| Summary: | The state of courtroom technology in Ontario is increasingly capturing the attention of both the public and the legal profession. This article seeks to contribute to the conversation on this issue by focusing on one particular technology in Ontario’s courtrooms: the use of video conferencing to receive witness testimony in civil trials. The central claim is that the approach to video conferencing that dominates the policy discourse reflects an overly narrow, instrumentalist view of technology that fails to adequately take account of possible broader political and social implications as well as this technology’s transformative potential. This argument is developed by exploring two different sources of risk associated with the implementation of video-conferencing technology in civil trials: (1) how video conferencing, as a mediating technology, may unintentionally interfere with credibility assessments and emotional connections between courtroom participants; and (2) the ways in which video conferencing, by disrupting the physical geography of adjudication, threatens the solemnity associated with, and respect given to, the civil justice system. A detailed consideration of these risks reveals that video conferencing engages fundamental questions about our civil justice system and implicates democratic values in ways that require more nuanced consideration in conversations about its use. Rather than offer a final verdict on the use of video conferencing in civil trials in Ontario, this article concludes by calling for deeper and broader discourse on this issue. This discussion should include all stakeholders in a conversation about if and how video-conferencing technology should be incorporated into our civil justice system
|
|---|
