In support of open courts

• Author: Iris Fischer
• Pages: 205-209

205

g Summer 2016

n u f pen curs

IRIS FISCHER

In February of this year, many were captivated by Jian Ghomeshi’s

sexual assault trial. That case, and the social media posts and report-

ing that preceded the charges, started a national conversation about

sexual assault and the criminal justice system. It also raised important

questions about court openness and privacy interests, and where the

balance should lie.

In the Ghomeshi trial, a coalition of the media applied to get access

to the trial exhibits, as the media does in other trials where there is a sig-

nicant public interest– the James Forcillo trial and Tim Bosma murder

trial, to name two recent examples. But unlike Forcillo and Bosma, in

Ghomeshi the media was the subject of strong criticism, even virulent

online attack, for its application to unseal a photo exhibit– the “bikini

photo” of the rst complainant.

I acted for the media coalition in the Ghomeshi case. Here’s why

the media applied to get access to all the exhibits in that case, which

was granted subject to the right of any interested party to object to the

release of a particular exhibit. And here’s why the media sought access

to the bikini photo, which it didn’t get.

I will start with some rst principles.

We have decades of case law that makes it clear: Our courts are pre-

sumptively open, and exhibits are presumptively accessible. This is the

case even when what is being adjudicated upon is highly personal, as it