Walter Sofronoff had no ‘corrupt, dishonest or malicious motive' in leaking Lehrmann inquiry report, lawyer argues
Hearings began on Monday into Sofronoff's legal challenge to findings by the Australian Capital Territory's corruption watchdog that he had engaged in 'serious corrupt conduct' by leaking the report of his investigation into the Lehrmann case to Janet Albrechtsen at the Australian and Elizabeth Byrne at the ABC, ahead of its official release.
There was 'overwhelming evidence that Mr Sofronoff genuinely believed he was acting in the public good', and attempting to aid accuracy of media reportage, his counsel Adam Pomerenke KC told the court.
'Even if Mr Sofronoff was wrong in his view, the fact remains that he genuinely and honestly held it. This is not a corrupt, dishonest or malicious motive. At worst, it could be characterised as an erroneous attempt to ensure accuracy and transparency in public discourse. That cannot rationally be described as corrupt,' Pomerenke said.
Bruce Lehrmann was accused of raping Brittany Higgins in the ministerial office of senator Linda Reynolds at Parliament House in 2019. He denied those allegations. A 2022 criminal trial was aborted because of juror misconduct, and prosecutors decided against a re-trial.
Sofronoff was appointed by the ACT government to determine whether the investigation into the aborted Lehrmann trial had been affected by political influence or interference. His report ruled out political influence or interference but made 'serious findings of misconduct' against prosecutor Shane Drumgold, which were partially overturned in March 2024.
The ACT Integrity Commission launched an investigation in May 2024 to determine whether Sofronoff acted corruptly in leaking the confidential documents.
The commission's findings, known as the Juno report, said Sofronoff claimed his conduct 'complied with the requirements of the Inquiries Act' and that, in leaking the documents, he had 'acted in the public interest to ensure the media were adequately informed' about his inquiry and 'in a position to comment accurately' about it.
The commission found that Sofronoff 'had not, in fact, acted in good faith', that his actions 'undermined the integrity of the Board's processes and the fairness and probity of its proceedings to such an extent as to have been likely to have threatened public confidence in the integrity of that aspect of public administration. It therefore constituted serious corrupt conduct.'
Sofronoff rejected a characterisation by the ACT Integrity Commission in its findings that he had become 'a fellow traveller' of Albrechtson, Pomerenke told the court.
The phrase was first used to describe Sofronoff by Justice Stephen Kaye when finding in March 2024 that Sofronoff's extensive communications with Albrechtson had given rise to an impression of bias against prosecutor Shane Drumgold during the inquiry into the Lehrmann trial.
The concept of the 'fellow traveller' being redeployed in the context of the Juno report was 'simply unrecognisable'; it was 'a meaningless slogan' with no clear definition, and 'seriously problematic' when used in that way, Pomerenke told the court on Monday.
'What is it supposed to mean? Is it that Mr Sofronoff shared an actual opinion or belief [with Janet Albrechtson]? If so, what is the opinion or belief that he actually shared? None is identified. And how could that opinion or belief rationally lead Mr Sofronoff to sacrificing the public interest in pursuit of the unidentified opinion or belief that he held?'
Even if one vehemently disagreed with what Sofronoff did, it should not be described as corrupt, Pomerenke told the court.
Sofronoff is seeking to have the finding of the corruption watchdog overturned partly on the basis of what he claims are a series of errors – an argument that turns on the interpretation of what constitutes 'serious corrupt conduct' in the integrity commission act – and on a lack of evidence that he leaked the report with malicious intent, the court heard.
The ACT Integrity Commission failed in May in an attempt to have Sofronoff's challenge to the report nixed on the grounds that it was subject to parliamentary privilege.
The hearing continues.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
an hour ago
- Reuters
Ukraine anti-corruption chief says his agency faces 'dirty information campaign'
KYIV, July 25 (Reuters) - Ukraine's top anti-corruption investigator said on Friday that he did not expect attempts to derail his agency's work to end, despite an abrupt U-turn by President Volodymyr Zelenskiy on curbing their independence that fuelled rare wartime protests. Semen Kryvonos, director of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU), said he was taken aback by attempts this week to curtail his agency's fight against graft but did not name those who may have been behind the legislation. "Everyone united around the idea of ruining our independence," Kryvonos told Reuters in an interview in Kyiv, referring to parliament passing the controversial measures. "This was a shock for me - how much demand had built up to destroy us." He spoke a day after Zelenskiy sought to defuse tensions by submitting legislation restoring the independence of NABU and its sister agency, the Specialised Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office (SAPO). Thousands of protesters took part in protests in Kyiv and other Ukrainian cities this week after lawmakers fast-tracked a bill granting a Zelenskiy-appointed general prosecutor power over the two bodies. The move had also threatened Kyiv's ties with the European Union and Western donors which have been a critical source of financial and military support during Russia's war in Ukraine. Kryvonos applauded Zelenskiy's reversal, but said NABU and SAPO remain a high-priority target for vested interests aiming to stymie their closely watched efforts to clean up. Parliament will consider Zelenskiy's new bill in a special session next week. But Kryvonos worries corrupt actors will step up a "dirty information campaign" already being waged against NABU on widely read anonymous Telegram channels, casting the agency as slow or ineffective. He did not identify the exact sources of resistance to his agency's work, saying only that they are "various representatives of the government, various financial groups". "Everyone who is offended by NABU and SAPO will be pushing out this message," Kryvonos said. Since Russia's February 2022 invasion, Ukraine has stepped up a campaign to eradicate the pervasive graft that has plagued its political culture for decades. Stamping out corruption is both critical to Kyiv's bid to join the EU and its effort to erase a legacy of autocracy and Russian rule. NABU and SAPO, launched with Western support after a 2014 revolution toppled a pro-Russian president, have levelled charges against lawmakers and senior government officials. In recent months, Kryvonos's agency has uncovered huge real estate schemes in the capital Kyiv and accused a then deputy prime minister of taking a $345,000 kickback. Kryvonos suggested such efforts had led to a sweeping crackdown this week that paved the way for the rollback of NABU's and SAPO's powers. Two NABU officials were arrested for suspected ties to Russia and nearly 20 other agency employees searched over lesser alleged infractions in a campaign critics said went too far. "All of this was a result of systemic work by NABU and SAPO, especially over the past half-year," he said, adding that he had also received "a huge amount" of threats. Despite winning a hard-fought victory this week, he said resistance was still widespread enough across the political landscape to pose a serious challenge. He cited the controversial law that had been supported by most of Zelenskiy's political party as well as opposition lawmakers and those associated with former pro-Russian factions. Political elites, Kryvonos said, "need to stop considering us as accept us as an important part of state institutions."
