Law must move with the times

A FUNDAMENTAL right under our system of justice is the right of someone accused of a crime to have a fair trial.

This often extends to details in one trial being kept quiet until a related trial is complete so as not to prejudice a later jury.

The law of the land operates to this effect — through the threat of contempt of court charges.

Sometimes judges add what they see as an extra layer of security by issuing a suppression order to ban publication of details of the first case until a later case is finalised.

The English common law system we inherited has operated this way relatively smoothly for centuries — until now.

The internet — and the rise of the global village — is now smashing all that tradition and simplicity to smithereens.

Too often traditional media is muzzled while details about a story can be trending on Twitter or searchable on Google.

Often these media carriage services run the work of international media beyond the reach of our courts who are able to publish with gay abandon.

Once again the tech giants, seemingly ungovernable by sovereign nations and states, do whatever the hell they want with little or no consequence from local judges and attorneys-general.

At this impasse there seem to be two options.

Either we re-evaluate our contempt laws and the use of suppression orders to recognise the difficulty of keeping jurors in the dark in the information age.

In that case local news outlets could report what is widely available on the internet.

Or option two: We hold firm but charge online publishers such as Twitter or Google for anything that is found to be in contempt of court or breach of orders.

Fairness dictates there should be one rule for everyone.

Technology moves at a breakneck pace. And our leaders need to ensure they keep up with it.