The use of videoconferencing in criminal proceedings, in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, put a strain on the materialization of the principles that inform due process. Justice systems had to adapt quickly to continue to provide justice services in cases deemed urgent. Then, due to the duration of the pandemic, they had to adopt new measures to continue handling cases. Once the health crisis and states of calamity were overcome, the justice systems continued with the use of videoconferencing and issued new rules for its use. However, it has been detected that these norms are applied in a discretionary manner by the courts and there is no clarity on the criteria for the use of videoconferencing. This study analyzes three representative Latin American countries and extracts information to address four questions: (1) how did the criminal justice systems react to the COVID-19 contingency?; (2) what were the discussions of the principles of immediacy, contradiction and publicity?; (3) how is virtuality currently regulated?; and (4) what criteria could guide its use?