BBC News
3 hours ago
- BBC News
Plymouth marines participate in Sydney training
A Royal Marines unit helped swoop on a passenger ferry in Australia during anti-terrorism training in view of tourists visiting Sydney Opera part of Australia's largest-ever military exercise marines from Plymouth-based 42 Commando worked with counterparts from the host nation, the US, Japan and Singapore in Sydney training saw allies work on boarding operations, which the Royal Navy said aimed to perfect the skills needed to hunt down smugglers, terrorists and pirates around the training in Sydney finished with the recapture of an iconic green and yellow New South Wales ferry using US Black Hawk helicopters among other specialist vehicles. The 42 Commando unit was recently involved with the seizure of 1.5 tonnes of illegal narcotics in the Middle East.
Reuters
3 hours ago
- Reuters
Economists doubt Trump outlook that US will sell 'so much' beef to Australia
WASHINGTON/CANBERRA/CHICAGO, July 24 (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump said that the United States would sell "so much" beef to Australia after Canberra relaxed import restrictions on Thursday, but economists and traders said that high prices and tight supplies make major American exports unlikely. Australia said it would loosen biosecurity rules for U.S. beef. The move will not significantly increase U.S. shipments, though, because Australia is a major beef producer and exporter whose prices are much lower, analysts said. U.S. companies export small quantities of beef to Australian buyers. They import much more in the form of lean beef used to make hamburgers, particularly as U.S. production has declined due to tight cattle supplies. U.S. beef prices set records this year and the number of beef cattle fell to the lowest level since 1961 after ranchers slashed their herds due to drought that burned up pasturelands used for grazing. A ban on cattle imports from Mexico because of New World screwworm, a devastating livestock pest, and steep tariffs on Brazilian beef that are set to take effect on Aug. 1 could further tighten supplies, and require additional imports of Australian beef. "We can't get enough beef in the U.S. right now, so we're bringing it in from Australia and Brazil," said Dan Norcini, an independent U.S. livestock trader. "We're not going to be selling anything significant to anyone." Last year, Australia shipped almost 400,000 metric tons of beef worth $2.9 billion to the United States, with just 269 tons of U.S. product moving the other way. "They have more cattle than people," said David Anderson, an agricultural economist at Texas A&M University. "That's why they export so much." U.S. and Australian beef also taste different. Many Australians like the grass-fed beef raised there, not marbled beef from U.S.-raised cattle that are generally fed with grain, said Jerry Klassen, chief analyst for Resilient Capital in Winnipeg. He predicted the United States will not export substantial amounts of beef to Australia in the next five years. "We just aren't in a position to export much beef to anyone, and the reality is Australia doesn't really have much need for U.S. beef," said Karl Setzer, partner at Consus Ag. The barriers that remain to exporting significant volumes of U.S. beef to Australia appeared to be lost on Trump this week. "We are going to sell so much to Australia because this is undeniable and irrefutable Proof that U.S. Beef is the Safest and Best in the entire World," Trump said in a post on Truth Social. "The other Countries that refuse our magnificent Beef are ON NOTICE." Trump has attempted to renegotiate trade deals with numerous countries he says have taken advantage of the United States – a characterisation many economists dispute. "For decades, Australia imposed unjustified barriers on U.S. beef," U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said in a statement, calling Australia's decision a "major milestone in lowering trade barriers and securing market access for U.S. farmers and ranchers." Australian officials say the relaxation of restrictions was not part of any trade negotiations but the result of a years-long assessment of U.S. biosecurity practices. Canberra has restricted U.S. beef imports since 2003 due to concerns about bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), or mad cow disease. Since 2019, it has allowed in meat from animals born, raised and slaughtered in the U.S. but few suppliers were able to prove that their cattle had not been in Canada and Mexico. The U.S. sources some of its feeder cattle from the two neighboring countries. On Wednesday, Australia's agriculture ministry said U.S. cattle traceability and control systems had improved enough that Australia could accept beef from cattle born in Canada or Mexico and slaughtered in the United States. The decision has caused some concern in Australia, where biosecurity is seen as essential to prevent diseases and pests from ravaging the farm sector. "We need to know if (the government) is sacrificing our high biosecurity standards just so Prime Minister Anthony Albanese can obtain a meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump," shadow agriculture minister David Littleproud said in a statement. Australia faces a 10% across-the-board U.S. tariff, as well 50% tariffs on steel and aluminium. Trump has also threatened to impose a 200% tariff on pharmaceuticals. Asked whether the change would help achieve a trade deal, Australian Trade Minister Don Farrell said: "I'm not too sure." "We haven't done this in order to entice the Americans into a trade agreement," he said. "We think that they should do that anyway."
