Labor leader Peter Malinauskas may have acted illegally when he secretly recorded Greg Digance, accused of blackmailing him, court told

Opposition leader Peter Malinauskas may have acted illegally by covertly recording the husband of an ex-Labor MP he believed was blackmailing him, a court has been told.

Opposition leader Peter Malinauskas has failed to explain why he covertly recorded a man accused of blackmailing him and may have therefore committed a crime, a court has heard.

On Thursday, counsel for Greg Digance – husband of former MP Annabel Digance – asked the Adelaide Magistrates Court to order the Labor leader to take the witness stand.

Steven Milsteed, for Mr Digance, said Mr Malinauskas had given SA Police two statements about a meeting with his client at Parlamento restaurant in February 2020.

He said those “two bites of the cherry” had been “wholly inadequate” and rife with “inherent ambiguities”, which only bolstered the need to cross-examine him.

“There appears to be no dispute (with prosecutors) that, by recording what was a private conversation with my client, without my client’s knowledge or consent, Mr Malinauskas committed an offence,” he said.

“It is an offence unless it can be said he acted to protect his lawful interests – if he did, that would be an exception (to the law).

“There has been a failure by Mr Malinauskas to disclose his reasons for believing he had to protect his lawful interests, and what those lawful interests were – and we want to know what they were.”

Former SA Labor MP Annabel Digance and her husband Greg outside the Adelaide Magistrates Court. Picture: NCA NewsWire/Brenton Edwards.

Opposition Labor Leader Peter Malinauskas. Picture: Roy VanDerVegt

Ms Digance, 63, and her husband, 60, have yet to plead to one count each of blackmail.

They were arrested one month after she publicly claimed power was being misused within the Labor Party.

Subsequently, Attorney-General Vickie Chapman successfully moved for a Select Committee to investigate those claims.

Police allege the Digances made baseless threats and false accusations about Mr Malinauskas to politically wound him and secure Mrs Digance’s return to politics.

The couple, however, claim the case is a “malicious prosecution”, and that Mr Malinauskas and others should have to give evidence prior to trial.

They say Mr Malinauskas “got wired up” and went to “extraordinary lengths” when he “deceitfully sought to entrap” them to silence the Select Committee inquiry.

On Thursday, prosecutor Gemma Litster said Mr Malinauskas had made his lawful interests “plain” in the two statements.

She said he described being “concerned” by Mr Digance’s “prolific correspondence” prior to their recorded meeting.

“Mr Digance said he wanted to meet, that he had information, that he didn’t want witnesses, that he didn’t want to meet at Parliament House,” she said.

“Mr Malinauskas told him ‘if you’re trying to give me information I shouldn’t have, then I shouldn’t have it, don’t give it to me’.

“That gave rise to his concerns about what might happen at the meeting, and the inference that arises from those communications is plain.”

Magistrate Simon Smart has reserved his decision on whether Mr Malinauskas should give evidence prior to trial.