A good place
The issue of remote location in hybrid criminal proceedings
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl.2779Keywords:
Right to a Fair Trial, Procedural Justice, Remote Criminal Justice, Article 6 ECHR, Legal GeographyAbstract
The use of videoconferencing in criminal proceedings has the potential to transform the spatial conditions under which defendants and other participants engage with the trial. However, how the characteristics of a remote location can affect a trial actor’s ability to participate in the trial—and potentially the fairness of the trial itself—are largely overlooked. This study examines how criminal proceedings in the member states of the Council of Europe address the issue of remote location, as well as the case law of the European Court of Human Rights on this matter. Then, drawing on socio-legal research, it argues that the adequacy of a remote location should be assessed not only on the appropriateness of technological means, but also on environmental, symbolic and personal conditions that collectively shape the remote participant’s ability to engage meaningfully with proceedings. The concept of suitability developed here offers a framework for further research into participation in hybrid proceedings and, more broadly, invites renewed attention to the spatial conditions in which criminal justice is administered.
Downloads
Metrics
Global Statistics ℹ️
|
83
Views
|
57
Downloads
|
|
140
Total
|
|
References
Aebi, M. F., and Cocco, E., 2025. Prisons and prisoners in Europe 2024: Key findings of the SPACE I report. Series UNILCRIM 2025/3. Council of Europe and University of Lausanne [online]. Available at: https://wp.unil.ch/space/files/2025/07/250715_key-findings-space-i_prisons-europe-2024_full.pdf
Allegrezza, S., and Bernardini, L., 2025. Digital participation at criminal trials in Europe toward a paradigm shift? European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice [online], 33, 17-42. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1163/15718174-bja10063 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/15718174-bja10063
Ballin, M. H., and Castelijn, T., 2024. The use of videoconferencing at trial and its effects on the rights of the defense: A study of the future regulation in the Netherlands. Tilburg Law Review [online], 29(2), 48-68. Available at: https://doi.org/10.5334/tilr.391 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/tilr.391
Bandes, S. A., and Feigenson, N., 2020. Virtual trials: Necessity, invention, and the evolution of the courtroom. Buffalo Law Review [online], 68(5), 1275-1352. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3683408 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3683408
Beazley, A., and Van de Gaer, R., 2024. COVID’s choice? Criminal trials, and the right to be present, the right to be tried within a reasonable time and the possibilities of remote participation. Tilburg Law Review [online], 29(2), 10-30. Available at: https://doi.org/10.5334/tilr.387 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/tilr.387
Belloni, P., Jaspaert, E., and de Vocht, D., 2025. Presence, proximity and participation: Online court communication from a procedural justice perspective. European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice [online], 33(1-2), 154-186. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1163/15718174-bja10069 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/15718174-bja10069
Casper, J. D., Tyler, T., and Fisher, B., 1988. Procedural justice in felony cases. Law & Society Review [online], 22(3), 483–507. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2307/3053626 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3053626
Cordier, F., 2018. Procédure pénale. Revue de Science Criminelle et de Droit Pénal Comparé [online], 4(4), 927-943. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3917/rsc.1804.0927 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3917/rsc.1804.0927
de Vocht, D., 2022. Trials by video link after the pandemic: the pros and cons of the expansion of virtual justice. China-EU Law Journal [online], 8(1), 33-44. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12689-022-00095-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12689-022-00095-9
de Vocht, D., and Jacobs, P., 2024. Can remote trials be fair trials? Exploring the potential effects of communication technology in the criminal justice context from an interdisciplinary perspective. Tilburg Law Review [online], 29(2), 1-9. Available at: https://doi.org/10.5334/tilr.383 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/tilr.383
Factor, R., et al., 2023. Videoconferencing in legal hearings and procedural justice. Victims & Offenders [online], 18(8), 1557-1579. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/15564886.2023.2248465 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15564886.2023.2248465
Falcone, A., 2022. Online hearings and the right to effective defence in digitalised trials. In: L. Bachmaier Winter and S. Ruggeri, eds., Investigating and preventing crime in the digital era [online]. Cham: Springer, 189-212. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-13952-9_9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-13952-9_9
Flower, L., 2025. The digital courtroom: Participation, attendance, engagement and consumption [online]. London: Routledge. Available at: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003344643 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003344643
HEUNI, 2026. European best practice recommendations for remote hearings in criminal court proceedings with adult parties [online]. Available at: https://heuni.fi/-/enhancing-videorecorded-interviews-and-virtual-hearings-in-europe#2c733ca1
Hynes, J., 2025. Physical and virtual spaces across a continuum of remoteness: Exploring spatial ruptures in remote court hearings. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers [online], 50(2). Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/tran.12694 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/tran.12694
Hynes, J., Gill, N., and Tomlinson, J., 2020. In defence of the hearing? Emerging geographies of publicness, materiality, access and communication in court hearings. Geography Compass, 14(9). Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/gec3.12499 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/gec3.12499
Jeffrey, A., 2019. Legal geography 1: Court materiality. Progress in Human Geography [online], 43(3), 565-573. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132517747746 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132517747746
Kamber, K., 2022. The right to a fair online hearing. Human Rights Law Review [online], 22(2), 1-21. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngac006 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngac006
