1
Part 1
The use of videorecorded pretrial interviews as evidence and remote hearings in court
(adult parties)
(adult parties)
Best practice recommendations
Watch: expert perspectives on video-recorded investigative interviews and remote hearings
The five short lectures below introduce key themes from the E-ViVi project — from the procedural justice implications of video links, to how remote hearings are experienced in practice, to specific guidance on investigative interviewing and courtroom communication. Each video runs 9–19 minutes and can be watched individually, in any order.
The five short lectures below introduce key themes from the E-ViVi project — from the procedural justice implications of video links, to how remote hearings are experienced in practice, to specific guidance on investigative interviewing and courtroom communication. Each video runs 9–19 minutes and can be watched individually, in any order.
How to turn on automatic subtitles on YouTube
- Click the “CC” (Closed Captions) button at the bottom of the video player. Subtitles will appear automatically.
- Click the gear icon in the bottom-right corner of the video player. Then click “Subtitles/CC” from the menu. If you want to watch the video with English subtitles, click “English (auto-generated)“.
- If you want to change the subtitles to another language, look for a “Auto-translate” and choose your preferred language.
European best practice recommendations for remote hearings in criminal court proceedings with adult parties
This publication presents evidence-based recommendations developed within the E-ViVi project to support the effective and fair use of remote hearings in criminal proceedings. Drawing on extensive data collected from justice professionals and NGOs across Finland, Sweden and the Netherlands, it highlights how digitalisation shapes courtroom interaction, identifies key challenges and opportunities, and offers practical guidance grounded in real-world experiences.
Background paper on the use of remote hearings and recorded pretrial interviews as evidence in court
Read more about what previous research tells us about virtual criminal proceedings from the “Background paper on the use of remote hearings and recorded pretrial interviews as evidence in court” background paper presents the results of the first part of the E-ViVi project: the desk research. Its purpose is to lay the (theoretical) groundwork and provide relevant context for the empirical part of the project, consisting of a survey and in-depth interviews with key professionals and court observations. from the desk research is based on a comprehensive review of both legal scholarship and empirical research on remote hearings and the use of AVR. This review draws on a broad range of sources, including academic literature, national reports, practical studies, and guidance from the European Union bodies, NGOs, professional associations, and other relevant institutions.
2
Part 2
What every criminal justice actor needs to know about children testifying
Watch: child witnesses and suspects in the justice system
The videos below focus specifically on children's involvement in criminal proceedings — as witnesses, as suspects. The videos offer hands-on guidance from Barnahus practice and how to support children through the justice process. They complement the recommendations above with insights from research and frontline practice.
The videos below focus specifically on children's involvement in criminal proceedings — as witnesses, as suspects. The videos offer hands-on guidance from Barnahus practice and how to support children through the justice process. They complement the recommendations above with insights from research and frontline practice.
Project fact sheet and summary of all the project outputs
Recording of the final conference (coming soon)
About the project
The E-ViVi project aims to improve the ways in which people are heard digitally in criminal proceedings through creating best practice recommendations and strengthening the capacity of criminal justice actors.
Technology has the potential to speed up the criminal process and reduce the burden on victims, witnesses, and the accused. Digital tools like remote hearings and video-recorded pretrial interviews can improve safety, support vulnerable participants, preserve witness memories, and reduce costs, especially in cross-border cases. However, concerns have been raised about fairness, the stress and cognitive load it may place on legal professionals, and potential negative impacts on communication between participants, affecting their sense of being truly heard. While some studies suggest that technology can help vulnerable witnesses, such as young victims, feel less stressed, there are findings indicating that judges may be biased toward live testimony over remote statements.
In many countries, video-recorded interviews are becoming more common in court to improve the quality of evidence, decrease the risk of re-traumatization, and reduce false confessions. Practices vary across Europe, and children may still face stressful in-person appearances. To protect their rights, it's crucial that interviews be conducted in a victim-friendly manner and that professionals are well-trained in handling such sensitive cases.
