There are even fears the scene is being set for the 110-year-old building to be abandoned.
Ministry of Justice figures reveal the cost in the first six months of this year of getting witnesses and defendants to and from Dunedin District and High Court trials, which have been held in Invercargill for the best part of the year, is 70% more, at $37,230, than in the same period last year, when trials were still held in Dunedin.
And that cost is likely to be much less than the extra costs in transporting and accommodating others required for trials, including judges, lawyers, police and court staff, partners, families and victims. All of those people have been making the 400km-round trip to Invercargill regularly since the closure of parts of the courthouse last year, after an engineer's report said the tower would be a danger to the public in a serious earthquake.
Six other courthouses nationwide were also closed, including those in Oamaru and Balclutha, whose futures remain uncertain.
The ministry says it still does not know how it will strengthen the Dunedin courthouse and what it will cost, but is, at present, still saying continued use of the building is the favoured option.
In the meantime, the known costs of keeping it closed are more than $750,000, with the actual costs likely to be significantly more - money some say would have been better spent on fixing up the courthouse.
With the 16th Dunedin trial held in Invercargill this year about to start, dozens of people have had to be paid mileage and travel time, and accommodation and meal expenses covered. The ODT has requested the figures, but lawyers are estimating each trial in Invercargill probably costs about at least $10,000 more than it would have in Dunedin.
Of the costs known publicly so far, about $600,000 has been spent on setting up temporary facilities at John Wickliffe House for civil and family court hearings and, up to August, the ministry said it had spent $22,566 on seismic assessment and design options for the courthouse, including engineering workshops on proposed solutions to the courthouse's issues.
That figure did not include the original seismic report, or a subsequent geo-technical survey.
Added to those costs will be the cost of building new waiting rooms, toilets and a bail room in the occupied part of the courthouse, relocation costs, and the lease and upgrade of a building in High St, where trials are expected to be held from April.
The cost of that upgrade is likely to be considerable given cells and secure areas are required. A person has also been employed in Invercargill to administer Dunedin trials.
Some lawyers are asking why that money is not being spent on fixing the courthouse up sooner.
District courts general manager Tony Fisher has previously said the work was taking time due to the building's structural complexities and category 1 Historic Places Trust listing. He said he did not apologise for the closure, because the information was that the courthouse was unsafe.
Despite his assurances ministry officials were trying to keep the legal profession in the loop, lawyers contacted yesterday said they had still seen no justification for it or any information about why it was taking so long.
It is understood at least one judge is defying the ministry's orders and continuing to occupy his courthouse office near the tower.
Dunedin lawyer Anne Stevens said the whole thing was a nonsense. She estimated the ministry would have spent at least $2 million so far on "not" fixing the building, expenditure she described as "bizarre".
"They are so willing to spend without knowing the facts of what the problem is. They act like there is no tomorrow."
That people were being kept out of the building for their safety did not make sense without information about the actually likelihood of the tower falling as it related to the seismic risk in Dunedin. She had requested information and copies of seismic and engineering reports, but the ministry had declined to provide them while it was still considering its options.
"Where is the seismic risk? We just don't know. They are being deceptive and irresponsible to blow all this money. It is outrageous that they are being so irresponsible."
She wondered at the ministry's motivation. If it was contemplating moving court functions entirely from the old courthouse, that would not happen without protest, she said.
