An influential report this week called for the Court of Protection (CoP) to be opened up to greater public scrutiny.
The court, which helps to manage the affairs of people who are critically ill or have conditions such as dementia, has previously attracted criticism for making many decisions behind closed doors.
Now a study by Cardiff University’s School of Law has concluded that the rules that govern the court are open to miscarriages of justice and it should be routine for journalists to cover hearings.
Dr Lucy Series said: “There is no doubt that restrictions on the ways that Court of Protection cases are reported by the media are necessary to protect the privacy of those involved, but the current rules are not fit for purpose.
“Clearly, there is a need for further exploration of how the law can be framed in a way that can best accommodate the diverse situations facing the Court of Protection. But all participants in the research expressed support for the principle of open justice.”
The CoP was established under the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Initially the intention was for all hearings to be held in public, but regulations were subsequently introduced which said that “as a general rule” cases should be private.
The shortcomings of this system were demonstrated by a recent case in which a woman was imprisoned for attempting to remove her father from a care home where she believed his life was in danger.
Wanda Maddocks was handed a five-month jail term for contempt by a Court of Protection Judge sitting in Birmingham.
Following the controversy, senior judges ruled that no-one else should be jailed in secret and ordered the CoP to publish all rulings in which a person was handed a custodial sentence.