The public organization “World of Law” has published a study on the publicity of court proceedings and the openness of judicial information in Dushanbe.
The Director of the PO “World of Law,” Gulchehra Kholmatova, told Asia-Plus that the study on the publicity of court proceedings and access to judicial information was conducted in March–April of this year within the framework of the project “Implementation of the Right to Public Justice,” funded by the National Endowment for Democracy.
Access to Court Proceedings
“The conducted research showed that, in particular, access for media representatives, journalists, and the public to attend court hearings (both criminal and other types of proceedings) is not directly provided for in current legislation. The Law of the Republic of Tajikistan ‘On Periodical Press and Other Mass Media’ states that ‘mass media have the right to receive information from state bodies, organizations, and their officials in the manner prescribed by the legislation of the Republic of Tajikistan. State bodies, organizations, and their officials, when providing necessary information to the media, must ensure favorable conditions for familiarization with documents’ (Part 2, Article 23 ‘Right to Receive Information’). The same article also states that state bodies, organizations, and their officials must promptly provide urgent information of public importance that is not classified as state secret or otherwise protected by law and does not require additional review (Part 3 of the Law),” Kholmatova said.
The lawyer emphasized that neither this law nor any other legal or subordinate regulatory acts directly enshrine the right of journalists, other media representatives, or the public to be present at court proceedings—whether criminal, civil, economic, or administrative.
The researchers acknowledge that Tajikistan has a solid legal framework for ensuring transparency of the judiciary.
“Although laws often formulate only general norms, many uncertainties arise in their practical application. Therefore, it is very important that nothing is omitted—if not at the stage of drafting laws, then at least at the level of by-laws: laws must be detailed as much as possible,” the lawyer noted.
Use of Equipment in Courts: International Practice
According to the researchers, with prior authorization, mobile phones, computers, voice recorders, photo and video cameras, and other equipment may be brought into courtrooms.
Regarding international practice, Kholmatova explained:
“In Russia and the United States, there are no restrictions; in the Netherlands, only mobile phones are allowed, while other equipment may be brought in only by journalists and only with permission. Prohibited items are stored in lockers at the entrance.”
She also noted differences in filming rules:
- In Russia and the USA, filming in court service areas is allowed only with administrative permission
- In Russia, only official information in corridors may be filmed, and individuals only with their consent
- In the USA, filming may be allowed more broadly depending on permissions
- In the Netherlands, filming is generally prohibited unless specifically authorized
In the Netherlands, if permission is granted to bring equipment into the courthouse, it automatically allows entry into the courtroom. In the USA, photo and video equipment cannot be brought into the courtroom even in cases of permission unless explicitly authorized, and such permission is granted only in exceptional cases. In Germany, mobile phones are allowed in the courthouse but must be stored outside the courtroom.
Access to Judicial Information on Websites
Another component of the study concerned the publication of court decisions on court websites and access to them by journalists and citizens who are not participants in proceedings.
“This issue is practically not regulated in Tajik legislation. In Europe and North America, different models exist regarding the protection of personal data when court decisions are published or provided upon request. However, in all countries, access to court decisions is now a key issue of judicial transparency. In all systems, a person requesting a court decision does not need to justify their interest or purpose,” Kholmatova emphasized.
The head of “World of Law” stated that court websites are one of the most important sources of judicial information, but courts face certain challenges in this area.
Experts propose that, in order to ensure transparency of civil and economic proceedings, court decisions that have entered into legal force should be published on the websites of relevant judicial bodies. They also recommend adopting a Law of the Republic of Tajikistan “On Ensuring Access to Information on Court Activities,” based on international best practices.
In addition, they propose adopting unified rules or regulations governing the online activities of courts.
Summing up the interview, Gulchehra Kholmatova emphasized that the study-intended for justice system officials, academics, and civil society organizations-consisted of three parts: an analysis of national legislation in relation to international standards of judicial transparency; surveys of judges, lawyers, and the public; and observation of court proceedings in Dushanbe.
The final section of the study contains conclusions and recommendations on ensuring the publicity of court proceedings and access to judicial information.
