CLOSING OF THE COURTS

Taranaki Daily News, 12 September 1934, Page 5

CLOSING OF THE COURTS

WOMEN’S OPPOSITION TO BILL CASE FOR PUBLICITY STATED. Opposition to the proposal that courts dealing with domestic cases should be closed to/ the public is voiced in a statement issued by the Women’s Service Guild. . • . “The guild is of opinion that a graye injustice may be inflicted on the innocent parties in these cases wluch gain by publicity because this assists to refute incorrect versions and malicious propaganda,” it says. “To remove, as as been requested, a large section of court work vitally concerning home life from the wholesome correction of public opinion would be, we believe, a retrograde step and a reversion to 'star chamber methods.’ • . “The Women’s Service Guild is o? opinion that only State officers, the Press and members of the legal profession should have official standing in court. The recognition in a semi-official way of people belonging to various organisations is not wise because, however well meaning these people may be, they are elected from their own organisations, and are not subject to control and’ discipline as are officers attached to the different departments of State 'connected with the administration of Justice.” The guild considers that any annoyance to women on leaving the court is a matter for the police to deal with, but does not think that the number, of-in-stances of interference is so great that the courts must be closed. “The crying need of to-day is . not to hide away and so obscure the result of lack of training and bad citizenship, but rather should we face the facte and strive by right standards of living to eliminate the causes of immorality and bad citizenship in our country. Only by a clear understanding of posshne danger and temptation can persons in charge of young people exercise the vigilance necessary to protect them,” the statement continues.

“We do not agree with the proposals contained in Mrs. McCombs’ Bill to forbid the reports of proceedings in domestic cases from being published. We are of opinion that publicity protects the innocent. In one Wellington case the publication of evidence while the case was proceeding brought forward a witness with essential evidence, but we are utterly opposed to morbid, salacious details being published.”, ' '