Li, Joyce --- "Editorial" [2024] UNSWLawSocCConsc 1; (2024) 18 UNSW Law Society Court of Conscience v

---

EDITORIAL

Joyce Li^[1]

Welcome to Issue 18 of the Court of Conscience.

The theme for this year is ‘Changing With the Times: Progress and Law Reform’, which explores key areas of the law within the 21st century that require continued consideration for the future. This curated selection of 17 articles delivers a concise but nuanced snapshot of some of the key issues that continue to impact our broader community and society at large. It places us within the context of a rapidly developing world that is fraught with innovation, tension and emerging developments. Naturally, it seems appropriate to anticipate that with time, our laws should adjust to bridge this gap and reflect changing community values. When one thinks of law reform, one way to describe its function is the modernisation of law. This involves the act of ‘bringing it into accord with current conditions; the elimination of defects in the law; the simplification of law; and the adoption of new or more effective methods for administering the law and dispensing justice’.^[2] At the same time, we need to continue to gauge what is working and what requires further improvement. Law reform is an iterative process. Each of the articles in this issue contribute to scholarship by discussing both how far we have come, and also how much further we have yet to go.

Issue 18 commences with a foreword by the Honourable Tom Bathurst, the Chairperson of the New South Wales Law Reform Commission, who emphasises that the process of law reform requires iterative consultation and knowledge-gathering. We then launch into the first suite of articles that explore the intersection between law and human rights. The Honourable Kirby encourages lawmakers to have greater consideration of individuals from non-majoritarian sexual orientation and gender identity groups to address issues concerning basic human rights needs. Emeritus Professor Rosalind Croucher reinforces the need for Australia to implement a Human Rights Act to ensure continued compliance with our international law obligations. Lorraine Finlay, Patrick Hooton and Andrea Olivares Jones observe that the right to privacy may be increasingly corroded and that further safeguards are required to address this gap, particularly for neurotechnologies. Sophie Farthing considers developments in Australia’s approach to regulating AI and concludes that international human rights law would provide a helpful framework to design our own bespoke regulations in this area.

Three articles then discuss the interaction between the law, nature or climate-related concerns, and rights-focused or private economic initiatives. The Honourable Justice Preston discusses the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment and suggests that reform is required to ensure that the correlative obligations to protect and fulfil this right are upheld. Dr Faith Gordon reframes the climate crisis as a child rights crisis that will greatly impact young people, and advocates for the law to continue addressing these issues. Courtney Hall examines the Nature Repair Market Initiative to demonstrate the complexity in incentivising private investment ecological conservation while also ensuring environmental protection and socioeconomic development.

The next few articles extend our deep dive into Australian policy. Two articles pinpoint areas in the law that require amendment to better align with and reflect the interests of Indigenous peoples. Dr Bryan Keon-Cohen reviews leading domestic and international case law to note that Australian courts have refrained from extending fiduciary law principles to Crown-Indigenous relations, which could be remedied via either constitutional reform or treaty initiatives. Mahlia Garay, Lucy-Ann Kelley, Annaliese Gielingh evaluate the significance of adopting legislative reforms that would require judicial officers to consider the known risks of harm to an Aboriginal child of being removed from their parents or carer in child protection matters.

The following four articles assess diverse aspects of social policy. Vicki McNamara and Professor Michael Legg consider how legal service reforms in the United Kingdom and Utah as initiatives could inspire Australian reform to address the gap between legal services and unmet legal needs. Dr Sonya Willis explores the potential for tax reforms to adopt technological innovation and assist taxpayers in a manner that does not exacerbate societal inequity. Dr Sarah Ailwood observes the impact of piecemeal reforms of Australian defamation laws on victim-survivors of gender-based violence in light of the #MeToo movement, concluding that reform is needed to protect the ability to speak. Professor Penny Crofts reviews existing barriers to criminal law prosecutions against corporations and urges for a renewed enforcement and willingness to prosecute corporate crime.

The final suite of articles reviews recent developments in technology. Professor Jeannie Paterson focuses on the need for greater transparency regarding AI-generated images and bots to complement existing legislation on consumer protection. On a related note, Dr Gregor Urbas scrutinises recent reforms that have aimed to regulate AI-generated material and notes the limitations in how this will address concerns about deepfake sexual imagery. Dr Niamh Kinchin pushes for further risk-based regulation to address potential threats by using algorithmic risk assessments in the immigration process. Dr Gunther Teubner and Dr Anna Beckers close Issue 18 by lending an international, cross-disciplinary perspective on the complexity of technological laws.

Issue 18 would not have been possible without everyone who has been involved in the process from start to finish. I express my sincere thanks and gratitude to the authors of this journal for their contributions to this year’s theme and for entrusting our publication with their works. It has been an honour to work with you and I hope you are proud of our accomplishment. I extend my thanks to the anonymous peer reviews for taking their time to provide insightful feedback on the submissions that formed part of this journal. I thank Mr Bathurst for kindly agreeing to pen this year’s foreword for Issue 18 and for providing invaluable insights on law reform. We are honoured to have your support in leading our discussion on these important issues.

With the Court of Conscience now in its 18^th year of publication, I was immensely pleased when I realised the number ‘18’ is considered to be a lucky number in many cultures, including my own. I certainly feel lucky to have been able to work alongside such a hard-working and dedicated student-led Editorial Team for Issue 18. As my time as Editor in Chief draws to a close, I cannot thank each of you enough for your unmatched diligence, knowledge and assistance to the Journal. It has been wonderful having you on the team. I am grateful that the Court of Conscience has the backing of the University of New South Wales Law Society and the Law and Justice faculty. In particular, I would like to give a shout out to the Faculty’s Dean Andrew Lynch, Law Society Co-Presidents Bhavik Aggarwal and Lihara Delungahawatte, and Vice President (Social Justice) Imandi Mudugamuwa for their continued support of the journal. A massive thank you to our artist, Darshni Rajasekar, for providing the beautiful illustrations that complement the journal, and to the graphic designer Helaina Clare for putting together our publication. Finally, I thank my friends and family for being with me every step of the way.

The law is ever-changing. It ebbs and flows in parallel to emerging developments that continue to affect our world. I hope the reader enjoys this insight into what further change could look like and the ripple effects that the law continues to have on society.

---

^[1] Court of Conscience Editor in Chief.

^[2] Encyclopaedic Australian Legal Dictionary (online at 24 September 2024) ‘law reform’.