Mr Speaker, I rise to advise the Assembly today of the Government's decision to establish a judicial commission into a complaint against the Chief Magistrate of the Australian Capital Territory under the Judicial Commissions Act 1994.

The complaint is that, on or about 21st of October 2009, the Chief Magistrate caused or procured the creation and transmission of written material to Special Magistrate Peter Lauritsen which had, or might have had, the effect of interfering with the conduct of criminal proceedings to be heard by him relating to a public figure known professionally and socially to the Chief Magistrate before the proceedings commenced.

The complaint was made to me on the 23rd of October by two magistrates of the ACT Magistrates Court, magistrates John Burns and Karen Fryar. The complaint relates to the conduct of a criminal proceeding currently before the Magistrates Court which is the subject of a suppression order and which I cannot comment on. The complaint revolves around documents prepared by, or on behalf of, the Chief Magistrate.

Following receipt of the complaint and the documents in question I sought the advice of the Chief Solicitor of the ACT Government Solicitors Office. On his advice I referred the matter to the Director of Public Prosecutions. The Director of Public Prosecutions has subsequently, and on his own initiative, referred the matter to ACT Policing for investigation in relation to possible breaches of the criminal code.

The police investigation is ongoing and I will not comment on it further. These are matters properly the responsibility of the independent Director of Public Prosecutions and the police.

Mr Speaker, my responsibilities as the Attorney-General and First Law Officer are clear and they must be exercised without fear or favour, affection or ill will. As Attorney-General I must always strive to maintain the integrity of the justice system and public confidence in it.

Once a complaint is received by me, I must decide, first, whether the complaint is valid and, secondly, whether, if substantiated, it would justify consideration by the Legislative Assembly of a resolution requiring removal of the officer.

I stress to members it is not for me to judge whether or not the allegations that have been made are true. I am making no such judgement.

The threshold for my decision is whether or not the complaint, if substantiated by a judicial commission, would justify consideration by the Legislative Assembly of a resolution requiring removal from office of the judicial officer for misbehaviour.

I believe that the complaint I received from magistrates Burns and Fryar on October 23 should be treated as a complaint for the purposes of the Act. I further believe that the complaint, if substantiated, would justify consideration by the Legislative Assembly of a resolution requiring the removal from office of the Chief Magistrate. The complaint is a serious one; if proved, the alleged behaviour could amount to an attempt to influence the conduct of a proceeding. Whilst any possible criminal charges are currently being investigated by the AFP, I am still bound to acknowledge the gravity of the alleged behaviour. As the head of the ACT Magistrates Court, the Chief Magistrate must lead by example and act in an ethical and proper manner at all times. Whether or not any criminal charge is laid or proved, the conduct of the Chief Magistrate, if established, may represent an attempt to influence the outcome of a criminal matter currently before the court and this would be misbehaviour. Conduct such as that alleged in the complaint is unacceptable from any judicial officer, and leads me to conclude that, if proved, the Legislative Assembly could consider a resolution to remove the Chief Magistrate from office.

Mr Speaker I have had close regard to the fact that the Chief Magistrate is required to retire from his office on December 14th when he reaches the statutory age limit of 65. I have concluded that whether the complaint was made with six years, six weeks or six days left in the magistrates term of appointment the complaint must be dealt with on its merits and in accordance with the Act.

Therefore I advise the Assembly that today I have requested that the Government establish a judicial commission and that request has been accepted. The commission will be comprised of three retired Supreme Court judges from other jurisdictions. The commission will conduct its business in accordance with the Act and the Government will provide such assistance to the commission as it requires.

We should also foreshadow to members that should the commission advise it is unable to complete its inquiries and present its report before the Chief Magistrates retirement date, the 15th of December this year, the Government will propose amendments to the Judicial Commissions Act to allow the commission to continue its work after the 15th of December.

As a result of the decision to establish the inquiry and pursuant to Section 19 (1) of the Act, the Chief Magistrate is excused from performing his functions as Chief Magistrate.

I know that this decision today will shock and sadden many in the Canberra community, particularly in the legal profession. I share those feelings today, yet I must also reiterate that the proper administration of justice, and maintenance of public confidence in that administration, must be our primary concerns at this time.

MEMBERS OF THE JUDICIAL COMMISSION

Justice James Wood: Retired NSW Supreme Court Justice who led the royal commission into corruption in the New South Wales Police Service between 1994 and 1996 and led the ministerial commission into child protection in the state between 2007 and 2008.

Justice Jerrold Cripps: Former NSW Supreme Court Justice and NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption Commissioner.

Justice Ted Mulligan: Former South Australian Supreme Court Justice who led the states Children in State Care Commission of Inquiry between 2004 and 2008.