Courts to have television cameras if Cameron's plan is approved

London: Courts in England and Wales could be opened to television cameras for the first time if plans that were to be put forward by David Cameron yesterday are to come through.

The prime minister was expected to tell lawmakers that the conclusions to trials of murderers, terrorists and other serious criminals should be broadcast.

Once a defendant has been found guilty, cameras would be able to film the judge passing sentence and the reaction of the convicted criminal. Initially at least, the trial leading up to the verdict will not be shown, protecting witnesses from wider publicity. A ban on cameras in the courtroom was introduced in 1925. But in America, 38 of the 50 states allow TV cameras into criminal and civil courts, providing that the judge agrees.

Cameron is understood to believe that a judicial verdict should become more of a ‘moment of public reckoning', as well as aiding public understanding of the court process.

Coalition face-saver

The move will also be seen as part of attempts by Conservative members of the Coalition to toughen their stance on law and order in the wake of last month's riots, though the idea was being considered before the unrest broke out.

Cameron's proposed rule changes are expected to require full parliamentary legislation. Currently, only the proceedings of the UK Supreme Court can be televised, but they very rarely are.

Cameras have been allowed in some Scottish courts under tight restrictions since 1992. The appeal of Lockerbie bomber Abdul Basit Al Megrahi was televised in 2002. In the US, the controversial ‘not guilty' verdict at the O.J. Simpson murder trial in 1995 was widely attributed to courtroom coverage and the on-air antics of Simpson's lawyers. Under Cameron's plans, however, it is expected that the only part of a trial cameras will be able to film will be the judge passing sentence.

The prospect of easing the bar on cameras was raised by director of public prosecutions Keir Starmer, who suggested earlier this year that it would mean greater openness and transparency in the justice system.

"In principle I would support a proposal that judgments, judges' closing remarks and judicial sentencing in criminal cases could be televised," he said. "There may be a case for going further, although I would obviously not want to promote anything that adversely affected the ability of victims or witnesses to give their best evidence to the court.

His predecessor, Kenneth Macdonald, also argued the move would be appropriate as long as witnesses and juries were protected.