Under an archaic law, people can still be punished for ‘scandalising the court’ or publicly criticising a judge’s ruling. It’s time for this law to be revisited.
Academic rigor, journalistic flair
Articles on Suppression orders
Displaying all articles
Pell trial reporters, a judge and a media lawyer on why the suppression order debate is far from over.
The Conversation, CC BY79.9 MB (download)
On the day George Pell was sentenced, several experts with wide-ranging experiences of suppression orders discussed how they affect the public’s right to know and whether the laws should be reformed.
While media outlets rail against being prohibited from reporting on certain cases, it is about striking a difficult balance between open justice and a fair trial.
It is hard to inquire about a suppression order you do not know exists because discussion of its existence and contents has been suppressed.
The Victorian state parliament is currently considering the Open Courts Bill (2013) after questions have been raised about just how much transparency is needed in the justice system. The bill, proposed…
Top contributors
-
Associate Professor, Melbourne Law School, The University of Melbourne
-
Associate Professor, School of Law, University of Canberra
-
Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Advancing Journalism, The University of Melbourne
-
Director of the Centre for Advancing Journalism, The University of Melbourne
-
Professor of Journalism and Social Media, Griffith Centre for Social and Cultural Research, Griffith University, Griffith University
-
Lecturer, Thomas More Law School, Australian Catholic University
-
Senior Lecturer in Law, The University of Western Australia
-
Journalism Lecturer, La Trobe University
