Videoconferentie en Rechtspraak

Presentatie over: "Videoconferentie en Rechtspraak"— Transcript van de presentatie:

1 Videoconferentie en Rechtspraak
in Nederland en Europa Peter J.A. van Rotterdam, NVvIR, Den Haag, 23 juni 2011

2 Videoconferentie - Wie is Peter van Rotterdam?
Dunglish 2005/ /03 Proj.Mgr. Videoconferentie in de Rechtspraak 2010/10 - ??? Proj.Mgr. Transnational Videoconferencing (in judicial procedures)

3 Videoconferentie – Wat ga ik vertellen?
Regelgeving en Eisen Invoering in Nederland Stand van Zaken in NL Sharing Best Practices in Europe

4 Videoconferentie – Regelgeving
Wijziging van het Wetboek van Strafrecht en het Wetboek van Strafvordering en enige andere wetten in verband met het gebruik van de videoconferentie in het strafrecht 20 (2000) Nr. 1 TRACTATENBLAD VAN HET K O N I N K R I J K D E R N E D E R L A N D E N 388 Wet van 16 juli 2005 tot wijziging van het Wetboek van Strafrecht en het Wetboek van Strafvordering en enige andere wetten in verband met het gebruik van de videoconferentie in het strafrecht Overeenkomst, door de Raad vastgesteld overeenkomstig artikel 34 van het Verdrag betreffende de Europese Unie, betreffende de wederzijdse rechtshulp in strafzaken tussen de lidstaten van de Europese Unie, met verklaringen; Brussel, 29 mei 2000 275 Besluit van 8 mei 2006, houdende algemene eisen ten aanzien van het horen van personen per videoconferentie (Besluit videoconferentie) 610 Besluit van 27 november 2006, houdende wijziging van het Besluit videoconferentie

5 Videoconferentie – Wat is dat?
Beeld- en Geluidsverbinding tussen 2 (of meer) lokaties Rechter, OvJ/IND, griffier (advocaat), publiek te horen persoon, tolk (advocaat)

6 Videoconferentie – Regelgeving
Voorwaarde behoud kwaliteit rechtspraak Toepassing alle zaken, maar voorlopig nog niet … Per zaak rechter besluit videoconferentie al dan niet in te zetten (advocaat heeft keuze cliënt bij te staan in rechtszaal of op locatie cliënt) Praktijk ● hoog volume, lage interactie - verlenging raadkamer gevangenhouding vreemdelingenbewaring ● hoge kosten - rogatoire commissies

7 Videoconferentie – Eisen vanuit de Regelgeving
In order to assure the interests of each person involved (person to be heard, judge, lawyer and others) the quality of image and sound should be such that each person involved gets a realistic and clear view on what is happening in the other (remote) location The view should not be manipulated by e.g. zooming in or out and/or focusing more or less on certain characteristics of a person Image and sound should be synchronized Looks, facial expression, mouth movements, direction of view, gestures, posture of each person involved should be clearly perceptible Other persons in the other (remote) location should be visible Interactions between persons (how they react, when they look at and/or speak to each other) should be clearly noticeable Sound should be real-time, audible and allow simultaneous speaking Communication should be possible based on sound only (e.g. while looking through files) Objectivity: each person should be represented in the same way to each other person and each person should have the same perception of eye-contact with all other persons True-to-Life

8 Videoconferentie – Eisen vanuit de Regelgeving

9 Videoconferentie – Eisen vanuit de Regelgeving
Consultation facility to consult one’s lawyer (with or without interpreter’s assistance, in one or from the other remote location) not to be heard by others Exchange of Documents facility to share and/or exchange documents (either hard- or softcopy, either in file or new in court session) between both locations Secure the authenticity of the reproduction should be assured in that it is indefeasible it should not be possible to (meaningfully) intercept the reproduction Cross-Border Connectivity it should be possible to connect the system to systems outside Netherlands; each system should therefore adhere to ITU standards for ISDN, VPN, Internet and DSL

10 Videoconferentie – Eisen vanuit de Praktijk
Usability possible to use court rooms also for non-videoconferencing proceedings possible to alternate between videoconferencing and non-videoconferencing fast possible to change videoconferencing settings between cases fast (~1 minute) reliable to use (technically stable) easy to use (not too many options / buttons)

11 Videoconferentie – Invoering in Nederland
Tot Onderzoek Herfst 2005 Operationalisering van Eisen Europese Aanbesteding Jaar 2006 Overeenkomst met Leverancier Technische Voorbereidingen Rb Maastricht + Dboot Dordrecht Jaar 2007 Beperkte Uitrol - Vreemdelingenbewaring (Rb Maastricht + Dboot Dordrecht) - Transnationaal (Rb Haarlem + HvJ Curaçao + Rb DenHaag) Evaluatie van Praktijk Ervaringen Begin 2008 Besluit tot Landelijke Uitrol

12 Videoconferentie – Invoering in Nederland

13 Videoconferentie – Stand van Zaken in Nederland
15 Rechtbanken # Zaken 3 Detentiecentra en 6 Penitentiaire Inrichtingen Almelo Amsterdam Arnhem 's-Hertogenbosch 's-Gravenhage Dordrecht Groningen Haarlem Maastricht Middelburg Roermond Rotterdam Utrecht Zutphen Zwolle >1000 vreemdelingenbewaring (groei) >100 verlenging gevangenhouding (pilot) >25/jaar rogatoire commissies (sinds 2007) Zeist Rotterdam Zaandam Haarlem Zwaag/Hoorn Breda Amsterdam Haaglanden Voordelen Costs Savings (less transport, less delay) Safety (easier to keep guard over prisoners on site than during transport) Humanity (prisoners do not like transport) Others (e.g. less probability to not keep judicial terms) and it supports cross-border legal cooperation with videoconferencing as in EU-treaty

14 Videoconferentie – Stand van Zaken in Nederland

15 Videoconferentie – Sharing Best Practices in Europe
NL Ministry of Security and Justice together with entities from 11 member states Austria Belgium Bulgaria Czech Republic Germany Ireland Italy Latvia Malta Rumania Slovenia working on Transnational Videoconferencing – True to Life Implementation

16 Videoconferentie – Sharing Best Practices in Europe
Now: Agree on common ‘True-to-Life’ quality requirements VC Studios in Belgium, Germany, Czech Republic Evaluation of VC Facilities in Latvia and Malta Sharing Best Practices with all partcipants Later: Each EU Member State has at least 2 Courts with VC facilities At an agreed ‘True-to-Life’ quality level To apply VC for national and transnational purposes And From There: Further Roll-Out as appropriate

17 Videoconferentie – Sharing Best Practices in Europe

18 VRAGEN?