In a controversial statement, a former Supreme Court judge has argued that psychiatrists, not judges, pose the biggest threat to court transparency. The judge, Betty King, KC, made these remarks in response to a report that highlighted a 'crisis' in open justice, with Victoria's court system deemed the least transparent in Australia. The report, commissioned by the Melbourne Press Club, warned of the prolific use of suppression orders and their impact on court reporting, calling for an overhaul of the state's Open Courts Act.
King suggested that some psychiatrists abuse the system by writing compelling but untested psychiatric reports that lead to suppression orders. She believes these reports, along with the legislation that allows mental health-based suppression orders, should be tested in court. King's comments come as Victoria's top law officer, Attorney-General Sonya Kilkenny, works to balance the need for transparency in the courts with the right to a fair trial. Kilkenny has emphasized the importance of striking the right balance between an open court system and a person's right to a fair trial, stating that they will continue to work towards ensuring this balance is achieved.
The former judge also defended the broader use of suppression orders, arguing that they are necessary to ensure the fairness of the justice system and avoid mistrials. She jokingly referred to herself as the 'Queen of suppression orders' and presided over the trial of slain underworld boss Carl Williams. However, King acknowledged that the most worrying aspect of mental health suppression orders is their misinterpretation and the need to re-evaluate psychiatric reports. The Monash study, based on interviews with working journalists, called for urgent steps to repair the fractured relationship between judges and journalists who report from their courts.
Despite the controversy, King believes that most judges have a lot of respect for journalists and that media liaison officers should be the go-to people for any problems. She also suggested that external reviewers or commissioners are not necessary, as all decisions made by a magistrate or judge can be reviewed by different levels of the judiciary. The report's findings have sparked debate, with the Courts Council chair, Chief Justice Richard Niall, expressing disappointment and arguing that the report does not reflect the positive engagement with media by the courts across Victoria.
