5 September 2023

Sofronoff releases letter defending decision to release Board of Inquiry report to journalists

| Lizzie Waymouth
Join the conversation
walter sofronoff

Walter Sofronoff KC’s lawyer said Mr Sofronoff found it “baffling” that Andrew Barr was concerned by his engagement with journalists. Photo: Screenshot.

Board of Inquiry chair Walter Sofronoff KC has hit back at Chief Minister Andrew Barr’s claims he breached the ACT Inquiries Act by providing a copy of the inquiry report to journalists before it had been publicly released by the government.

Last month, Mr Barr said that a “reasonably straight reading” of the legislation would “clearly indicate” Mr Sofronoff breached the act.

In a letter released yesterday (31 August), Mr Sofronoff defended his decision to share the report with ABC journalist Elizabeth Byrne and The Australian journalist Janet Albrechtsen on the basis that the copy was embargoed until it had been published by the government.

“I furnished those copies under my authority as chair of the inquiry,” he said, pointing to sections 13 and 18 of the Inquiries Act.

“It served to ensure that, when the government published the report, those two journalists would be in a position swiftly and promptly to write and broadcast stories that would have as their foundation a true appreciation of the result of the work of the commission,” he wrote.

Mr Sofronoff also provided a copy of the report to Brittany Higgins’ solicitor Leon Zwyer out of concerns for Ms Higgins’ health and the impact the release of the inquiry report might have.

Asked about the matter today, Mr Barr responded that “Mr Sofronoff’s lawyers are able to write as many letters as they want”.

“I will act upon my obligations under Territory law that relate both to matters of integrity through our Integrity Commission, and that relate to matters associated with the Inquiries Act.”

He said the ACT Government has sought legal advice and will act on that advice, that there is a matter before the Supreme Court in relation to the Board of Inquiry at the moment, and that he is not in a position to elaborate further at this stage.

READ ALSO ‘We need to break these doors down’: Old Parliament House fire grew while protesters blocked police access, trial told

In a strongly worded letter to Mr Barr and Attorney-General Shane Rattenbury, Mr Sofronoff’s lawyer Glen Cranny called for the Chief Minister to make a public statement accepting Mr Sofronoff acted ethically and did not breach the terms of the act.

“We are writing on Mr Sofronoff’s instructions to point out respectfully why Mr Barr was wrong to say Mr Sofronoff had contravened the act and to impute that he had behaved in bad faith. We also write to give Mr Barr an opportunity to correct the harm that he has caused to Mr Sofronoff’s professional reputation,” Mr Cranny wrote.

He pointed out that it is a “necessary and fundamental attribute” of a public inquiry that it “has the means to communicate with the general public, usually via the mass media”.

“In short, unless there is a good reason, a board of inquiry must publish to the world the evidence and information that it has gathered.

“In this instance, Mr Sofronoff publicly undertook to ensure that any document or piece of information that he might take into account in formulating his report would be published.”

Mr Cranny said the engagement with journalists throughout the inquiry was “never a secret” and was known by the staff of the inquiry, who were appointed by the government. During the inquiry itself, Mr Sofronoff also said that he and his counsel had “freely engaged” with journalists to ensure they fully understood the evidence and its significance.

“Mr Barr’s statement that he found Mr Sofronoff’s statement that he engaged with journalists ‘concerning’ was baffling to our client.”

READ ALSO Labor accused of having ‘appetite to avoid the usual process’ over drug decriminalisation law

Mr Cranny invited Mr Barr and Mr Rattenbury to consider the matters in the letter and obtain legal advice.

“We would respectfully invite Mr Barr also to consider whether the best course would be to make a public statement to the effect that, having taken advice, he accepts that Mr Sofronoff neither breached the terms of the statute, nor did he act unethically and that Mr Barr is now satisfied that Mr Sofronoff performed his duties properly and fully.”

Join the conversation

All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
Tom McLuckie11:08 pm 02 Sep 23

Mr. Sofronoff will be waiting a long time for a retraction from Andrew Barr – he is not renowned for acknowledging being wrong, ever.

I’d be thinkin’ I may get hold of everything printed since this affair hit the newspapers … so far ( it certainly ain’t finished yet ) bundle them all up and send them across to the American author John Grisham.

You may know Mr Grisham from his successful books on political and court goings on in what is called the deep south of the US.

My idea in sending all to Mr Grisham is to show that it’s not only his US deep south where it may be considered strange going’s on can happen in courts with elected and appointed officials.

Indeed some of his books have been turned into successful films.

Perhaps the film could open with a party leader who believed as he was the chosen one to lead the government , he gave positions to a minor party leader in order to gain a majority to govern.
The film could roll on from this point.

As a book plot it would come over as implausible – no rational person would believe so many stuff ups by so many people.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.