THE DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE:RE-EVALUATING THE PRINCIPLE OF IMMEDIACY AND DEFENSE RIGHTS IN THE ERA OF REMOTE PROCEEDINGS

Abstract

The rapid digitalization of global judicial systems has transitioned remote
participation from a temporary emergency measure into a structural pillar
of modern criminal procedure, compelling a critical reassessment of
foundational principles-most notably the principle of immediacy, which
requires the direct and unmediated confrontation of evidence and parties
before the adjudicating court. While video conferencing technologies
offer advantages in terms of judicial economy and efficiency, they
simultaneously undermine the traditional foundations of the right to a fair
trial. The courtroom is not merely a logistical venue; it is a space where
the principle of immediacy enables the court to directly observe and
assess the demeanor of the accused and witnesses. The mediation of a
digital screen obscures critical non-verbal cues and creates a
psychological distance that may jeopardize equality of arms, the right to
confront witnesses, and the right to effective legal assistance under
Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. These tensions
raise fundamental questions about the capacity of remote proceedings to
serve the truth-finding function of criminal adjudication, risking the
transformation of trial into a bureaucratic formality rather than a genuine
pursuit of material truth. A tension exists between the drive for a datadriven judiciary and the necessity of safeguarding the human-centered
procedural guarantees of criminal law. The legitimacy of digital justice
depends on strict necessity and proportionality criteria that prevent
technological efficiency from eroding the core of defense rights, and de
lege ferenda proposals are advanced toward reconciling innovation with
the enduring imperatives of procedural justice.