House Judiciary panel hears push to bar live broadcasts of pretrial hearings
June 10, 2026 | House of Representatives, House, Committees, Legislative, Puerto Rico, International
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico — The House Judiciary Committee on June 10 opened a wide-ranging review of the transmission of judicial proceedings and heard repeated calls to limit or bar broadcast of pretrial stages such as preliminary hearings, suppression motions and rule-six proceedings.
Representative Gabriel Rodríguez Aguil'o, sponsor of House Bill 1211, asked legislators to weigh the constitutional right to a public trial against what witnesses, defense lawyers and civil-rights advocates described as new, amplified risks posed by social media and artificial intelligence. “Cuando estamos en vista preliminar, no hay jurados. Los jurados están en la calle como nosotros,” Rodríguez Aguil'o said, arguing that early-stage broadcasts create impressions that can linger and contaminate the jury pool.
The Department of Justice, through a written ponencia read into the record, said audiovisual transmission of pretrial phases could “incidir adversamente sobre los derechos constitucionales de las personas acusadas, así como en su impacto sobre las v edctimas y los testigos.” DOJ counsel said there is no definitive empirical study proving the effect of transmissions on witness willingness or testimony and asked the committee to seek further information. “No existe… un estudio emp edrico en este momento,” the office stated.
Officials from the Administration of the Courts said the Supreme Court's recent resolution (ER20262, May 18, 2026) ended the experimental PECAM program and adopted a permanent Procedi regulation, to take effect Oct. 1, 2026. Gisel Rosa Gonz e1lez, who presented the administration's ponencia, described Procedi's safeguards, including limits on camera framing, a rule 21 on permissible uses of recorded material and procedures by which a judge administrator can evaluate transmission requests. She said Procedi expands coverage to all regions but retains judicial discretion to restrict images or audio for sensitive testimony.
Representatives of the Colegio de Abogados, the Sociedad para Asistencia Legal and the Commission on Civil Rights urged the committee to go further than Procedi and to adopt legislative limits on transmission of pretrial stages. Manuel Aquiliquini, a former Colegio president, said the technological and social-media landscape of 2026 is far different from 2013 and argued that many preliminary hearings in Puerto Rico now resemble "mini-trials" whose excerpts can be edited, redistributed and weaponized online.
Legal-aid advocates emphasized the imbalance at pretrial hearings: prosecutors typically present evidence with limited discovery or investigative access available to defense attorneys, they said, making any publicized early-stage presentation likely to create misleading impressions about a case. "La naturaleza de la vista preliminar es tan distinta a lo que es el juicio plenario," said a legal-aid representative, urging that broadcasts of such stages be prohibited.
Committee members repeatedly raised concerns about witness safety. Lawmakers cited past incidents in which witnesses in high-profile cases were targeted after their involvement became public, and asked whether courts or agencies had recorded security incidents tied to transmission. The Department of Justice and the Administration of the Courts told the committee they would gather and deliver records, statistics and any documented complaints or incidents relevant to televised proceedings.
The committee gave the agencies a formal request for supporting documentation and statistics and set a 10-day deadline for submission to inform next steps. The panel also signaled it will continue deliberations after reviewing the requested materials.
As the committee weighs possible statutory action, the debate centers on three competing values: the public's right of access and press freedom, the integrity and solemnity of judicial proceedings, and the safety and due-process rights of participants in criminal cases. The hearing record shows broad agreement that the balance should be reexamined in light of digital platforms, viral redistribution and generative AI, even as the court system and some media advocates continue to press for greater public visibility of judicial work.
The committee recessed after the second panel and will reconvene after staff review of the materials to be delivered by the Justice Department and the Administration of the Courts.
Representative Gabriel Rodríguez Aguil'o, sponsor of House Bill 1211, asked legislators to weigh the constitutional right to a public trial against what witnesses, defense lawyers and civil-rights advocates described as new, amplified risks posed by social media and artificial intelligence. “Cuando estamos en vista preliminar, no hay jurados. Los jurados están en la calle como nosotros,” Rodríguez Aguil'o said, arguing that early-stage broadcasts create impressions that can linger and contaminate the jury pool.
The Department of Justice, through a written ponencia read into the record, said audiovisual transmission of pretrial phases could “incidir adversamente sobre los derechos constitucionales de las personas acusadas, así como en su impacto sobre las v edctimas y los testigos.” DOJ counsel said there is no definitive empirical study proving the effect of transmissions on witness willingness or testimony and asked the committee to seek further information. “No existe… un estudio emp edrico en este momento,” the office stated.
Officials from the Administration of the Courts said the Supreme Court's recent resolution (ER20262, May 18, 2026) ended the experimental PECAM program and adopted a permanent Procedi regulation, to take effect Oct. 1, 2026. Gisel Rosa Gonz e1lez, who presented the administration's ponencia, described Procedi's safeguards, including limits on camera framing, a rule 21 on permissible uses of recorded material and procedures by which a judge administrator can evaluate transmission requests. She said Procedi expands coverage to all regions but retains judicial discretion to restrict images or audio for sensitive testimony.
Representatives of the Colegio de Abogados, the Sociedad para Asistencia Legal and the Commission on Civil Rights urged the committee to go further than Procedi and to adopt legislative limits on transmission of pretrial stages. Manuel Aquiliquini, a former Colegio president, said the technological and social-media landscape of 2026 is far different from 2013 and argued that many preliminary hearings in Puerto Rico now resemble "mini-trials" whose excerpts can be edited, redistributed and weaponized online.
Legal-aid advocates emphasized the imbalance at pretrial hearings: prosecutors typically present evidence with limited discovery or investigative access available to defense attorneys, they said, making any publicized early-stage presentation likely to create misleading impressions about a case. "La naturaleza de la vista preliminar es tan distinta a lo que es el juicio plenario," said a legal-aid representative, urging that broadcasts of such stages be prohibited.
Committee members repeatedly raised concerns about witness safety. Lawmakers cited past incidents in which witnesses in high-profile cases were targeted after their involvement became public, and asked whether courts or agencies had recorded security incidents tied to transmission. The Department of Justice and the Administration of the Courts told the committee they would gather and deliver records, statistics and any documented complaints or incidents relevant to televised proceedings.
The committee gave the agencies a formal request for supporting documentation and statistics and set a 10-day deadline for submission to inform next steps. The panel also signaled it will continue deliberations after reviewing the requested materials.
As the committee weighs possible statutory action, the debate centers on three competing values: the public's right of access and press freedom, the integrity and solemnity of judicial proceedings, and the safety and due-process rights of participants in criminal cases. The hearing record shows broad agreement that the balance should be reexamined in light of digital platforms, viral redistribution and generative AI, even as the court system and some media advocates continue to press for greater public visibility of judicial work.
The committee recessed after the second panel and will reconvene after staff review of the materials to be delivered by the Justice Department and the Administration of the Courts.
View the Full Meeting & All Its Details
This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.
✓
Watch full, unedited meeting videos
✓
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
✓
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
✓
Permanent access to expanding government content
30-day money-back guarantee
