Media freedom trumps drink driver's shame

TVNZ's right to name and shame a drink driver leaving court has been upheld by the High Court, which has overturned a ruling by the Broadcasting Standards Authority that the item was unfair.

The broadcaster had shown and named a woman leaving court after her second conviction for drink driving, as part of a Close Up segment about The Dominion Post and The Press newspapers publishing lists of people convicted of drink driving.

Auckland couple David and Heather Green, who apparently have no connection with the woman, complained to TVNZ and later to the Broadcasting Standards Authority, saying the woman had been publicly singled out and humiliated, making the item unfair.

The woman made it clear she did not want to cooperate with the filming and was concerned what would happen if her employer found out about her conviction.

The authority upheld the Greens' complaint but a Wellington High Court judge has overturned that finding.

Justice Jill Mallon said an individual's rights had to be balanced against permitting the open reporting of court proceedings and the media's right to freedom of expression.

The shame and humiliation of being shown on television after appearing in court could not of itself breach the broadcasting standard of fairness, the judge said. There were limits to open justice values, for example showing a person vomiting or soiling themselves.

"Absent something that takes it beyond the usual embarrassment, shame or humiliation of being a defendant in a court proceeding, a defendant's feelings about being shown in the media is not a justified limit on open justice and freedom of expression," Justice Mallon said.

Her ruling comes in the wake of conflicting views from High Court judges about allowing filming or photographing of people in the dock.

In a case in Christchurch, Justice John Fogarty compared broadcasting film footage of an accused person during their trial to pillory, a public humiliation.

Justice Mallon said the judges who had granted permission for cameras to be in court had not viewed the humiliation, embarrassment or shame of an accused person as overriding the public importance of open justice - which assists public understanding, scrutiny and informed debate of court proceedings.

In saying TVNZ had acted unfairly, the authority had accepted the public nature of court records but failed to take account of the public nature of the courtroom in which a person could be filmed, or shown in the street leaving court, Justice Mallon said.

- © Fairfax NZ News