Family court judges won't edit media reports - top judge

11 November 2004

Principal Family Court Judge Peter Boshier has moved to allay fears held by journalists that his judges will misuse their power to vet media stories.

Last month the Government announced that Family Court proceedings would be opened to the public and media with tight restrictions in place.
One proposed restriction strongly opposed by journalists was the power for judges to demand to see stories before publication.

Commonwealth Press Union (CPU) New Zealand chairman Gavin Ellis said "the suggestion that journalists should give up their copy to judges for vetting is totally unacceptable.
"It casts judges in the role of editor. That is unacceptable, it is a form of censorship."

Judge Boshier has written to Mr Ellis over those concerns.
"There has been a view expressed by media that judges are to be given the power to vet or censor journalists' copy in reporting on Family Court proceedings," he wrote.

"This is a misapprehension of what is proposed."
Judge Boshier said it was proposed that journalists would be able to report proceedings as of right, subject to the exclusion of details identifying parties or children.
It was also proposed that in some circumstances the media could apply for leave to publish some of those details.

That was likely to occur in cases in which the identity of the parties would be of significant public interest, he said.

"However, it is also likely that when children are involved the court will make orders protecting their privacy," he said.

"In those circumstances the judge would want to be able to ascertain that the orders have been complied with before publication - and for no other reason.
"This is to ensure that the children's rights have been protected - if such details are published then privacy is lost and cannot be regained.

"It may also assist the media in avoiding a contempt through breaching the orders."
"I do not see the proposed legislation as an attempt to muzzle the media or prevent them from doing their job," Judge Boshier said.

"The judges want no say in the content of media reports but only the opportunity to ascertain that any orders made with regard to non-publication of certain details are complied with."
The Government said the changes were designed to improve transparency without compromising proceedings.

Media and others could attend hearings with the judge's permission, while involved parties could ask for outsiders to be excluded.
Judges could direct that draft news reports be submitted to the court to check they complied with court directions.

Any breach of those directions would mean individuals were liable of three months' imprisonment or a $2000 fine and organisations up to $10,000 in fines.
Associate Justice Minister David Benson-Pope said broader publication would give a clearer picture of the court, but "strict guidelines" would be put in place.