Thread by @OpenJusticeCoP

🧵

1/

Every six weeks or so, we step back and take a look at how the Court of Protection is doing in relation to open justice and transparency. Here's our assessment for 14th November listings and the last six weeks of observation. @HMCTSgovuk

2/

We've added another 2 Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) since last time.

They still represent a fairly modest collection of requirements for us to be able to support the judicial commitment to #openjustice and transparency in the Court of Protection.

@HMCTSgovuk 3/

So how well did the Court of Protection do in meeting the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) today?

Spoiler: Not very well at all. But there's room for optimism. The pattern of success and failure makes clear there's one obvious solution! @HMCTSgovuk

Follow this thread!

@HMCTSgovuk 4/

Here's a good example of a listing that supports the judicial commitment to transparency.

Says the hearing is public, via MS Teams, provides correct contact info, tells us it's a directions hearing + what it's about.

Excellent.

We wish they were all like that!

5/

Many hearings are NOT in the Court of Protection list on CourtServe.

This means they're hard to find. It also so means they don't comply with the pro-forma requirements of that list.

There are 46 hearings for today in CourtServe.

28 are in the COP list
18 are NOT.

6/

There are two hearings in Barnstable today.

They should have been in the Court of Protection list.

They're not.

And they don't include crucial info, e.g. that the hearings are public + what they're about.

It's the wrong contact address too.

@HMCTSgovuk

@HMCTSgovuk 7/

This hearing in Chelmsford isn't in the COP list.

I found it hidden in the Chelmsford Daily Cause list.

It doesn't comply with the pro-forma requirements of the COP list - nothing about the hearing being public, or what it's about. And the wrong contact info.

@HMCTSgovuk

8/

This hearing in Guildford today isn't in the COP list.

All it says is the time of the hearing and its case number.

It should say "public".

It should say whether it's remote/in-person ("hearing channel" is blank).

It should say what the hearing is about. @HMCTSgovuk

@HMCTSgovuk 9/

There are 6 hearings in Hastings today.

They're well hidden. You only find them if you leave the COP list and delve into the Daily Cause List for Hastings.

They should be in the COP list.

They should give a COP contact no. + more info.

@HMCTSgovuk

10/

Today's COP hearing in Horsham should have been in the COP list.

That's the list we rely on as members of the public.

We can't routinely spend hours scrolling through 100s of hearings in Daily Cause lists across England and Wales.

(At least this one says it's public!)

@HMCTSgovuk 11/

We expect better of Leeds

It's a COP regional hub.

But 3 hearings aren't in the COP list.

It seems it doesn't know its own COP email address - it directs would-be observers to a generic county court enquiries line.

It doesn't say "public"... or much else @HMCTSgovuk

12/

This hearing in Milton Keynes isn't in the COP list either.

Minimal information about the hearing.

And apparently the Hearing Channel is "Not Attending". I don't know what that means. Does anyone? (Should read MS Teams or BT Meet Me or in person)

@HMCTSgovuk

@HMCTSgovuk 13/

This hearing in Oxford isn't in the COP list.

It's missing lots of info & gives the wrong contact details.

This list of hidden hearings with missing information is really depressing.

(I added court photos to try to make it more cheerful but I'm not sure it worked)

14/

This hearing in Plymouth should be in the COP list.

Wrong contact details
Missing info

On the bright side, note the "modernising architectural agenda of the 1960s" + elegant building design (opened by Lord Denning on April 16th 1963)

@HMCTSgovuk

@HMCTSgovuk 15/

A hearing in Pontypridd today.

It's not in the Court of Protection list.

It doesn't say it's open to the public.

It doesn't say what it's about.

If it had been entered in the COP list, the pro-forma would elicit this info.

@HMCTSgovuk

16/

As well as 'hidden' hearings, there are 'secret' ones that aren't listed anywhere.

We know of 2 since the last assessment - both before Tier 3 judges (the most senior ones).

This listing failure for a hearing before Lieven J should never have happened. @HMCTSgovuk

@HMCTSgovuk 17/

I was told about a hearing before Lieven J in Northampton.

It wasn't in the COP list.

Nor was it in the Northampton Daily Cause list.

Or anywhere else.

I got the link from the judge's clerk (most people wouldn't be able to do that)

@HMCTSgovuk

18/

It's a recurrent problem - hearings before Tier 3 judges in regional courts often don't appear on any lists.

So @KitzingerCelia wrote to @HMCTSgovuk in October 2022 with suggestions as to how to fix this.

Looking forward to hearing developments.

19/

Then there was also a deliberately secret hearing recently.

There was good reason to keep it secret in this case. And the judge did reveal it, after the event.

Frankly, we're more worried about the many, many hidden + inadvertently secret hearings.

@HMCTSgovuk

@HMCTSgovuk 20/

So it's bad news on Key Performance Indicator 1 ("List the hearing in the COP list").

Well over a third of today's hearings (39%) are not in the COP list.

They're not only "hidden" as a result, they're also inadequately informative.

But @HMCTSgovuk is on to it!

21/

So now on to Key Performance Indicator 2: "Make it clear the public can observe".

Oh dear.

Only 24 of the 46 hearings listed for today do this.

@HMCTSgovuk

@HMCTSgovuk 22/

I emailed all 3 hearings in the COP list marked "Private".

1 sent me the link.

1 said they would have done but it had been vacated.

1 said they would have done if they'd opened my email in time, sorry.

Remember "private" doesn't mean we can't attend.

