Publication

Abstract

Public access to criminal trials is an indispensable attribute of the AngloAmerican legal system. The “rule of publicity” has been the rule in England from time immemorial and was a fundamental attribute of the judicial systems of the early American colonies. The Supreme Court has concluded that “a presumption of openness inheres in the very nature of a criminal trial under our system of government,” and the First and Sixth Amendments safeguard the public nature of criminal trials.

Yet, as essential as publicity is to the American legal system, secrecy is to the Catholic Church’s legal system: canon law. Amidst calls for greater transparency and accountability in the Church, recent developments in canon law have only taken small steps to lift the pall of secrecy. Meanwhile, U.S. Catholics have discovered many reasons to distrust their leaders, stemming from sexual and financial misconduct and cover-up. While some canonical scholars have recognized the benefit of employing secular models of transparency, none has endeavored to provide a method of incorporation or to suggest concrete changes.

This Comment begins that conversation by comparing public access in criminal trials under U.S. law and canon law and by examining whether canon law can successfully incorporate any elements of American law. Due to fundamental differences in the two legal systems, many elements cannot be incorporated, but the core values promoted by the American legal system’s public access doctrine are values inherent in good governance in general. This Comment applies these values to criminal trials in canon law and provides three concrete proposals that uphold the fundamental values of good governance and accomplish the express purposes of the Church’s penal system. Rather than hide its criminal trials in secret, the Church should instead expose them.

Read more