Extract from The Guardian
Tim Carmody had fellow judge kept out of the loop on potential legal
challenges from election, papers released under freedom of information
show
Queensland chief justice Tim Carmody
quietly arranged for a fellow judge to be kept out of the loop on any
legal challenges from the state election in a controversial attempt to
assert control of who would possibly decide government.
Documents obtained under Right to Information (RTI) laws reveal that Carmody blindsided his colleagues with a public statement that he would decide who sat in the court of disputed returns (CDR) during a cliffhanger election result in February.
They reveal that days after judge David Boddice told court staff the chief justice had appointed him to the task, Carmody intervened by directly overriding Boddice’s instructions to the same staff.
The first that other judges knew of his plan to contest the appointment of Boddice – who had been nominated two months earlier under a 20-year protocol – was a public statement the next day that it was “a matter for the chief justice under the electoral act”.
Carmody did not finally allow Boddice’s appointment until the same day the electoral commission of Queensland announced it would not refer the crucial seat of Ferny Grove to the court.
Court memos detail exchanges between judges as they rallied behind senior judge administrator John Byrne, who was sacked by Carmody after a confrontation over his intervention, during which Byrne recorded him purportedly calling his colleagues collectively “scum” and one a “fat fuck”.
The exchange was one of the key incidents in Carmody’s falling out with his colleagues, which has led to his offer to resign to end an “untenable” situation. He remains on sick leave from court duties.
The Queensland justice department RTI director has refused to release a recording Byrne made of the conversation, saying that it contained “personal information of the chief justice”.
She advised Guardian Australia that “on this basis, I believe the right of the chief justice to privacy outweighs the public interest in releasing it”.
Emails reveal that when it first emerged that the Queensland election could hinge on the seat of Ferny Grove, Boddice emailed court registry staff on February 4 to prepare for a possible court case.
“I confirm the chief justice has appointed Justice Dalton and me as the judges to constitute the court of disputed returns for 2015,” Boddice said.
Emails show Carmody was advised in December of Boddice’s nomination by roster after a judge’s meeting, in line with a protocol that had been in place since 1995.
Boddice issued guidelines to registry staff in case any election dispute was filed, including that they “immediately notify” his associate.
However, on 10 February, Carmody phoned the executive director of the courts, Julie Steel, to instruct her to override Boddice’s instructions. He informed that he would decide who heard such cases and that staff should advise her, not Boddice, of any legal challenge.
Steel wrote in an email to Carmody: “I have told [registry staff member Di Antonsen] that you will be nominating precisely who will do this work if and when an application to the CDR is received rather than Justice Boddice.
“I have asked Di to have any contact referred to her and then to me rather than as directed by Justice Boddice. Otherwise, unless or until you advise to the contrary, I propose not to enter into this directly.”
The same day, Carmody issued a media statement via a spokesman that “the constitution of the court of disputed returns is a matter for the chief justice under the electoral act”.
“He will consider the issue if and when it arises,” it said.
Carmody’s colleagues expressed surprise and disquiet when the statement was reported the next day in a newspaper as “a statement from the supreme court”.
In an email titled “supreme court ‘statement’?”, senior judge administrator John Byrne said: “I know nothing of any such statement.”
Appeal court president Margaret McMurdo replied: “John – I know nothing of such statement. It does not accord with our long established practice with which those who practice in this area of the law are familiar. I think the statement should be corrected.”
Martin Daubney said: “The last time I looked, I am a member of the supreme court and I certainly did not authorise the issuing of such a statement. Nor did any of our colleagues with whom I have spoken. A clarification would be much appreciated.”
Carmody subsequently tried to “speak privately with [Boddice] about what he described in a memorandum as ‘unresolved concerns’”, according to former justice Alan Wilson in his March valedictory speech.
This was “rightly resisted by the judge, and unanimously condemned by the judges”, Wilson said.
As was Carmody’s sacking of Byrne, who had been acting on behalf of trial division judges in his dealings with the chief justice.
Memos show Carmody eventually appointed Boddice to the court of disputed returns on 13 February.
This was the same day the Queensland electoral commission reversed an earlier decision to refer the Ferny Grove result to the court.
