By James Simons-
British Courts staff in some parts of the Uk do not read guidelines provided by the Ministry Of Justice, we can reveal.
Courts in a number of boroughs showed no understanding of guidelines in communicating with the press, after several highly appointed staff showed no knowledge expected commitment to the media and the application of data protection laws. When The Eye Of Media.Com approached Southend Magistrates Court for an update of a case that had taken place in open court , staff there wrongly believed the information should be obtained from the Ministry Of Justice.
On Calling the MOJ, it emerged that the Ministry had provided guidelines to all the courts to provide the media with any updates of cases that have taken place in courts. Despite the MoJ’s insisting that court staff have guidelines to co-operate with journalists who call, clueless staff continued to say they could not supply the information because of date protection. The Magistrates Court had to be told directly to provide the details requested.
An immediate test run was ordered by the editor of the site for other courts to be randomly called to assess their knowledge of the guidelines or data protection. Courts were called and asked whether they could provide an update of a fictitious case in order to see their response. The experiment which began on Friday has so far seen just four out of nine courts contacted who understood that they could provide information requested about cases in open court since those cases have been in the public domain.
IGNORANCE
Many court staff spoken to ignorantly mentioned data protection as a reason for withholding the requested information. some of them consulting their various managers for confirmation. The embarrassing situation for the courts who are paying people who lack basic knowledge about how the courts are expected to work when dealing with the press. Further tests are to be conducted this week in more courts, whilst the level of incompetence it shows about the court staff caught is being analysed.
The Ministry Of Justice was kept updated with our findings, whilst it is being decided whether the court staff found wanting should be exposed by name. The level of incompetence shown will depend on how far the guidelines to them from the Ministry Of Justice is central to their fundamental duties.
REASONS
Journalists have many reasons to request an update of a court case. The public interest is the most obvious, especially if they did not attend the case or discovered about the case after it had been concluded. Some journalists involved in background investigations about cases where clashes may have occurred, sometimes choose not to be present in the eventual court case. This happens more in gang related cases of violence or murder, or cases where emotions could be running high, and a journalists has a concern of safety because of a confrontation they fear may occur outside court.
Such concerns are not that common, but they happen, and sometimes, time for a replacement may be too short. A journalist should not have to explain why they want to obtain information about an event in open court, court staff should know journalists have a right to such information.
Our investigation showed that some of the courts takes 3 times longer to answer the phone than others, but officials at the other end in the fines department are very prompt to answer the phone.