Klip, A., 2024. The right to be present online. European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice [online], 32, 1-14. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1163/15718174-32010001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/15718174-32010001
Kremens, K., and Peristeridou, C., 2025. ‘Everything, everywhere all at once’: Virtual criminal justice in Europe. European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice [online], 33(1-2), 1-15. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1163/15718174-20250005 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/15718174-20250005
Laro González, E., 2025. La declaración por videoconferencia en materia penal desde la perspectiva europea y española. Revista de Estudios Europeos [online], 85, 150-170. Available at: https://doi.org/10.24197/ree.85.2025.150-170 DOI: https://doi.org/10.24197/ree.85.2025.150-170
Lu, R., et al., 2025. Livin’ in the future: Analyzing state statutes on video teleconferencing in criminal court proceedings. Criminal Justice Policy Review [online], 37(2), 103-128. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/08874034251383944 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/08874034251383944
McKay, C., 2018. The pixelated prisoner: Prison video links, court ‘appearance’ and the justice matrix [online]. London: Routledge. Available at: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315111506 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315111506
McKay, C., 2026. Digital vulnerability in criminal justice: Vulnerable people and communication technologies [online]. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland AG. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-032-10028-3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-032-10028-3
McKay, C., and Macintosh, K., 2024. Digital vulnerability: People-in-prison, videoconferencing and the digital criminal justice system. Journal of Criminology [online], 57(3), 313-333. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/26338076231217794 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/26338076231217794
Muir, B. R., Newman, E. J., and Rossner, M., 2025. The role of video background cues in the virtual court: A psychological perspective. Psychology, Crime & Law [online], 31(2), 207-225. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2023.2224493 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2023.2224493
Muir, B. R., Newman, E. J., Rossner, M., 2024. Evaluations of virtual defendants with depleted or rich contextual information. Tilburg Law Review [online], 29(2), 105-124. Available at: https://doi.org/10.5334/tilr.388 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/tilr.388
Nir, E., and Musial, J., 2022. Zooming in: Courtrooms and defendants’ rights during the COVID-19 pandemic. Social & Legal Studies [online], 31(5), 725-745. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/09646639221076099 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/09646639221076099
Peristeridou, C., and de Vocht, D., 2023. I’m not a cat! Remote criminal justice and a human-centred approach to the legitimacy of the trial. Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law [online], 30(2), 97-106. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/1023263X231193214 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1023263X231193214
Pivaty, A., 2026. Remote criminal hearings and article 6: Rethinking procedural guarantees after Stephan Kucera v Austria [online]. 3 March. Strasbourg Observers. Available at: https://strasbourgobservers.com/2026/03/03/remote-criminal-hearings-and-article-6-rethinking-procedural-guarantees-after-stephan-kucera-v-austria/
Reitz, J. C., 1998. How to do comparative law. American Journal of Comparative Law [online], 46(4), 617-636. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2307/840981 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/840981
Rossner, M., and Tait, D., 2023. Presence and participation in a virtual court. Criminology & Criminal Justice [online], 23(1), 135-157. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/17488958211017372 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/17488958211017372
Rowden, E., and Wallace, A., 2018. Remote judging: The impact of video links on the image and the role of the judge. International Journal of Law in Context [online], 14(4), 504-524. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1744552318000216 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1744552318000216
Sanders, A., 2021. Video-hearings in Europe before, during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal for Court Administration [online], 12(2). Available at: https://doi.org/10.36745/ijca.379 DOI: https://doi.org/10.36745/ijca.379
Thibaut, J., and Walker, L., 1975. Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. New York: Hillsdale.
Turner, J. I., 2021. Remote criminal justice. Texas Tech Law Review, 53, 197-271.
Turner, J. I., 2025. Rethinking courtroom presence in the virtual era. Indiana Law Journal [online], 101(1), 1-52. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5151997 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5151997
Tyler, T. R., 2006. Why people obey the law [online]. Princeton University Press. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400828609 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400828609
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Paolo Belloni
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
OSLS strictly respects intellectual property rights and it is our policy that the author retains copyright, and articles are made available under a Creative Commons licence. The Creative Commons Non-Commercial Attribution No-Derivatives licence is our default licence and it regulates how others can use your work. Further details available at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 If this is not acceptable to you, please contact us.
The non-exclusive permission you grant to us includes the rights to disseminate the bibliographic details of the article, including the abstract supplied by you, and to authorise others, including bibliographic databases, indexing and contents alerting services, to copy and communicate these details.
For information on how to share and store your own article at each stage of production from submission to final publication, please read our Self-Archiving and Sharing policy.
The Copyright Notice showing the author and co-authors, and the Creative Commons license will be displayed on the article, and you must agree to this as part of the submission process. Please ensure that all co-authors are properly attributed and that they understand and accept these terms.
