Victims of a serial paedophile fighting to keep his name secret will today ask a judge to lift suppression of their names.
The two women, who live in Christchurch, were in tears this week as they recounted details of the sex crimes the man committed against them four decades ago.
They believe he used the automatic name suppression granted to all victims of sexual abuse to hide his past. They want his name made public so parents can keep their children safe.
There could also be other victims who had not spoken to police, they said.
"He's just a mongrel," one of the victims said.
The women, who were repeatedly sexually abused as children in the 1970s, will be supported by friends and family at the Christchurch District Court hearing this morning.
"I haven't done anything wrong so why do I need to hide?" one of the victims said.
The paedophile was convicted in Christchurch in 1995 of five offences of indecent assault or doing an indecent act. He complained to the Privacy Commission after his name and convictions appeared on the Sensible Sentencing Trust's website of offenders.
He argued the court had suppressed his name.
The trust disputed the claim suppression had been granted and said the court record showed an interim order was made but there was no record of final suppression.
A Court of Appeal ruling in June suggested the interim suppression order remained in force unless it was lifted.
The Director of Human Rights Proceedings Robert Kee was set to take the case to the Human Rights Review Tribunal in August on the man's behalf.
The issue of name suppression was irrelevant to many of the privacy issues at stake, he said.
The information about the man's convictions came from a police employee who took computer information and gave it to the man's employer and the trust.
A privacy complaint against police was settled on confidential terms.
The trust was scheduled to go before the Human Rights Review Tribunal in August to defend the privacy breach claim.
This morning, Trust spokeswoman Ruth Money said it had reached a settlement with Kee, who had filed a discontinuation of the proceedings.
''We have to do a privacy course and acknowledge that we breached a privacy principle," Money said.
- The Press