The Supreme Court of New Zealand is pulling back the veil and making lawyers’ written arguments, or submissions, accessible online from today.
Victoria University graduate Feroze Brailsford saw the initiative as a good thing for students across the country.
"I think it’s really good and is seen as a success so it can be rolled out for other courts as well."
Mr Brailsford said accessibility had been difficult in the past and empathised with students who were not able to attend the courts in person.
"I think that could be a really valuable thing not only for law students but law students who aren’t in Wellington, that don’t have the opportunity to pop down and hear those oral arguments."
This new function could be a key player in championing transparency at the highest level and was already in effect overseas.
Victoria University law professor Catherine Iorns said she considered it a good move for education particularly because it enabled lawyers and students to read all arguments put to the court before it had come to a decision.
Knowing what was being argued could be helpful in understanding a decision more fully, Prof Iorns said, and accessing this information could help probe the limits of court rulings for any potential future impacts to law.
Chief Justice Helen Winkelmann canvassed interested parties in March 2021 getting an overwhelmingly positive response from members of the profession and law schools.
"Many expressed strong support for the proposal to make written submissions publicly available on the basis that it supports understanding of what is in issue in the proceeding, and through that improves transparency and helps maintain confidence in the administration of justice," Justice Winkelmann said.
Once delivered in open court, a lawyers’ submissions were already treated as public, but Prof Iorns said accessing these could be difficult when you did not know how.
"This move by the Supreme Court will make them easily accessible, and thus increase access to information about the law which is better for open justice more generally, and especially for education."
Following last year’s canvassing, interested parties voiced a need for necessary safeguards to be in place for sensitive material, including name suppression, which the court was also very mindful of, Justice Winkelmann said.
"Efforts to further strengthen open justice must be consistent with the need to protect suppressed, confidential or sensitive information. We must balance the need for transparency with the interests of parties – including victims and their whanau – and other countervailing interests," Justice Winkelmann said.
A review of the initiative will be held later this year.
-- Hazel Osborne, Open Justice reporter
