When may the court carry out the procedure referred to in the provision through a video or similar relay facility rather than with the accused attending in person?
General information · Not legal advice
Material to check
In a practice file, we read the papers showing why attendance in person is difficult, such as a medical certificate or a transfer or detention record, and the hearing minutes recording what the prosecutor and the defence counsel each said, since the provision turns on both opinions.
These are types of material to look for, not evidence already verified by PRO SE.
Where readings differ
One reading keeps every condition attached: the court may proceed by video or similar relay facility only where special circumstances make attendance difficult for the accused and the court also finds it appropriate, and only after hearing the opinions of both the prosecutor and the defence counsel.
Another reading looks at who is asked: the provision requires the views of the prosecutor and the defence counsel, and does not make the accused's own agreement a condition, so a file where the accused objects may still satisfy the wording of the provision.
Your judgment
If the accused objects to appearing by video link, what in the file could show whether that objection should weigh on the court's finding of appropriateness?
PRO SE does not make this decision or keep a case record on this public site.When to reconsider
We look at this again if the provision is amended to require the accused's consent, or if a court decision sets what counts as special circumstances making attendance difficult.