Quote:
Originally Posted by SebC
I think we need to discuss the problem in abstract terms.
Perpetrator does something to victim. Publication ban is put in place to protect victim's identity. In the court's view, perp has been punished fairly.
Perpetrator runs for public office. It's now a matter of public interest that the ban be lifted, but that has to be weighed against the consequences for the victim.
One could avoid the scenario entirely by disallowing perpetrators who are subject to a publication ban from running for office, but that's anti-democratic.
I don't see a clean solution here, but I'd suggest that we may need a procedure where publication bans are automatically re-assessed on an expedited and case-by-case basis if they involve a perpetrator who is running for office.
|
I don’t know the ins and outs of this, regarding publication bans. But can’t some information be made available? We’ve definitely seen cases where there are publication bans in place, but that doesn’t mean they’re entirely sealed and nothing is known.