Grands colloques - Les technologies de l'information et de la communication au service de la justice du XXIe siècle -1 - 271

LAURENCE DUMOULIN AND CHRISTIAN LICOPPE

261

Chamber, although it only concerned the detention of the person and not
the substance, was the first opportunity that she had had to see him again.
Her lawyer—a tenacious opponent of videoconferencing—has publicly
lamented that videoconferencing amputated some part of this confrontation. Seated where she was, that is to say where the plaintiff sits, the
young woman was never on camera. The accused was therefore not aware
that his accuser was present. He might never have known it, had not the
plaintiff’s lawyer indicated that fact, as soon as she was given the floor.
Conversely, the plaintiff, in contact with the moving image of the accused,
did not interact with him: no gazes could be exchanged, no gesture or
bodily movement, no meaningful attitude was possible, in relation to the
other party.
The layout in the room usually used for hearings before the Examining
Chamber of the Grenoble Court of Appeal is such that, if members of
the public sit in the first or second row, on the right-hand side of the
room, they are on camera, and therefore appear on the screen behind the
lawyers who take the floor (one of the assessors then positions the screen
so that the inmate can see the lawyer who is speaking). We have observed
cases where the victims, initially seated on the left, or at the back of the
room, moved in order not only to see the screen better but also to position
themselves on camera. There may be a variety of reasons for wanting to
see or be seen by the detainee, which may or may not be linked to the
case in question: people may want to show that they are not afraid, but
they may also be seeking to anticipate the future. Thus, in the case of a
jeweller whose shop had been been robbed by people wearing ski-masks,
the aim was to see the person in order to be able to identify him or her
if they ever came back to the shop.
Proponents of videoconferencing tend to underestimate this type of
challenge, linked to physical presence, focusing instead on the virtues of
videoconferencing for victim protection—along with other technical means,
such as audiovisual recordings, used particularly for underage victims of
sexual offenses. There are also considerable challenges linked to the distancing of detainees, which may not be immediately apparent. Observation
shows that the relationship between defence lawyers and their clients
becomes less immediate, thus engaging the judge in a novel form of
mediation.

III – THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN
THE DEFENCE LAWYER AND THE DEFENDANT
FOR HEARINGS IN PRISON AND IN COURT
Regarding defendants, it is necessary to distinguish between those who
are free and detainees. Firstly because, to date, they are not targeted in
the same way by government policy—which aims to use videoconferencing

Grands colloques - Les technologies de l'information et de la communication au service de la justice du XXIe siècle -1

Table des matières de la publication Grands colloques - Les technologies de l'information et de la communication au service de la justice du XXIe siècle -1