Breaking: Media makes case to reveal high-profile man's identity

A judge has reserved his decision on whether to lift a suppression order preventing the identity of a Queensland man at the centre of an alleged extortion threat from being revealed.A man accused of a domestic violence extortion charge is alleged to have threatened a complainant by saying he would reveal information about her and someone who can only be referred to as "MM".MM's name has been suppressed by a Cairns court since late May, although he was not the direct target of the alleged threat.Media organisations, including the ABC, have challenged the suppression order through a judicial review at the Supreme Court in Cairns.Cairns Courthouse. (ABC News: Mark Rigby)After a four-hour hearing today, Justice James Henry reserved his decision on whether the order should be varied to allow MM's name to be published.Threat 'never communicated to MM'Media outlets have brought the judicial review of the suppression order on the grounds of a "jurisdictional error", the court heard.Andrew O'Brien KC, for the media outlets, argued the magistrate did not have the power to make the suppression order, or "either misapprehended the nature or the limit of the power".Mr O'Brien said there was precedent for complainants and witnesses in blackmail cases to be suppressed to prevent a "chilling effect" that discouraged blackmail victims from coming forward.Andrew O'Brien KC argued the magistrate did not have the power to make the suppression order. (ABC Far North: Christopher Testa)However, he told the court "no authority we've been able to identify takes it beyond that"."Unless MM has a status of witness or a victim, there has been no extension of the principle of protection," he said.Mr O'Brien told the court the alleged threat "was never communicated to MM"."There was no threat ever made against MM — MM was not the victim of the offence," he said."Nor is MM a witness in the proceeding."Mr O'Brien said the courts had to strike a balance between protecting complainants in extortion cases and allowing matters to proceed in open court."Consistently, the cases have been limited to suppressing the identity of the complainant and that's where the balance has been struck," he told the court.Mr O'Brien said the need for a suppression order must be "established by some evidence or other motivating factor".He argued the suppression order in this case went "beyond the limits of what was necessary"."The idiosyncratic features of the person aren't relevant to the decision you make today," he told Justice Henry in submissions.However, Jonathan Horton KC, appearing for the Queensland Police Service, said the acting magistrate did have evidence before her showing she would find it "distressing" for the alleged extortion threat to be revealed.Suppression order became 'Kafkaesque'The court heard the non-publication order was also opposed on the grounds of procedural fairness and overreach.MM's name has been suppressed since a hearing on May 29, where the lawyer representing the man charged with extortion applied for a bail variation.That barrister, Brydie Bilic, told the Supreme Court today she initially asked for the names of her client and the complainant to be blocked from publication."The inference that's put against me is the applicant has a strong desire to make the allegation known," she said."If that were the case, the matter would've simply ended there on that day."At the May hearing, Acting Magistrate Meoli requested a police prosecutor be replaced in the courtroom by a more senior police prosecutor, the court heard."[The magistrate] was concerned the prosecutor present would not understand what she was consenting to," Ms Bilic told the court.An interim "blanket" non-publication order was made, which extended to suppressing the identity of MM.However, Ms Bilic said "a Kafkaesque situation evolved" when the court registry was unable to provide hard copies of the non-publication order "because Her Honour named MM specifically".Ms Bilic said there was an element of "potential public interest that might not otherwise be attracted"."There is a concession that there's information that's sensational but not inaccurate."Defence barrister Brydie Bilic outside the Cairns Courthouse. (ABC Far North: Christopher Testa)The court heard acting magistrate Meoli handed down her final non-publication order immediately after hearing submissions, without an adjournment in between.Mr O'Brien said Justice Henry could either set aside the magistrate's suppression order, vary it, or send it back to the Magistrates Court for further hearing.The existing suppression order extended to include details of the alleged threat, which Justice Henry noted prevented publication of the material facts of the case."It's not about protecting identity; it's actually going further than that," he said.Today's hearing started behind closed doors but after a legal argument, Justice Henry ruled the case could proceed in open court."One allegedly disobedient member of the public … justified a cautious approach in this case," Justice Henry said after opening the court.Justice Henry did not set a date for his decision.The non-publication order remains in place in the meantime.