Skene Loane
University of Melbourne, Australia.
J Bioeth Inq. 2004;1(1):49-56. doi: 10.1007/BF02448907.
The role of the courts in 'communicating' with those affected by their decisions is contentious. Some legal commentators maintain that courts and legislators are able to communicate decisions effectively and that attempts to 'dumb down' the law will not make such decisions more accessible to doctors and other professionals. Justice Michael Kirby, on the other hand, seems to share the present author's view that judges could improve their communication of their decisions to a wider audience: 'In future, it seems inevitable that proceedings [of the High Court] will be broadcast live. Maybe one of the judges will explain the decisions of the court in simple terms as they are handed down ... Adaptation to new ways and values is part of the genius of our law, although some if its practitioners need to be dragged kicking and screaming to accomplish the changes' (emphasis added).(1) This article explores the position in Australia.
法院在与受其裁决影响的人“沟通”方面所起的作用颇具争议。一些法律评论家认为，法院和立法机构能够有效地传达裁决，而且试图将法律“简化”并不会使医生和其他专业人员更容易理解这些裁决。另一方面，迈克尔·柯比大法官似乎认同笔者的观点，即法官可以改进向更广泛受众传达其裁决的方式：“未来，高等法院的诉讼程序进行现场直播似乎是不可避免的。也许会有一位法官在宣布裁决时用简单的语言解释法院的决定……适应新的方式和价值观是我们法律的精髓所在，尽管有些法律从业者需要被连拉带拽地去实现这些变革”（重点为后加）。(1) 本文探讨澳大利亚的情况。