It was also the same day that justice Roslyn Atkinson sent Carmody a memo on behalf of other judges: “We wish to inform you that we have complete confidence in Byrne SJA and his performance of his duties as Senior Judge Administrator”.
Documents obtained under Right to Information (RTI) laws reveal that Carmody blindsided his colleagues with a public statement that he would decide who sat in the court of disputed returns (CDR) during a cliffhanger election result in February.
They reveal that days after judge David Boddice told court staff the chief justice had appointed him to the task, Carmody intervened by directly overriding Boddice’s instructions to the same staff.
The first that other judges knew of his plan to contest the appointment of Boddice – who had been nominated two months earlier under a 20-year protocol – was a public statement the next day that it was “a matter for the chief justice under the electoral act”.
Carmody did not finally allow Boddice’s appointment until the same day the electoral commission of Queensland announced it would not refer the crucial seat of Ferny Grove to the court.
Court memos detail exchanges between judges as they rallied behind senior judge administrator John Byrne, who was sacked by Carmody after a confrontation over his intervention, during which Byrne recorded him purportedly calling his colleagues collectively “scum” and one a “fat fuck”.
The exchange was one of the key incidents in Carmody’s falling out with his colleagues, which has led to his offer to resign to end an “untenable” situation. He remains on sick leave from court duties.
The Queensland justice department RTI director has refused to release a recording Byrne made of the conversation, saying that it contained “personal information of the chief justice”.
She advised Guardian Australia that “on this basis, I believe the right of the chief justice to privacy outweighs the public interest in releasing it”.
Emails reveal that when it first emerged that the Queensland election could hinge on the seat of Ferny Grove, Boddice emailed court registry staff on February 4 to prepare for a possible court case.
“I confirm the chief justice has appointed Justice Dalton and me as the judges to constitute the court of disputed returns for 2015,” Boddice said.
Emails show Carmody was advised in December of Boddice’s nomination by roster after a judge’s meeting, in line with a protocol that had been in place since 1995.
Boddice issued guidelines to registry staff in case any election dispute was filed, including that they “immediately notify” his associate.
However, on 10 February, Carmody phoned the executive director of the courts, Julie Steel, to instruct her to override Boddice’s instructions. He informed that he would decide who heard such cases and that staff should advise her, not Boddice, of any legal challenge.
Steel wrote in an email to Carmody: “I have told [registry staff member Di Antonsen] that you will be nominating precisely who will do this work if and when an application to the CDR is received rather than Justice Boddice.
“I have asked Di to have any contact referred to her and then to me rather than as directed by Justice Boddice. Otherwise, unless or until you advise to the contrary, I propose not to enter into this directly.”
The same day, Carmody issued a media statement via a spokesman that “the constitution of the court of disputed returns is a matter for the chief justice under the electoral act”.
“He will consider the issue if and when it arises,” it said.
Carmody’s colleagues expressed surprise and disquiet when the statement was reported the next day in a newspaper as “a statement from the supreme court”.
In an email titled “supreme court ‘statement’?”, senior judge administrator John Byrne said: “I know nothing of any such statement.”
Appeal court president Margaret McMurdo replied: “John – I know nothing of such statement. It does not accord with our long established practice with which those who practice in this area of the law are familiar. I think the statement should be corrected.”
Martin Daubney said: “The last time I looked, I am a member of the supreme court and I certainly did not authorise the issuing of such a statement. Nor did any of our colleagues with whom I have spoken. A clarification would be much appreciated.”
Carmody subsequently tried to “speak privately with [Boddice] about what he described in a memorandum as ‘unresolved concerns’”, according to former justice Alan Wilson in his March valedictory speech.
This was “rightly resisted by the judge, and unanimously condemned by the judges”, Wilson said.
As was Carmody’s sacking of Byrne, who had been acting on behalf of trial division judges in his dealings with the chief justice.
Memos show Carmody eventually appointed Boddice to the court of disputed returns on 13 February.
This was the same day the Queensland electoral commission reversed an earlier decision to refer the Ferny Grove result to the court.
It was also the same day that justice Roslyn Atkinson sent Carmody a memo on behalf of other judges: “We wish to inform you that we have complete confidence in Byrne SJA and his performance of his duties as Senior Judge Administrator”.
No comments:
Post a Comment