Family court reporting is a two-edged sword – but what about secret courts? Both consider information that is considered not in the public interest to report, but with reporters now allowed into family courts, why can’t they go to the secret courts as well?
Reporters are being allowed to report from family courts in England and Wales after a change in the law that allows scrutiny of the issues around cases, as long as the families themselves remain anonymous.
Family courts deal with cases including divorce and separation, child custody and visitation, child and spousal support, adoption and domestic violence.
The aim is – or should be – to resolve conflicts amicably while serving the best interests of children and other vulnerable family members.
At first, reporters were not allowed to write about such cases, but there has been a gradual acceptance that scrutiny of the courts’ responses to them may lead to more positive outcomes. Justice may be blind [see the picture] but it seems efforts are being made to ensure that at least some of us are getting a more clear-sighted understanding of how it works.
It is a two-edged sword, though. Courts and the press must be responsible, understanding that some cases still require privacy and some details should remain unreported.
Buy Cruel Britannia in print here. Buy the Cruel Britannia ebook here. Or just click on the image!
That being said, the BBC quotes a case on which it reported during a two-year transparency pilot scheme, in which a young mother paid £30,000 to protect her young daughter after her ex-husband, the child’s father, had been convicted of multiple paedophile offences. The Family Court agreed he should lose parental rights over the little girl.
BBC reporting of Bethan’s case led the then-MP Harriet Harman to campaign to change the law on parental access – which is now under way. In the future, no other parents in Bethan’s position would have to go to court to remove parental rights from those convicted of the most serious paedophile offences.
And this is all very well.
But what about other court proceedings that remain as opaque – or even more so – as the family courts used to be?
What about the secret courts?
These are proceedings in which defendants are not allowed to see some or all of the evidence against them – primarily in order to protect national security. This makes it extremely difficult – or impossible – to challenge some or all of the evidence against them.
These procedures have raised issues of fairness and transparency in the justice system and, when matters under consideration include terrorism – on which current UK law is considered to be poorly-written and the misuse of which is thought to have led to the arrest of people under false pretences – have caused concerns about miscarriage of justice and the creation of a class of political prisoners, here in the UK.
Can a level of transparency not be considered in these hearings?
Or is it considered vitally important that a journalist who has been arrested for supporting peace in Gaza should be denied the right to know why he or she is being treated like a terrorist?
You see, arresting someone simply for advocating peace in a conflict where one side has been proscribed as a group of terrorists and the other merely behaves like terrorists creates a highly unsafe precedent.
This Writer is not sure how such journalists will ultimately be handled by the court system. Terrorism legislation makes it possible for them to come under the jurisdiction of the secret courts, and that makes the State’s position in arresting them unsafe, in the eyes of many commentators.
If the government continues to deny journalists the opportunity to cover such proceedings and discuss the issues they raise, we have to ask: what are our politicians trying to hide?
Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:
Be among the first to know what’s going on! Here are the ways to manage it:
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (bottom right of the home page). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical
3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/
Join the Vox Political Facebook page.
4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com
5) Follow Vox Political writer Mike Sivier on BlueSky
6) Join the MeWe page at https://mewe.com/p-front/voxpolitical
7) Feel free to comment!
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.
Cruel Britannia is available
in either print or eBook format here:
The Livingstone Presumption is available
in either print or eBook format here:
Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:
The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:
Family court reporting is a two-edged sword – but what about secret courts?
Family court reporting is a two-edged sword – but what about secret courts? Both consider information that is considered not in the public interest to report, but with reporters now allowed into family courts, why can’t they go to the secret courts as well?
Reporters are being allowed to report from family courts in England and Wales after a change in the law that allows scrutiny of the issues around cases, as long as the families themselves remain anonymous.
Family courts deal with cases including divorce and separation, child custody and visitation, child and spousal support, adoption and domestic violence.
The aim is – or should be – to resolve conflicts amicably while serving the best interests of children and other vulnerable family members.
At first, reporters were not allowed to write about such cases, but there has been a gradual acceptance that scrutiny of the courts’ responses to them may lead to more positive outcomes. Justice may be blind [see the picture] but it seems efforts are being made to ensure that at least some of us are getting a more clear-sighted understanding of how it works.
It is a two-edged sword, though. Courts and the press must be responsible, understanding that some cases still require privacy and some details should remain unreported.
Buy Cruel Britannia in print here. Buy the Cruel Britannia ebook here. Or just click on the image!
That being said, the BBC quotes a case on which it reported during a two-year transparency pilot scheme, in which a young mother paid £30,000 to protect her young daughter after her ex-husband, the child’s father, had been convicted of multiple paedophile offences. The Family Court agreed he should lose parental rights over the little girl.
BBC reporting of Bethan’s case led the then-MP Harriet Harman to campaign to change the law on parental access – which is now under way. In the future, no other parents in Bethan’s position would have to go to court to remove parental rights from those convicted of the most serious paedophile offences.
And this is all very well.
But what about other court proceedings that remain as opaque – or even more so – as the family courts used to be?
What about the secret courts?
These are proceedings in which defendants are not allowed to see some or all of the evidence against them – primarily in order to protect national security. This makes it extremely difficult – or impossible – to challenge some or all of the evidence against them.
These procedures have raised issues of fairness and transparency in the justice system and, when matters under consideration include terrorism – on which current UK law is considered to be poorly-written and the misuse of which is thought to have led to the arrest of people under false pretences – have caused concerns about miscarriage of justice and the creation of a class of political prisoners, here in the UK.
Can a level of transparency not be considered in these hearings?
Or is it considered vitally important that a journalist who has been arrested for supporting peace in Gaza should be denied the right to know why he or she is being treated like a terrorist?
You see, arresting someone simply for advocating peace in a conflict where one side has been proscribed as a group of terrorists and the other merely behaves like terrorists creates a highly unsafe precedent.
This Writer is not sure how such journalists will ultimately be handled by the court system. Terrorism legislation makes it possible for them to come under the jurisdiction of the secret courts, and that makes the State’s position in arresting them unsafe, in the eyes of many commentators.
If the government continues to deny journalists the opportunity to cover such proceedings and discuss the issues they raise, we have to ask: what are our politicians trying to hide?
Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:
Be among the first to know what’s going on! Here are the ways to manage it:
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (bottom right of the home page). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical
3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/
Join the Vox Political Facebook page.
4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com
5) Follow Vox Political writer Mike Sivier on BlueSky
6) Join the MeWe page at https://mewe.com/p-front/voxpolitical
7) Feel free to comment!
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.
Cruel Britannia is available
in either print or eBook format here:
The Livingstone Presumption is available
in either print or eBook format here:
Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:
The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:
you might also like
Let’s start the New Year with some hopeful news
The lies that smashed the unions and destroyed our coal industry
Police State Britain: Tories would arrest you for looking at them in a funny way