Naming usual after conviction

Peter Stewart would have faced "almost inevitable" failure in his bid to keep his name secret, a top lawyer says.

However, Marie Dyhrberg said she feared the "definite and absolute" swing towards the right of the public to know the identity of those appearing before the courts was coming at the cost of trampling the rights of those still presumed innocent.

Dyhrberg's previous cases have included getting permanent name suppression for an American billionaire who admitted smuggling cannabis into New Zealand during the America's Cup in Auckland. The decision was overturned on appeal, and Peter Benjamin Lewis was named.

She said the convictions entered against Stewart on historical child-sex charges effectively doomed his bid for permanent name suppression in the current judicial environment.

"There is a presumption (on conviction) for naming that you can't argue against," she said.

"There will be rare cases where it will still be appropriate for really emotional family issues, and particularly when the public good isn't served by naming someone."

Dyhrberg said rights were being trampled when defendants were identified before accusations were proven in court.

"I'm still of the view there ought to be suppression of name until conviction or guilty plea, and that should be automatic."

Defendants who were identified and then cleared of charges still had their reputations smeared, Dyhrberg said.

"People will always say they `got off'. They won't say `they were acquitted' or `they were found innocent'. They say they got off and it sticks.

"It doesn't hurt the public to wait a few more weeks. The argument that the public ought to know in no way outweighs the presumption of innocence."