The development of technology and modernization of court facilities means that a witness in a remote location can also give evidence at court. In a recent gazette published by the Administrative Division of the High Court Division of The Supreme Court of Bangladesh, our ex. Hon’ble Justice Hasan Foez Siddique has given a practice direction on using ‘audio-video conference’ for giving evidence in a trial. However, virtual evidence presents a unique set of challenges for parties to a dispute, lawyers/advocates, judges or related parties to the dispute. Before using the audio-video conferencing for giving evidence, it is necessary to consider how the use of this option will impact on the overall litigation process and prospects.
Pros
- It saves time.
- It saves cost (witness accommodation / transport etc.).
- Greater convenience.
- Witness cooperation improved.
- It may secure evidence that may be unavailable e.g. for witness based abroad, hospital.
- Being a 3rd world country sometimes it’s not safe to bring criminals to court to give evidence.
Cons
- Performance of witnesses can be impaired when giving evidence via audio-video conference and the evidence could be extremely important to the outcome of the case.
- Preparation is the key to ensure that the ‘audio-video conference’ evidence works well but there can always be unforeseen issues so ensure technical assistance is available, at both the local and remote site, to deal with any problems that arise on the day.
- Requires permission of the court.
- Less overall control of the witness.
- Poor infrastructure at the local site may increase costs.
- No recording of evidence mentioned.
- Our court room does not have suitable equipment for use of video conference evidence thus it will be necessary to ensure the correct court is allocated for the hearing. Moving the equipment to a different court partway through a trial can increase cost and impact on the trial timetable.
- It is also important to manage any time zone differences as this can lead to unusual ordering of witness or even breaking off from one witness part-way through evidence to go to the audio-video conference center, but this is usually better than no evidence at all.
- No guidance given as to from where witnesses residing abroad will give evidence from.
From the above discussion it can be seen that ‘audio-video conference’ evidence is an option which can be marshaled to the aid of clients but only with careful planning and preparation. Furthermore, training should be given for lawyers, judges and witnesses on how to give and take video evidences. Undoubtedly, a proper planning, preparation and implementation of giving evidence via audio-video conference would definitely save considerable time and cost for our clients which is what all clients are extremely interested in.