@HMCTSgovuk

23/

Key Performance Indicator 3

Tell us whether the hearing is remote or in person (and ideally whether it's telephone or video, and if video which platform).

Better news on this front. Most of the listings tell us! @HMCTSgovuk

24/

The "hearing channel" can change at the last moment.

This afternoon's hearing before Hayden J in the Royal Courts of Justice was listed as in person, but was changed - we heard mid-morning - to "hybrid" to accommodate a party.

It meant observers could attend remotely.

25/

You wouldn't think it would be *that* hard to supply correct contact info for would-be observers.

But 41% of today's hearings do exactly that.

All 18 hearings not on the COP list provide their own generic court contact details instead of the regional COP hub.

@HMCTSgovuk

@HMCTSgovuk 26/

5th Key Performance Indicator: Tell us what the hearing is about.

Only 50% do this.

Lots of room for improvement here - notice it's the "hidden" hearings (the ones not in the COP list) that are letting the court down again. @HMCTSgovuk

27/

Some exs of no info what hearings are about.

Sadly the RCJ lists never say what hearings are about either.

We learnt thru' the grapevine Hayden J was hearing a case about kidney transplant today.

So @TheOrganOgress (+ others) went along to watch. Exactly her topic.

@TheOrganOgress 28/

Open justice should include people with specialist knowledge in particular areas watching how the court makes decisions in that area

It's good for developing professional knowledge of law

And an opportunity for scrutiny of justice by someone with topical expertise.

29/

If "Organ Transplant" had listed by Hayden J's case today, @TheOrganOgress wouldn't have been dependent on me hearing about case on the grapevine and passing the info on to her.

Specialists should have access to this info direct.

The COP agrees - in theory.

@HMCTSgovuk

@TheOrganOgress @HMCTSgovuk 30/

Half of the county court hearings fail to provide this info despite COP promises that this would be done.

And none of the RCJ cases ever provides this info - meaning someone needs to 'leak' it to us to get interested observers in court.

@HMCTSgovuk - let's fix this please!

31/

Stay with us.

Honestly, this is what the grand and noble principles of open justice and transparency boil down to: Is it in the listings?

The devil is in the detail.

KPI 6 - Tell us the type of hearing.

Only 39% do this @HMCTSgovuk

@HMCTSgovuk 32/

The sort of good news is that 64% of the COP-listed hearings did specify type (compared with 0% of the hidden hearings outside the COP list).

So the solution? Obvs. Get all the hearings into the COP list. @HMCTSgovuk

@HMCTSgovuk 33/

Last KPI

We check lists, find hearing that says it's about something we're interested in, is public, gives us right contact info etc...

We write to the court asking to observe....

** Does the COP admit us to the hearing?** (after all that?!)

Often not....

@HMCTSgovuk

34/

Staff are busy

We often don't get replies when we ask to observe.

It can take a reminder email with "RESENDING" or "URGENT" in the title

And then a follow-up phone call

Or two

I feel 'entitled' to do all this. Lots of people don't. Or don't have time. @HMCTSgovuk

@HMCTSgovuk 35/

Our view is that we're supporting the judicial commitment to transparency in the COP

So we should persist in the face of obstacles

Judges *want* us (we believe) to report on difficulties so that the Court and its staff and @HMCTSgovuk can figure out how to improve things

36/

Just some of the access problems encountered by members of the public over the last 6 weeks trying to support the judicial commitment to open justice in the Court of Protection....

@HMCTSgovuk

@HMCTSgovuk 37/

Some more of the access problems encountered by members of the public over the last 6 weeks trying to support the judicial commitment to open justice in the Court of Protection....

Let us know if this happens to you. Together we can make things better.

@HMCTSgovuk

38/

We are not required to explain why we want to attend public hearings.

But I've balked at arguing with a judge about this...

... and why oh why didn't I have the guts to just take the "PRIVATE" notice off the court door myself?

@HMCTSgovuk

@HMCTSgovuk 39/

When we chase non-replies, we're sometimes told that if only we'd emailed the court *sooner* they'd have had time to "process the request". I'm not sure what needs "processing"? Why not just send us the link?

@HMCTSgovuk

40/

If court staff could simply send a link to would-be observers, instead of asking the judge first, that would avoid problems like this, today.

The judge didn't receive my request until after the hearing had started.

@HMCTSgovuk

@HMCTSgovuk 41/

One judge has a "practice" of checking with counsel for objections to observers in a public hearing before granting access.

He didn't hear back from counsel before the hearing started so didn't grant me access.

This is simply WRONG for public hearings @HMCTSgovuk

42/

Here's the final outcome of how well the Court of Protection is doing in relation to our - very modest - Key Performance Indicators.

It doesn't look very good, does it.

Two years and 4 months after our Project was launched, are we having *any* effect, @HMCTSgovuk ?

@HMCTSgovuk 43/

We're not giving up yet - here's the positive spin,

If you look at the COP list only (+ ignore the 18 listings which should have been there + aren't), it look much brighter.

So, @HMCTSgovuk, we think the strategy should focus on getting all the hearings on the COP list.

44/

So this is the way forward - FOUR positive suggestions for @HMCTSgovuk

Can they work?

Will they support the judicial commitment to open justice + transparency in the COP?

Watch this space for the next report!

@HMCTSgovuk 45/

Last slide

Please support transparency by:

RT key tweets in this thread (with comments from you ideally)

Let us know transparency successes + failures when you ask to observe hearings

Send feedback!

@HMCTSgovuk

THE END