THE RORT · DOSSIER · SUPPRESSION ORDERSSTATUS · SYSTEMIC
DOSSIER / MECHANISMMECHANISM · COURTS

Suppression Orders

Status Systemic

The court orders that hide names and evidence from the public record. Most lift on conviction; the ones that matter are granted earlier, on evidence the resourced are best placed to assemble, and no authoritative national count of them exists.

Last on record
2026-09
Named in
3 articles
Across
2 cases

Named in 3 articles across 2 cases 5 connections: mechanisms 2, councils and panels 1, courts 1, police 1

Key figure on file
3 August 2026
The Monday on which Carr's legal team abandoned the application to extend his suppression order, without explanation. Judge Gucciardo then lifted the… ABC News, 5 August 2026
3
Articles naming it
2
Cases it recurs across
5
Linked in the graph
4
Figures on file

Fig. 01 / Where this name appears

Fig. 01Source: article scan · every article naming itAs of 2026‑09Auto-assembled

Fig. 02 / On the record

  1. 3 August 2026The Monday on which Carr's legal team abandoned the application to extend his suppression order, without explanation. Judge Gucciardo then lifted the interim order; the decision, in the reporting's own words, had been taken out of his hands.Source: ABC News, 5 August 2026The order the Act cannot reach →
  2. 28 August 2026The date Justice James Henry, Supreme Court of Queensland, dismissed the judicial review brought by four media outlets, including the ABC, against the Cairns non-publication order over MM's identity. The order remains in force.Source: ABC News, 28 August 2026The order the Act cannot reach →
  3. '99 per cent'Bosland's estimate of the share of cases in which suppression orders already lift on conviction. It is his assertion, not an official statistic; no authoritative count exists to test it.Source: ACM mastheads, 11 August 2026The secrecy you can buy →
  4. About 1,111Suppression orders counted nationally for 2023 by the Alliance for Journalists' Freedom white paper. The count is a byproduct of media notifications, and Bosland warns the cross-state comparison is debunked.Source: Alliance for Journalists' Freedom, Press Freedom in Australia white paper, November 2024, p. 18; Bosland, The Conversation, 7 July 2026The secrecy you can buy →
Fig. 02Source: figures on file for this name, each tied to the article it came fromAs of 2026‑09Auto-assembled

Fig. 03 / Named together

Suppression OrdersDeemed Refusal: named together in 1 articleDeemed Refusal1Randwick City Council: named together in 1 articleRandwick City Council1The Land and Environment Court: named together in 1 articleThe Land and Environment Court1Victoria Police: named together in 1 articleVictoria Police1Voluntary Planning Agreements: named together in 1 articleVoluntary Planning Agreements1
The 5 names most often in the same articles as Suppression Orders. A line's weight, and the number by each name, is how many articles name both. Grey chords join the neighbours most often named together themselves (two articles or more). Circles are people and organisations, squares are mechanisms. Named together is all this shows: it is not a finding about what the relationship is.
Fig. 03Source: article scan · articles naming bothAs of 2026‑09Auto-assembled

How this page is assembled. The name, status and role are the desk's entity record. The article list, case counts, connections and the figures under On the record are read by script from the published articles that name Suppression Orders: the desk's key figures where it declared them, otherwise figures harvested from those articles. A connection is a name that appears in the same articles; it is not a finding about the relationship. The page is rebuilt when an article is published or changed.

← THE DOCKET