Genuine Motives?

My thanks to John Hirst of Jailhouselawyer's Blog for drawing my attention to this article by Marcel Berlins in the Comment is free section of the Guardian today. Berlins, like other journalists, is not impressed by the government's plans to open up the family courts, which come into operation next Monday: "They clearly fail to meet the media's hopes and expectations. Indeed, on one view, very little of significance will change. Some openness is there, at least cosmetically, but the end result looks a lot like the status quo."

A cynic may say that journalists would criticise the measures unless they completely opened up the family courts to the media. After all, there is hardly anyone more full of their own self-importance than a journalist (with the possible exception of a politician). Surely, as Berlin implies, the public's 'right to know' is more important than the interests of the children?

Of course, I'm not a cynic. Am I?


  1. There some important improvements to accountability although the ability to scrutinise the proceedings publicly (even if anonymously) is not automatically provided.


Post a comment

Thank you for taking the time to comment on this post. Constructive comments are always welcome, even if they do not coincide with my views! Please note, however, that comments will be removed or not published if I consider that:
* They are not relevant to the subject of this post; or
* They are (or are possibly) defamatory; or
* They breach court reporting rules; or
* They contain derogatory, abusive or threatening language; or
* They contain 'spam' advertisements (including links to any commercial websites).
Please also note that I am unable to give advice.