OCT–DEC 2017 AusTRAlIAN QuARTeRlY 13

iMAGE: © lock the Gate Alliance-Flickr

C

ertainly, there is a risk that

some may seek to abuse

the judicial system. In

the context of planning

and environmental law,

for example, commercial competitors

may seek to initiate legal proceedings

without legal merit to delay their

competitor’s project and gain some

collateral commercial advantage.

It is these sorts of abuses – frivolous

and vexatious proceedings brought

merely to delay and obstruct – that the

term ‘lawfare’ would, on its face, appear

to connote.

of course, there are many safeguards

in place in the legal system to prevent

under-mining

public trust

The rhetoric of lawfare

Access to justice is an important contributor to the trust

citizens have in their governments.^1 And like most oECD

countries, levels of trust in Australia’s national government

have declined since 2007.^2 In a modern democracy such as

Australia the separation of powers enables the judiciary

to be a check and balance on government decisions, to

ensure they stay within the bounds of the laws passed by

parliament. This ability to challenge government decisions

before independent and impartial arbiters enhances public

trust and confidence in the system overall.

Yet the ‘lawfare’ rhetoric being utilised by industry

lobbyists is a dangerous attempt to erode public access to

the courts, which further risks undermining public trust in

government decisions.

ARTICle BY: sean ryan