Abstract:
The current reporting regime in the Family Court of New Zealand promotes openness of justice, while protecting the privacy of a select group of vulnerable members of society. The media shows little interest, however interest increases accordingly where a participant has a public profile. Where sensitive information about public figures in Family Court proceedings are published, they are likely to suffer disproportionately significant consequences due to widespread publication. However this adverse impact cannot justify restrictions on the reporting of identifying information unless they fit within the narrowly defined statutory provisions applicable to vulnerable people. Balance between the principles of openness of justice and privacy is better achieved by continuing to allow media to attend and publish reports of family proceedings, but prohibiting publication of identifying information generally unless leave has been granted by the Court. This continues to provide for openness of justice, as identifying information usually offers no real substance other than as a vehicle to incite interest, while recognising even the most famous of celebrity's familial disputes should remain private where possible. This does not equate to special treatment for public figures, but recognition publicity is not given on an equal basis.
