Banning journalists from naming judge who handed Sara Sharif over to killer dad ‘will raise suspicions of cover up’
Share:
BANNING journalists from naming the judge who handed Sara Sharif over to her killer dad is "bound to raise suspicions of a cover up", a court heard today. The decision is also "corrosive to public trust", and judges "must expect their decisions and decision-making to be the subject of public scrutiny", it was told.
![[Sara Sharif's dad Urfan and step-mum Beinash Batool were last month found guilty of her murder]](https://www.thesun.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/2024-handed-life-sentences-father-958120293_d7755b.jpg?strip=all&w=640)
It came as The Sun and other media outlets fought to appeal an order from last month which kept three family court judges involved with Sara Sharif anonymous. Two, who were involved in earlier proceedings and are now retired, opposed the appeal while the third, who gave Sara to her dad in 2019, stayed neutral.
![[Mugshot of Urfan Sharif.]](https://www.thesun.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/undated-handout-custody-photo-issued-958131856_91502d.jpg?strip=all&w=720)
Mr Justice Williams claimed in his ruling last month that naming individuals would be like "holding the lookout on the Titanic responsible for its sinking". He also said it would risk a social media "lynch mob" and that some media outlets "will not" report it "fairly and accurately".
Adam Wolanski KC, for the press, slammed the Titanic analogy as being "bizarre and wrong". He said in written submissions: "Judges are the face of justice itself. […] The judiciary is one of the main repositories of state power. "Because of their role as dispensers of justice, judges must expect their decisions and their decision making to be the subject of public scrutiny, including scrutiny which involves ‘vigorous’ and ‘trenchant’ criticism.".
