The measures to contain the spread of COVID-19 significantly impacted (criminal) justice sectors worldwide, including the justice system in the Netherlands. The administration of justice could no longer take place in physical court meetings. Many cases could not be processed. Behind the scenes, people worked hard to scale up the technological infrastructure needed and make court buildings COVID-proof. Necessary (emergency) legislation was created in consultation with stakeholders. The Dutch judiciary speeded up the implementation and use of videoconferencing, including the criminal courts.

Over time, lawyers and court reporters became critical in the (social) media. They pointed to problems with respect to organisation, technology, communication, and legal principles. The principle of a fair trial, more specifically the principle of equality of arms, risked being violated. Equality of arms means that the public prosecutor and the defence must have equal opportunities to convince the court. These opportunities differ by the means (modality) by which a person is present. Many of us have experienced how different on-screen communication is from in-person contact, affecting what and who can be seen and heard. This is also the case for people who are digitally or physically present in court, either as a professional (e.g. lawyer and prosecutor) or as citizen (e.g. suspect and victim).

Other fundamental rights were affected as well. The time slots for videoconferencing, organised by prisons, to allow suspects and their lawyers to participate from prison were problematic. Another challenge was to safeguard the public nature of the judiciary, the public access to the courts. This visual essay describes the response of the Dutch justice system to the pandemic over time and incorporates images that present several practices of seeing, looking, and showing. According to several organisations, actors, and legal professionals working in the justice system worldwide, trial by screen is here to stay.

遏制 COVID-19 传播的措施对世界各地的（刑事）司法部门产生了重大影响，包括荷兰的司法系统。司法行政不能再通过实体法庭会议进行。许多案件无法处理。在幕后，人们努力扩大所需的技术基础设施，并使法院建筑能够抵御新冠病毒。与利益相关者协商后制定了必要的（紧急）立法。荷兰司法部门加快了视频会议的实施和使用，包括刑事法庭。

随着时间的推移，律师和法庭记者在（社交）媒体上变得持批评态度。他们指出了组织、技术、沟通和法律原则方面的问题。公平审判的原则，更具体地说是平等权利的原则，有被违反的危险。权力平等意味着公诉人和辩方必须有平等的机会说服法庭。这些机会因个人出现的方式（方式）而异。我们中的许多人都经历过屏幕上的交流与面对面的交流有多么不同，这影响着可以看到和听到的内容和人员。对于以数字方式或实际出庭的人来说，无论是作为专业人士（例如律师和检察官）还是作为公民（例如嫌疑人和受害者），情况也是如此。

其他基本权利也受到影响。监狱组织的视频会议时段允许嫌疑人及其律师在监狱内参与，但存在问题。另一个挑战是维护司法机构的公共性质，即公众诉诸法庭的机会。这篇视觉文章描述了荷兰司法系统随着时间的推移对这一流行病的反应，并结合了展示观看、观察和展示的几种做法的图像。据世界各地司法系统工作的多个组织、演员和法律专业人士称，屏幕审判将继续存在。