A court heard arguments yesterday that the unprecedented anonymity granted to the judge in the Sara Sharif murder case poses a threat to open justice and risks eroding public trust in the legal system. Media organizations are appealing against the judge's decision, arguing that judges as those who make 'life-and-death decisions' must be subject to public scrutiny.
An unprecedented ban on naming the judge in the Sara Sharif case has been described as a threat to open justice and a potential erosion of public confidence in the system. Last month, a High Court judge sparked widespread outrage after ordering that none of the professionals involved in the case of the 10-year-old murdered by her father and stepmother could be named. The judge cited concerns that the media could not be trusted to report fairly.
This marks the first time in British legal history that a judge has been granted anonymity. Yesterday, the Court of Appeal heard arguments that the ban must be overturned. Advocates for open justice argued that judges, as the 'face of justice itself,' make 'life-and-death decisions' and that keeping their names secret will have a damaging impact on public trust in the judicial system. Following the murder convictions of Sara's father, Urfan Sharif, 42, and stepmother Beinash Batool, 30, Mr Justice Williams imposed the anonymity order. The ban prevents the naming of various professionals involved in the case, including social workers, guardians, and the family court judge who made the decision to hand Sharif custody prior to his daughter's death on August 8, 2023. The Old Bailey trial revealed that Sara's torture began when she was placed in her father's care, despite 16 years of allegations regarding his violence towards women and children. Mr Justice Williams defended his decision, stating that the anonymity order was intended to prevent a 'virtual lynch mob' and that he did not believe the media could report fairly, accurately, and responsibly. He compared holding individual social workers or guardians or judges accountable to blaming the lookout on the Titanic for the ship's sinking. Now, several media organizations, including the Daily Mail, are appealing against the decision on grounds of open justice. It has emerged that no one involved in the case requested Mr. Justice Williams to impose the anonymity order. However, the family court judge and two other retired judges who also handled Sara's case have expressed concerns about their well-being. Adam Wolanski, KC, representing the media, argued that judges, as those who make 'life-and-death decisions,' must face public scrutiny of their judgments, even if it involves 'severe criticism.' He emphasized that judges are the 'face of justice itself,' holding significant state power. Through common law, they create and interpret legislation, acting as a safeguard against abuses by other state organs, even those at the highest levels of government. They also possess the power to determine an individual's liberty and make decisions regarding the welfare and custody of children, among other responsibilities. Mr. Wolanski deemed the anonymity order 'bizarre and wrong,' characterizing it as censorship, a practice incompatible with English law. He expressed concern that the ban sets a dangerous precedent, questioning whether judges will in the future request anonymity for themselves in specific situations. Wolanski also criticized the judge's comments, which he perceived as displaying hostility and prejudice towards the mainstream media. Chris Barnes, representing several freelance journalists, echoed the concerns, stating that seeking anonymity for judges, except in truly exceptional circumstances, is likely to damage public confidence in the judiciary and the wider justice system. He asserted that this practice must not be allowed to stand. The hearing is ongoing
Sara Sharif Judge Anonymity Open Justice British Legal System Media Freedom
United Kingdom Latest News, United Kingdom Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Sara Sharif Murderer Urfan Sharif Attacked in PrisonUrfan Sharif, convicted of murdering his 10-year-old daughter Sara Sharif, has been attacked in Belmarsh Prison. Police are investigating the assault, which resulted in non-life-threatening injuries.
Read more »
Sara Sharif Case Sparks Calls for Reform Amidst Misogyny ConcernsThe sentencing of Sara Sharif's father highlights public anger and calls for accountability from institutions. While the government proposes new legislation to address child safety gaps, the case exposes a troubling pattern of misogyny that contributed to Sara's tragic death.
Read more »
Teen Denies Murder Charge in Sara Sharif CaseA 14-year-old boy accused of murdering his 10-year-old stepsister Sara Sharif denies the charge. Meanwhile, Sara's father and stepmother have been sentenced to life in prison for their role in the abuse campaign.
Read more »
Sara Sharif Case Jurors Offered Counselling SupportJurors who served in the Sara Sharif murder trial have been offered free counselling and support services due to the highly distressing nature of the case.
Read more »
Judges in Sara Sharif Case Could Be NamedCourt of Appeal to consider appeal over media restrictions on naming judges involved in Sara Sharif's family court proceedings.
Read more »
Sara Sharif: Vigil held in Woking to remember 'shining star'A representative of the local mosque says Sara's death is 'heartbreaking'.
Read more »