Despite efforts to increase access and transparency in the state’s judicial system, Indiana remains one of the nation’s most restrictive states in giving the public firsthand access to the courts through video, audio and still photography.

A pilot program in eight Hoosier courtrooms in 2006-07 – including that of Allen Superior Court Judge Nancy Boyer – was a major disappointment, largely because of a process that required all parties involved to approve of cameras.

The Indiana Supreme Court is trying again. This time it has arranged for an 18-month pilot project allowing a northwest Indiana newspaper to show proceedings via webcast in three Lake County courtrooms.

Even this pilot is arguably too restrictive. Webcasts will be delayed, not live, and the judges will have wide discretion to order a proceeding or portions of a proceeding not to be shown to the public. Parties involved can ask that proceedings not be subject to webcast, though, unlike the previous pilot, they will not have veto power. The judges will “determine in open hearing whether the interests of justice and public education warrant webcasting or not” under the state Supreme Court’s order that sets guidelines for the pilot project.

Other restrictions are more reasonable and aim to protect some people in the courts. Judges will not allow audio or video of undercover officers, informants, minors and victims of sex crimes, among others. Juvenile cases will be off limits, along with divorces involving custody battles and other types of cases.

The Times of Northwest Indiana will provide the equipment. Its employees must meet standards of decorum that require them to be as unobtrusive as possible.

The Valparaiso University School of Law will evaluate the program to offer measurable data the courts can use to weigh the success and effectiveness of the pilot. The law school will monitor the use of the webcasts and will interview participants, including witnesses and jurors, as well as attorneys and judges.

While four of the court’s five justices approve of the Lake County pilot, Justice Brent Dickson, sadly, disapproves, just as he did before the earlier experiment. In 2006, Dickson wrote: “The possibility of being televised to neighbors and others can be embarrassing or frightening to some, and alluring and captivating to others. The public broadcast of personal or unpleasant information is often a risk to be avoided at all costs. Others are fascinated or energized by the possibility of appearing on television, and will engage in a variety of antics to get camera attention.”

Dickson seems to downplay the fact that courts are open to the public, and Hoosiers have every right to witness what happens in open court. As for witnesses or lawyers playing to the camera, judges are perfectly capable of making sure participants follow strict courtroom protocol.

With the General Assembly on the Web and numerous City Council meetings on cable TV, Hoosiers are able to witness the activities of their legislative branch of government. It’s time Indiana take a step – and this pilot is nothing more than a baby step – toward opening the judicial branch to greater public view.