A former Supreme Court judge has sparked a debate on the balance between transparency and fairness in the legal system, particularly regarding mental health suppression orders. In an interview, Judge Betty King, KC, criticized psychiatrists' role in these orders, suggesting their reports are often untested and may lead to misinterpretations. King argues that the system is being abused by some psychiatrists, and their reports, along with the legislation, should be subject to scrutiny in court.
The issue of transparency in the courts has been a growing concern, with a recent Monash University study commissioned by the Melbourne Press Club ranking Victoria's court system as the least transparent in Australia. The study highlighted a crisis in court reporting due to the widespread use of suppression orders, calling for an overhaul of the Open Courts Act. Victoria's Attorney-General, Sonya Kilkenny, acknowledged the need for a delicate balance between an open court system and the right to a fair trial, emphasizing the importance of listening to victim-survivors' voices.
However, King defended the use of suppression orders, arguing that they are essential to ensure fair trials and prevent mistrials. She humorously referred to herself as the 'Queen of suppression orders', citing her experience in presiding over high-profile cases. King believes that external reviewers or commissioners are unnecessary, as all judicial decisions can be reviewed by different levels of the judiciary.
The controversy surrounding the study's findings has sparked discussions about the relationship between judges and journalists. King expressed surprise at the study's conclusions, stating that most judges have a deep respect for journalists. She advised that media liaison officers in courts should be the primary point of contact for any issues, ensuring a positive engagement between the judiciary and the media.
Despite the debate, the Open Courts Act has been under scrutiny, with a 2018 review by retired Supreme Court justice Frank Vincent finding that the number of suppression orders had not significantly decreased since the law's enactment. Vincent concluded that more focus should be on educating judges about the appropriate use of suppression orders.
