Report comment

Peter,

What benefit would the hearing in public bring, would there be an opportunity for the victim, their relatives, the police or others to intervene; would we see the grotesque parody of justice we see in some US jurisdictions when it comes to sentencing hearings?

How would the hearing in public better inform the debate which seems to be conducted in a fog of hysteria and fewer than 140 characters?

It may be controversial but the prisoner retains some residual rights as to privacy and that in many cases there could be very good reasons why many parts of the hearing should be in camera / redacted and then you're back to square one re howls of indignation re a lack of transparency.

But broadly I agree with your post save one detail I would (and this is not my field) suggest that the decision is subject to challenge by way of judicial review: however I struggle to see the grounds on which such a review might rest.