Former SA MP Annabel Digance files $2.3 million lawsuit against Premier Peter Malinauskas, claiming malicious prosecution

She was accused of blackmailing Peter Malinauskas – now this former MP wants $2.3 million in damages, claiming she’s the victim of a “malicious prosecution”.

A former Labor MP once accused of blackmailing Premier Peter Malinauskas is now suing him for $2.3 million, accusing him of orchestrating a “disgraceful” conspiracy to destroy her political career.

Annabel Digance has alleged, in Supreme Court documents, Mr Malinauskas “misused his power and authority” to direct SA Police and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions to “wrongfully arrest” and “maliciously prosecute” her.

His actions, she alleges, amount to “misfeasance” of his public office to secure “political advantage”, protect a “friend and political ally”, and ruin her.

But Mr Malinauskas has fired back, alleging Ms Digance has misused confidential information gleaned from her dropped criminal case to pursue him for civil damages.

Annabel and Greg Digance outside the District Court after blackmail charges were dropped. Picture: Naomi Jellicoe

That, he alleges, is either an abuse of the legal process or contempt of court – while police and prosecutors say they are neither instructed by, nor obedient to, politicians.

“I’m hardly surprised that they’ve decided to do this,” Mr Malinauskas told The Advertiser on Monday.

“All I’ve ever wanted is for them to leave me alone, and I’m grateful that the court-imposed orders against them remain in place.”

In her statement of claim, filed by Sydney law firm Carroll & O’Dea Solicitors, Ms Digance alleges Mr Malinauskas wanted to stop a parliamentary inquiry into bullying and sexual harassment, which she had supported.

“He believed (the inquiry) would expose facts potentially embarrassing for him and SA Labor, and damage him personally and politically,” she alleges.

“He believed it would embarrass and damage the reputation of (one of) his friends and political allies, reducing his and SA Labor’s prospects of success at the 2022 State Election.”

Premier Peter Malinauskas was Opposition leader at the time of the alleged conduct. Picture: Roy VanDerVegt

She alleges that, in April 2019, her husband met with Mr Malinauskas at the now-defunct Parlamento restaurant.

She alleges that meeting was a lawful “negotiation to secure a political advantage” for her ahead of the next election, but Mr Malinauskas unlawfully recorded it and went to police.

Senior police, she alleges, were “motivated to assist” Mr Malinauskas and launched a covert operation that saw her recorded during a subsequent meeting in March 2020.

“Mr Malinauskas attempted to extract incriminating statements from Ms Digance (and) expressed, to his wife, frustration that he had been unable to,” she alleges.

Ms Digance alleges Mr Malinauskas “instructed” police he “did not want” their investigation to “proceed until after” the election, “attempting to conceal from the electorate” he had made an “unlawful” recording.

Her April 2021 arrest, she alleges, was both unlawful and a trespass given police and prosecutors “ought to have known” there was no basis for the blackmail charge.

“Mr Malinauskas misused powers and authority entrusted to him by the public of SA,” she alleges.

“He misused his position and status as a member of parliament to obtain the co-operation of senior members of SA Police.

Mr and Mrs Digance leaving custody after being bailed. Picture: 7NEWS Adelaide

“His conduct was disgraceful, especially as it was undertaken with the intention of damaging Ms Digance (who) was harmed in precisely the way Mr Malinauskas intended.”

The case against Ms Digance and her husband was dropped in April 2023, one month before trial, after the Digances consented to a ban on contact with Mr Malinauskas and his family.

In his defence papers, Mr Malinauskas denies Ms Digance’s allegations, saying he neither “requested”, “directed” nor “instructed” SA Police or prosecutors to do anything.

He further denies any actions he took amount to misfeasance, saying they were “preparatory and incidental” to the “laying and prosecution of criminal charges”.

Mr Malinauskas admits he made the Parlamento recording and, in April 2021, told police he would “co-operate to the extent necessary” should they elect to prosecute Ms Digance.

Mr Malinauskas has alleged Ms Digance’s lawsuit is an abuse of process, a contempt of court, or both. Picture: Supplied

Her lawsuit, he alleges, makes “impermissible use” of documents tendered during her criminal case, rendering it “an abuse of process and/or a contempt of court”.

In its papers, the state government – representing police and prosecutors – said the Parlamento recording had been deemed both lawful and “reasonable suspicion” for a blackmail charge.

“The relationship between Mr Malinauskas and SA Police has been wrongly characterised as one of instruction and obedience,” it alleges.

“Police acted lawfully, without malice and used reasonable force to make the arrest … we deny that the ODPP or any solicitor in its employ was motivated by malice.”

Ms Digance’s claim will be heard in court on Wednesday.