Attorney-General for the State of Queensland v WMS (No 2)

The matter before the court was an application by the Attorney-General for the State of Queensland to set aside a non-publication order made by a magistrate in August 2021. The respondent, WMS, is a person subject to supervision orders under the Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld). The magistrate had made an order that the identity of WMS be not disclosed to the public, which the Attorney-General sought to overturn. The court was required to decide whether the non-publication order should remain in place or whether it should be set aside to allow for the publication of WMS’s identity.

The court considered the public interest in the protection of the identity of sexual offenders against the public interest in transparency and accountability in the administration of justice. The court noted that the reasons for the decision to release WMS had already been published and that the identity of WMS had not been disclosed in any media reports. The court found that the non-publication order should remain in place to protect WMS’s identity and to prevent any potential harm that may arise from the disclosure of his identity. The court also noted that the order was subject to certain exceptions, such as the disclosure of identifying particulars of WMS to necessary staff of government agencies involved in the administration of justice and the respondent’s reporting obligation under the Child Protection (Offender Reporting and Offender Prohibition) Act 2004.

The court ordered that no identifying particulars of WMS be disclosed to the public until further order of the court. The order was subject to certain exceptions, such as the disclosure of identifying particulars of WMS to necessary staff of government agencies involved in the administration of justice and the respondent’s reporting obligation under the Child Protection (Offender Reporting and Offender Prohibition) Act 2004. The court also restricted access to the court file by any member of the public until further order of the court.

The court’s decision was that the non-publication order made by the magistrate should remain in place to protect the identity of WMS and to prevent any potential harm that may arise from the disclosure of his identity. The order was subject to certain exceptions, and the respondent was authorised to inform the relevant person or entity to whom he was required to report under the Child Protection (Offender Reporting and Offender Prohibition) Act 2004 of the making of the orders. The respondent must also inform any person or entity to whom he communicates the making of the orders, of the making and the terms of this non-publication order and the potential for proceedings for contempt of Court as a result of any conduct which deliberately frustrates the effect of this non-publication order.