Creampuff, the core of the problem:
All lawyers will recognise the oft cited aphorism of Lord Hewart from Rex v Sussex Justices; Ex parte McCarthy:
“… it is not merely of some importance but is of fundamental importance, that justice should not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done.” 1
Lord Hewart was encapsulating a principle that had been long known and often expressed 2. Another pithy articulation of part of the scope of the principle is that of Lord Bowen:
“… Judges, like Caesar’s wife, should be above suspicion …”. 3
And Lord Atkin said:
“Justice is not a cloistered virtue.” 4
The High Court has expressly applied Lord Hewart’s aphorism a number of times,5 as have other Australian courts.
..................... I use the word “justice” to mean fair outcomes arrived at by fair procedures. To whom must justice, in this sense, appear to be done? The observer is not a party, not even the accused in a criminal trial.13
The relevant observer is always the “fair minded observer”, acting “reasonably”.14
Seen to be Done: The Principle of Open Justice - Supreme Court : Lawlink NSW
I submit that CASA does not appear to abide by this standard, at least according to many people who post here. THe question then is if they are Spieglemans "fair minded observer."?
I also submit that if there is substance to the allegations regarding the behaviour of CASA and such alleged behaviour continues, there is one day the possibility of an extremely nasty and unpleasant result for CASA.