‘Open Justice’ is closed and dangerous

I received an email last night that offers New Zealanders only an online whistle blower service.

Called Open Justice, it is the opposite of open – it is suggested you send information and data to an overseas site run by anonymous people who can’t be contacted unless they choose to respond to secure messages.

They will choose what to post online from what is provided. There is no way of challenging their decisions. This is closed, dangerous and offers no justice.

The website claims the launch email was sent to “selected media, bloggers, known activists, politicians and advocates that may have an interest in this service”, none of whom should have anything to do with entrusting ‘information of public interest’ to unknown people.

New service: anonymous release of public information

From: Felicity Abrone <fabrone@outlook.com>

To: John Key (his parliamentary email address, I will have been BCC’d)

This is a one-off e-mail from a one-off e-mail account

This e-mail is to create awareness of Open Justice
Open Justice is a whistleblower service for New Zealand
The service is secure, anonymous, encrypted and private
There is nothing of note to read as it has just started
Open Justice does not have specific issues\cases in mind
That is up to the public and its users to decide

This is an invitation to read\use Open Justice

Observant people will notice a problem with apostrophes in the email and on the website.

The reason this service exists

This is a “whistleblowing” service.

The emphasis is on security and anonymity for everyone involved. 

Open Justice will assist you in sending  information without your identity ever being exposed.

Information released to this site must meet the public interest test as understood by a reasonable, educated and informed adult.

This is not a service to get back at your ex.

Open Justice will expose criminals, corruption, fraud and gross breaches of public trust.

The aim is to provide the public with the raw data alongside any guiding information.
Open Justice is pro-police, pro-law and order, and pro-authority. It may appear counter intuitive to provide a service that will occasionally frustrate these sectors. However, this is the nature of whistleblowing.

This Service is extended to people in New Zealand only. But to ensure legal safety and separation it is 100% operated from elsewhere. No New Zealand currency pays for the operating costs. No New Zealanders are involved in operating it.  None of the infrastructure is on NZ soil.

Open Justice suspects there will be speculation as to who or what is behind all of this. You will be wrong as Open Justice people have no prior public profile (and hope to keep it that way).

The success of Open Justice is in the public’s hands. If there is no need for this site, it will wither.
Like you, this site does not know where this will end up. If anywhere. It does not have a specific issue in mind.

To launch, an email will be sent to selected media, bloggers, known activists, politicians and advocates that may have an interest in this service.

Open Justice is ready.

Anonymity and no right or ability to challenge anything is about as opposite to ‘open’ justice as you could get.

It reminds me of how certain people who call themselves ‘justice campaigners’ are incompetent on legal matters, and justice to them is trying to fuck over anyone they choose to harass.

A certain  website that itself has a complete disregard for practicing what they preach and operates in a similar way to what Open Justice says they will wrote:

…a complete disregard for the victims, the public expectations surrounding the type of offending and the well settled centuries old principles of open justice in we have in common within the Westminster system.

And:

To deny any citizen the right to witness open justice is a draconian step.

And…

Update: [name] has been advised by a number of our Kiwi readers that the above YouTube video has suddenly had a country block placed on it, that Kiwi’s wishing to view the video are unable to do so. [name] has further been advised that viewers instead receive the message “This content is not available on this country domain due to a legal complaint”.

It seems that the sudden geoblocking of this video is as a result of the New Zealand police’s cosy little relationship with YouTube and Google New Zealand and the New Zealand police’s concern that [name] readers might just get to see one amongst the many problems associated with [redacted].

If there had been a genuine legal complaint it would have taken a lot longer than just two hours for YouTube to process. Whats more Youtube would have pulled the video completely, not simply placed a geoblock on the content.

That then beggars the question, just how far will a corrupt police force go to prevent the public from seeing how justice is administered in [place name]?

In the interests of open justice, transparency and free speech [name] have decided to provide the video in question…

To that site ‘open justice’ means flaunting New Zealand law and natural justice, making numerous false accusations, defaming and harassing – the opposite of ‘justice’.

They are also known for having a problem with apostrophes.

Back to Open Justice:

About

WHO

Most people will come here wanting to know who. Sorry.

AIM

To make public such material that is or has been hidden from the public and where doing so is causing more harm.

PRIVACY

Open Justice will remove any material that is not  meant to be public from its site and keeps it encrypted and secure in a secret location.

EMAIL

To increase security for all involved, no incoming email is accepted.

You can send us a message here. Depending on what you write, you may not be contacted.

Whether it’s run by the same vigilante cowboys or not ( it’s possible it has been set up by someone who is well intentioned but badly misguided) but Open Justice is about as far from ‘open’ and ‘justice’ as you could get.

I expect that just about all media, bloggers, known activists, politicians and advocates will have no interest in using this ‘service’.

Who the hell would entrust whistle blower information with an anonymous ‘overseas’ entity with no right of response and no what of knowing how their information could be used or misused?

But they may have an interest in any content should it appear.

That could be revealing in an unintended way. Sure Open Justice may put up a few topics to try and appear to have various sources, but if there’s any obvious hit jobs then it may not be difficult to guess who is behind them.