Ms Maura McNally:

I wish to comment on two points. As the Chairman said in his opening speech this morning, we have two types of legislation. There is primary legislation, which is the Acts and statutes. Then there is secondary legislation, which is the statutory instruments or regulations. Anything thereafter is simply guidance. It does not have the effect of law. There can be no penal sanction in respect of a purported or alleged breach of guidance. You said that earlier, Chairman, and I wanted to emphasise it so there is no doubt about it.

I wish to return to the issue of the remote hearings. One of the basic precepts of our democracy and Constitution is access to justice. Not only must justice be done, it must be seen to be done. That includes in criminal cases the rights of victims to appear in court and address the court. It is the right of the parties to be present. Remote hearings are good in certain instances, but they are not the cure-all or panacea they are being made out to be. People want to be in court. There are certain instances where one must literally see the whites of their eyes, the verbiage and the behaviour of persons, not only what they are saying but how they are saying it. One needs to be able to read people and see how to read them. That is one of the things about having people, our citizens, in court. In most criminal cases members of the public are allowed into the court to see cases being run. It is similar in civil cases. Restrictions would arise in respect of minors being involved and so forth, but leaving that aside justice has to be done and has to be seen to be done. In paperless cases, the ones that require people to stand up and speak, be heard and to have their say in court, the remote hearings will not work in those instances in our submission.