Is it possible to record the hearing in the USA in Turkey?

You know, the one who erased the traffic fines of the nation and said to us for a moment while scrolling through the posts on social media?Wow! humanity is not deadDo you remember the judge who made you say? Yes, by Frank Caprio we are talking about. This sweet judge who brings smiles to people’s faces is known for her show Caught in Providence.

In the minds of people who see sections of this program, “How can such a production be set up in a court?”, “Can hearings be recorded and shared in this way?” and finally “In our country Could such a situation occur?Questions like ” arise. Let’s talk about this issue, which is no different from Arabic hair, as clearly as possible.

Is it legal to record hearings or even broadcast them live?

This situation, both in America and elsewhere in the world, criminal and civil hearings It is evaluated by dividing into two. There is a critical distinction even in the US perspective, which sees this more flexibly. Because on the one hand “If a camera enters this hall, it will only pass over my corpse.Former judge defending the idea David Souter While there are those like this, on the other hand, there are those who argue that this will increase trust in society.

The presence of cameras, according to some, puts court officials and civilians at risk. media pressure It may affect the decision to be made or the defense to be made. On the other hand, there is a group that advocates transparency. This distinction becomes even deeper, especially in extreme cases where the issue of ethics cannot be included, that is, only the law must play a role.

Of course, what we say is valid for “third parties” who want to record, other than those involved in the case and the court itself.

Because courts have the authority to take audio and/or video recordings if they deem necessary. But the defendant without consent It is illegal for this to be leaked outside.

At the same time, in the USA, it is not enough for the state or the court to allow this. Although this is basically allowed, judges require recordings to be made during the hearing. has the power to ban. This naturally causes controversy in certain hearings.

freedom of the press By presenting these images to the public, advocates want to show how justice is achieved – or not. In this way, people believe that judges will make more objective decisions and jurors will be more fair. In this context, we see that many state courts allow recording within certain rules.

But when it comes to federal courts, it’s not that easy.

Because although we see that it is allowed in some cases in civil cases, criminal cases The courts have an attitude against recording. The U.S. Supreme Court, the nation’s highest appellate court in this field, was initially against the records but now only out loud It allows live broadcasting.

As you can see before moving on to the situation in our country, the debates are on one side of the scale. from the fluidity of media concerns arising from, on the other hand, people’s wanting transparency The subject of freedom is born. While the authorities are worried about the chaos that the media will create, especially in the cases of people whose names are widely known, the society may not be sure that the authorities will act fairly.

How is this situation in our country?

No. 6100 Code of Civil Procedure Article 153 explains the issue clearly as follows:

“During the hearing no photos can be taken and in no way Audio and video recording is not possible. However, in cases where the trial makes it necessary, provided that it is reserved in the case file, withdrawal can be made by the court and registration can be obtained. All kinds of documents and minutes in the case file, including the recordings and recordings made in this way and issues concerning personal rights, shall be submitted to the court and the relevant persons. unless express permission It cannot be published anywhere.”

In other words, in our country, this can only be done by the court if deemed necessary. If people try to register despite this, they are punished. Punishments are made according to Article 286 of the Turkish Penal Code. It is like this:

“Audio or video during investigation and prosecution proceedings unauthorized recording or the person who transports it is punished with imprisonment for up to six months.”

There are also differences in keeping court records that you’ll want to know about.

Code of Civil Procedure This time, article 154 explains our method of keeping minutes as follows:

“With the execution of the investigation and trial proceedings, the judge records the oral statements of both parties and other relevant parties, briefly, if necessary, through the court clerk. registers.”

Well around the judge There is a revolving tradition of recording. In the USA, people who do this record everything said independently of the judge. The work done by these people, who are tasked with writing down everything that comes out of everyone’s mouth, becomes the written record of that hearing. Of course, electronic recording of each hearing is also included in the system.

“How do they write all that stuff so fast?” If you are thinking, let us introduce you to the shorthand typewriter.

This tool you see is not a letter by pressing multiple keys. syllabic It allows you to write. After years of training, stenographers who use this device in parliament and courtrooms quickly record what comes out of the mouth. Meanwhile, the stenographer, who is not under the control of the judge, can quickly do his part.

In our case, this tool is intensively in the Turkish Grand National Assembly It is used to record the speeches of MPs. In fact, according to a recent development, parliamentary stenographers will now include artificial intelligence tools that convert audio into text. In the courts minute clerksrecords what people say.

Lawyer Yıldırım Hacıoğlu, whom we consulted on this issue, touched upon our country’s situation and advantages on this issue.

According to Hacıoğlu, all hearings in our country are closed in order to protect the independence of the judiciary. UYAP It should not be forgotten that it was recorded within the framework of the (National Judicial Network Information System) system. So after reading all this”The judge can do whatever he wants.“You don’t need to think like this. Because the monitors in the courtroom show what is recorded and what is not. In this way, the report is transferred to the UYAP system in a way that is accepted by everyone and is later recorded. It is not possible to change. Of course, in addition to the minutes, the entire courtroom is recorded with cameras in order to examine situations such as behavior, movements and attitudes. Our system in question is used by many countries in Europe. being taken as an example.

Moreover, although it is forbidden to record the hearings, took place publiclyIn this context, it should be reminded that viewing is free.

Thus, we touched upon the issue of video and audio recording in courtrooms. In addition, we also saw many differences in keeping minutes. Many lawyers, which you can see in our source links, claim that Turkey is a step behind, especially in the methods of keeping minutes. What are your thoughts?