Tensions at the Federales have been averted at the eleventh hour as Justice Michael Lee last night (Nov. 14) ditched his proposed speech on “open justice” to the Communications and Media Law Association.
HH has been on the hustings advocating that the door should be opened wider so the sans-culotte can get a better view of the sausage manufacturing endeavours of the judiciary.
Debbie Mortimer CJ put a shot across the bow of that notion with the release this week of a speech she gave at Melbourne Law School over a month earlier.
For her part, she doesn’t like the term “open justice”, preferring instead “accessible justice” – hopefully believing that this will bring about greater public confidence in and respect for the judiciary.
See: Mortimer CJ – Reflections on the Concept of “Open Justice”
Her Melbourne speech suggests that open justice is just a “concept” – and there’s no need to get too wound up about it.
She thinks society should be protected from “juicy details” which may adversely affect “a human being”. Indeed, too much open justice might not be good for anyone.
The CJ emerged with her “reflections” after Justice Lee went to considerable trouble to outline to the Piddington Society, a month earlier than Mortimer, his proposals for a national approach to open justice and a sensible agenda to loosen the restraints.
The high volume of suppression orders he identified as a reflection of “a judicial and legal culture”.
See: Lee J – Open Justice: A National Approach?
See: Judge calls for greater judicial accountability
Lee’s management of the Lehrmann defamation case was the gold standard in litigation transparency, with an open online file that kept getting fatter by the moment.
On Thursday, (Nov. 14) Lee was slated to deliver an evening oration at the Ashurst “ballroom” for CAMLA – the topic: Contemporary Challenges to Open Justice.
To avoid a clash with his chief justice and to deprive the media of a juicy field day the topic was smartly ditched in favour of the more fluffy “Reasonableness and a Code of Conduct” – a survey of “reasonableness” in defamation law and its uncertainty.
That uncertainly may be reduced, he suggested, if a comprehensive code of journalistic conduct is developed which embeds within it the interpretation of reasonableness in case law and the general standards expected of journalists.
Fortunately, Justice Lee had the replacement speech up his sleeve, because that afternoon he had been at Gilbert + Tobin speaking at the Media Freedom Summit, where no one breathed a word about “open justice”.
He delivered the same spiel that evening at CAMLA, but with the addition of riffs from Celebrity Sue Chrysanthou sitting in the front row.
Hence the avoidance of a war with Mortimer, which many expected to be akin to the brutal battles over direct and indirect speech waged by forces loyal to Justice (Jackboots) Jackman on one side and Taco Bell CJ on the other.
See: Lee J – Media Freedom Summit
See: Lee J – Communications and Media Law Association
≈ ≈ ≈
The Media Freedom Summit is closely associated with the Alliance for Journalists Freedom, run by Peter Greste a former inmate of the Egyptian regime and now a professor of journalism and something of an avatar for press freedom.
His colleague at the AJF helm is the PR man and “communications management” expert, Peter Wilkinson.
Over the years, the AJF has produced a number of nutty ideas. Initially, it was pushing a plan for a constitutional amendment to protect the meeja.
This was pure pie-in-the sky and never going to fly, so the fall back position is now a Media Freedom Act requiring parliaments to apply human rights provisions to protect media freedoms.
More recently, there’s an even brighter plan: to award badges or medals to approved journalists who meet yet-to-be-determined standards. They can put these badges next to their byline and with a good dose of fairy dust this will protect them in the courts.
There’ll be two classes of journalists – ones with AJF/Greste medals and riffraff without – rather like barristers with their ranks divided into silks and non-silks, a structure that creates a lot of delirium.
≈ ≈ ≈
Lee and Mortimer could not be more different. He’s expansive and enjoys the spotlight. She’s diffident and shy, unfamiliar with the media and nervous of it.
In fact, her speech was the first time she has spoken publicly since her appointment as chief justice 19 months ago – apart from judicial welcomes and farewells. She has given no on-the-record interview to the retiles of the press.
Last year the court restricted access to originating documents, with the media required to wait until the first case management hearing before laying hands on the “juicy” stuff.
The FCA’s experienced and highly regarded media liaison man Bruce Phillips left the job in July this year, and the task is now managed by a communications Czar recruited from Home Affairs.
Meanwhile, the investigation of bullying complaints made against a former senior Federal Court judge proceeds.
Here are the latest stats for non-publication and suppression orders, for the year up to November 7, 2024 – compiled by Gina McWilliams, senior legal counsel at News Corp.
