court-operation-guidance/ (May 7, 2020).

2. Supreme Court of Canada. 2020. “News Release.” April 29. https://decisions.scc-csc.ca/scc-csc/news/en/item/6850/index.do (May 14, 2020).

3. R. v. Jordan [2016] 1 SCR 631.

4. When Open Courts Meet Closed Government;Paciocco;The Supreme Court Law Review,2005

5. Ontario Court of Justice. 2020. “COVID-19 Pandemic–Definitions of Urgent Matters.” Ontario Court of Justice, March 20. https://www.ontariocourts.ca/ocj/covid-19/definitions-urgent-matters/ (May 7, 2020).

Cited by 32 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3