Michael A. Chihak, Editor and Publisher, Tucson Citizen
4850 S. Park Ave., Tucson, AZ 85714
(520) 573-4646 (office); (520) 806-7759 (fax);
[email protected] The Petition of KPNX Broadcasting Company to amend Rule 122 of the Rules of the Arizona Supreme Court concerning camera coverage of courtroom proceedings has the full support of the Tucson Citizen.
My experience as editor and publisher of the Citizen for the last eight years is that courts in Pima County are increasingly unwilling to permit cameras in the courtroom. Several judges routinely deny requests for camera coverage without explanation, leaving the public to wonder why important cases are not subject to camera coverage, whether in our newspaper, on television or streamed live on the Web. Ironically, in an age of greater technological capacity to reveal what goes on in our courts, we are learning ever less about what takes place in our courtrooms through cameras.
Readers rely on images as sources of information, and Rule 122 should be updated to reflect this modern reality. Given the important role that cameras play in print, television and Internet journalism today, courts should be required, at a minimum, to make findings before banning photographic coverage. I understand that there is no constitutional right to camera coverage of court proceedings, but there is no constitutional prohibition, either.
The public’s First Amendment right of access to courtroom proceedings cannot be fully realized unless trial judges observe basic procedural safeguards before banning the use of this basic newsgathering tool.
KPNX’s proposed amendment to Rule 122 strikes a workable balance between the public’s need for information about the legal system, on the one hand, and reasonable concerns about the potentially harmful effects of camera coverage, on the other.
The proposed amendment preserves all the protections for privacy and safety of witnesses and ensure the right of parties to request a hearing on camera coverage decisions.
The revision suggested by the Maricopa County Superior Court would allow trial judges to consider the timeliness of the request in weighing the implications of camera coverage. This revision will encourage the media to submit camera coverage requests well in advance of trials and hearings – a fact will that will minimize delays to proceedings that exist under the current rule.
In sum, I urge the Court to adopt KPNX’s proposed amendment to Rule 122, along with the revisions suggested by Maricopa County Superior Court.
Respectfully submitted,
Michael A. Chihak