Cloistered justice: The opposing trends of barricade and respective secrecy

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Two recent reports illustrate contrasting trends in open justice exceptions conceptualised as respective and barricade secrecy. Respective secrecy protects the parties involved and their constitutive social ties and, as evaluation report into the Family Court Transparency Pilot indicates, has been shrinking. In contrast, barricade secrecy conceals actions and determinations of the state, and the greatly delayed government response to the Ouseley Review of Closed Material Procedures indicates its use will continue to spread. Taking seriously the demand that justice must be seen to be done, the article applies a secrecy studies lens to the dynamics of respective and barricade secrecy and argues that the friction between them conveys the vernaculars of disorder that operate in place of consistency, stability and certainty expected in democratic society.
Original languageEnglish
Number of pages20
JournalJournal of Law and Society
Early online date23 Feb 2026
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 23 Feb 2026

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

  1. SDG 10 - Reduced Inequalities
    SDG 10 Reduced Inequalities
  2. SDG 16 - Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
    SDG 16 Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

Keywords

  • Open Justice
  • Closed Material Procedures
  • Transparency
  • Secrecy
  • Disorder
  • Secrecy Studies
  • Barricade Secrecy
  • Respective Secrecy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Law

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Cloistered justice: The opposing trends of barricade and respective secrecy'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this