After spending more than 25 years as a Crown prosecutor, with a strong focus on legal reform in sexual and child abuse, Philip Hamlin is now working as a barrister in what he says is a ‘high crime area’. He’s looking forward to sharing his knowledge and passion for the law with students, in a newly minted role at the College of Law New Zealand.
Congratulations on being appointed as an adjunct instructor for The College of Law New Zealand. Is teaching something you have always wanted to do?
Yes, I’ve been teaching (for a long time), not in a formal sense, but I regularly present. I organised the continuing legal education program at my last firm for more than 20 years.
You have been heavily involved in areas of reform in sexual and child abuse. These can be dark areas. What motivated you to be a prosecutor and to get involved in reform? Do you feel satisfied that you have achieved change?
Yes, very much so. What I really enjoyed about the area was to engage with others who knew more than I did, and I apply my knowledge of the law and how it worked to try and bring about change – normally for the benefit of the whole trial process – and really try and get to the truth.
These cases are often very confusing and very emotional (for victims). We need to be very careful about what we’re doing. I don’t think we’ve treated well those who have been victims of crime.
The system hasn’t been kind to victims?
The system obviously focuses on the accused, and there’s nothing wrong with that. But we’ve been left a little bit behind in relation to the complainants of crime. So a lot of my work has been working with groups who work with the trial process or with the complainant, and trying to make that better by improving systems.
For example, the way people give evidence [could benefit from] using closed-circuit television and pre-recorded interviews. We’re now trying to have pre-recorded cross-examination, so that children don’t have to wait years until they get to the trial. For a five-year-old to have to wait 18 months for a trial, it’s like a lifetime for the child.
What else are you looking to revise?
I’ve been involved in law reform and encouraging research by psychologists and linguists who look at cross-examination and how difficult it is for children, or adults for that matter, but particularly for children.
We look at how difficult it is to give evidence in court without really discovering the truth by having an adversarial system. Maybe we need to modify it. That’s controversial, but that’s why it’s very interesting. We’re looking at how we might change something that’s been in the system for a very long time, like cross-examination. Many people have faith that cross-examination of a witness is the only way to test them. Well it’s one way, but it isn’t the only way.
Are you concerned that there’s an increasing lack of collegiality and dying out of advocacy in law?
Yes, I think that’s part of the reason I do the teaching, to try and encourage younger lawyers to open their minds to alternatives and to where we’re going in the law. It’s about more than just coming to classes for the answers. I’d encourage students to come to classes and try to understand what we’re doing as lawyers, what our larger responsibilities are about.