Copyright 2005, San Jose Mercury-News

Judge denies bid to open hearings
In juvenile foster care proceedings.

(San Jose Mercury-News 3/8/05) -- San Mateo County Court hearings that address whether abused children should stay with their families will remain closed to the public, a judge decided Monday.

County leaders had asked Judge Marta Diaz, who supervises the juvenile division, to make San Mateo the first county in California to open such proceedings -- known as dependency hearings -- in the interest of improving public understanding of the court's work to safeguard children.

But attorneys who routinely represent children and parents at such hearings strongly opposed changing the rules, arguing that the presence of strangers in the courtroom would scare children, and that media coverage would cause them stress and harm.

The law states that the hearings should be closed unless a judge believes someone with a ``direct and legitimate interest'' in the case should be admitted. County lawyers argued that Diaz therefore had discretion to open dependency proceedings to everyone. Hearings for very sensitive cases could still be closed, they said.

The California First Amendment Coalition, which counts the Mercury News as a member, filed a legal brief joining the call for greater openness.

After listening to arguments last week, Diaz said she was not convinced she had the legal authority to interpret the law the way county leaders had asked. To do so would be to change the overall thrust of the law, and such changes are better left to legislators, she said in a seven-page decision issued Monday.

``Any standing order issued by this court or any other court would be judicial tinkering and a clear violation of the separation of powers doctrine,'' she said.

Further, Diaz said she was comfortable with the level of discretion the law already allows judges, and said she already admits members of the public to dependency hearings fairly often.

``We do not need to spend time and energy in attempts to change perfectly adequate law,'' she wrote. ``We need to work harder with the law to do what must be done.''

County Counsel Thomas Casey said that despite the county's request being denied, he was ``pleased with the judge's conclusion on the importance of public awareness.''

Attorney Gerry Hilliard, who had argued against opening dependency hearings, said Diaz had ``followed the law'' and had made a ``well-reasoned and thoughtful decision.''

Newspapers that write stories about juvenile court issues rarely publish the names of minors involved. This and other ethical considerations demonstrate that newspapers would cover open dependency hearings responsibly, said Peter Scheer, executive director of the First Amendment Coalition.

``It's a very disappointing outcome,'' Scheer said. ``This is one of those areas where what's needed is some common sense. . . . Intuitively, it seems clear that by opening up the proceedings, in most cases, you make the system more accountable.''

A state Assembly bill seeking to open dependency hearings in 10 counties failed last year in the Senate.

At the conclusion of her decision, Diaz invited the community to discuss new ways to foster the spirit of openness within the confines of existing law.

``Join me in exploring pragmatic ways in which we can give greater notice and hence access to those with a direct and legitimate interest in the cases or in the work of the court,'' Diaz wrote.

One problem, Diaz said last week, is that members of the public are rarely aware that they have a right to ask a judge to admit them into dependency hearings. Additionally, there should be a way to inform the press about juvenile court matters without endangering children's privacy, she said. The press is given little to no information about juvenile cases.

By Jessie Seyfer