In 1996, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that Subsection 486(1) of the Criminal Code, allowing judges to exclude the public and press from the courtroom, was constitutional per the reasonable limits clause of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
[6] In 2004, the Vancouver Sun newspaper successfully argued that certain court proceedings in relation to the Air India terrorist attack should be open to the public.
[7] In 2021, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled against the estate of Barry and Honey Sherman finding the risk to the important public interest in privacy, on the facts of the case was not serious.
[9] These proven cases include matters of maintaining personal dignity,[9] terrorism offences,[7] and protecting the privacy of minors.
It is the keenest spur to exertion, and the surest of all guards against improbity.”[12] Since 2014, Ukraine has allowed videotaping of court sessions without obtaining the specific permission of the judge, within the limitations established by law.