The ultimate goal of the E-ViVi project is to strengthen access to justice and uphold a standard of respect for all parties — suspects, victims, and witnesses — both adults and children — in the criminal justice process.
By expanding knowledge around the use of remote hearings and recorded pretrial investigations as evidence in court, the project aims to develop best practice guidelines for justice actors to ensure that digital measures are used in a safe and evidence-based way. Remote hearings can reduce stress for parties, ensure swifter proceedings, and eliminate the need for travel. The use of video-recorded pretrial interviews as evidence helps prevent retraumatization of victims, who no longer need to testify again in court.
At the same time, care must be taken to ensure that remote hearings do not infringe upon the procedural rights of suspects or their right to legal aid. The project focuses specifically on how the increasing digitalization of criminal proceedings affects the encounters and hearings of parties, and how the capacity of criminal justice actors can be strengthened in this context.
This project is co-funded by the European Union.
Views and opinions expressed are however those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or JUST program. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority can be held responsible for them.
Technology has the potential to speed up the criminal process and reduce the burden on victims, witnesses, and the accused. Digital tools like remote hearings and video-recorded pretrial interviews can improve safety, support vulnerable participants, preserve witness memories, and reduce costs, especially in cross-border cases. However, concerns have been raised about fairness, the stress and cognitive load it may place on legal professionals, and potential negative impacts on communication between participants, affecting their sense of being truly heard. While some studies suggest that technology can help vulnerable witnesses, such as young victims, feel less stressed, there are findings indicating that judges may be biased toward live testimony over remote statements.
In many countries, video-recorded interviews are becoming more common in court to improve the quality of evidence, decrease the risk of re-traumatization, and reduce false confessions. Practices vary across Europe, and children may still face stressful in-person appearances. To protect their rights, it's crucial that interviews be conducted in a victim-friendly manner and that professionals are well-trained in handling such sensitive cases.
The ultimate goal of the E-ViVi project is to strengthen access to justice and uphold a standard of respect for all parties — suspects, victims, and witnesses — both adults and children — in the criminal justice process.
By expanding knowledge around the use of remote hearings and recorded pretrial investigations as evidence in court, the project aims to develop best practice guidelines for justice actors to ensure that digital measures are used in a safe and evidence-based way. Remote hearings can reduce stress for parties, ensure swifter proceedings, and eliminate the need for travel. The use of video-recorded pretrial interviews as evidence helps prevent retraumatization of victims, who no longer need to testify again in court.
At the same time, care must be taken to ensure that remote hearings do not infringe upon the procedural rights of suspects or their right to legal aid. The project focuses specifically on how the increasing digitalization of criminal proceedings affects the encounters and hearings of parties, and how the capacity of criminal justice actors can be strengthened in this context.
This project is co-funded by the European Union.
Views and opinions expressed are however those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or JUST program. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority can be held responsible for them.
Contacts
Project partners' contacts:
Project coordinators:
Julia Korkman, julia.korkman@om, HEUNI
Anni Lietonen, anni.lietonen@om.fi, HEUNI
Dorris de Vocht, D.L.F.deVocht@tilburguniversity.edu, Tilburg University
Shawnna von Blixen-Finecke, shawnna.von.blixen@barnahus.eu, Barnahus Network
Laura Ervo, Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Helsinki
Lisa Flower, lisa.flower@soc.lu.se, Department of Sociology, Faculty of Social Sciences | Lund University
Project coordinators:
Julia Korkman, julia.korkman@om, HEUNI
Anni Lietonen, anni.lietonen@om.fi, HEUNI
Dorris de Vocht, D.L.F.deVocht@tilburguniversity.edu, Tilburg University
Shawnna von Blixen-Finecke, shawnna.von.blixen@barnahus.eu, Barnahus Network
Laura Ervo, Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Helsinki
Lisa Flower, lisa.flower@soc.lu.se, Department of Sociology, Faculty of Social Sciences | Lund University
Views and opinions expressed are however those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or JUST program. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority can be held responsible for them.