Thursday, 22 June 2023

Office of the Special Investigator

Michael O’BRIEN (Malvern) (14:14): My question is to the Premier. Premier, the Court of Appeal has said that the Lawyer X saga:

… might prove to be one of the greatest scandals of our time in relation to the workings of the criminal justice system.

Why has the government refused to give the Office of the Special Investigator the power to lay charges against those responsible for this scandal?

Daniel ANDREWS (Mulgrave – Premier) (14:14): Because that is not what former judge McMurdo handed down in the royal commission recommendations. We have been completely faithful and delivered against the recommendations made in the royal commission that sadly needed to be run into what is a very serious matter. There is no debate between the member for Malvern and myself or perhaps anyone really, on that front. It is a very serious matter.

In terms of the expansion of powers, we have given to the special investigator exactly what the royal commission told us to give to them: no more, no less. On the broader issue at play here, if I might, it is not in my judgement good policy for us to be questioning the independence – in broad terms, not personalities but broad terms. We have independence of the prosecutorial function where the only thing that matters is the brief of evidence when it comes to making a judgement about whether someone should be charged or not and what they should be charged with or not. The independence of the DPP, the Director of Public Prosecutions, is critically important, as is funding, as is the full delivery of the recommendations that the royal commission provided to us, and that is what we have done. Many of those passed the Parliament very, very recently. There were some who were not supportive of elements of that particular work, but that work has been done. That is now the law of our state, and that is all about making sure that we do everything possible to make sure that what occurred cannot and does not occur again.

Michael O’BRIEN (Malvern) (14:16): A special investigator, eminent former High Court judge Geoffrey Nettle, has raised significant concerns about the DPP’s refusal to lay charges, as was reported to Parliament yesterday. Premier, having praised Mr Nettle on appointing him for his extensive and wideranging experience at the highest levels of the legal system, why is the government now refusing to allow him to hold accountable those who sought to pervert the course of justice in this state?

Daniel ANDREWS (Mulgrave – Premier) (14:17): Well, we know why he is here and not at the bar. Seriously, with a question like that – did you not listen to the answer that was just provided? Is there actually a debate between the government and those who would want to be the government on the independence of prosecutorial functions?

Michael O’Brien: On a point of order, Speaker, it is not for the Premier to debate the question. He has made a choice to not give Geoffrey Nettle the powers he needs to bring charges, and he needs to answer questions as to why.

John Pesutto interjected.

The SPEAKER: Order! Leader of the Opposition! The member for Malvern knows how to call a point of order. That is not a point of order.

Daniel ANDREWS: The member for Malvern and the Leader of the Opposition by their incessant interjections can try and put it out there that somehow the government has not done as it should have done. Well, the government has established a special investigator in the precise terms –

Members interjecting.

Daniel ANDREWS: They always interject when they are not interested in the answer. We have delivered this in the precise terms that the royal commissioner outlined. I think it is a sad day when the member for Malvern – well, I have quite a bit of time for the member for Malvern, but if he is seriously putting it to me that we ought to not have independent prosecutorial functions in this state, well, on that we will never agree because that fundamentally is wrong.