Ruling the right result by any test

COMMISSIONER Dyson Heydon’s reasons for remaining in charge of the Royal Commission into Trade Union Governance and Corruption pass the sniff test, the pub test and any other test the frightened rats in corrupt unions and their lackeys in the Labor Party may demand.

His decision is clearly written and relies on fact and flawless legal logic. Even members of the Teachers Federation should be able to work their way through it without moving their lips. Labor’s commentariat, led by former senator Graham “Whatever it takes” Richardson and ACTU president Dave Oliver yesterday railed against his decision before they had read it — even though it was available — and the speed with which they attacked it reflected on them not the Commissioner. The union movement, which represents just 12 per cent of private sector employees, looks as though it is fighting a corruption-buster in its struggle to shut down the commission and the ALP should suffer from the blowback. Labor MPs have conducted a disgraceful smear campaign against Commissioner Heydon. Senior counsel for the ACTU acknowledged this travesty when he put to the Commissioner on August 21: “I know you understand it, but for the benefit of everyone else, I, at no point in these submissions, are (sic) suggesting that you (are) actually biased.” That sentence was included in submissions for the CFMEU and 34 CFMEU officials and senior counsel for the AWU. None of the lawyers would perjure themselves and support remarks their clients were freely making to the media. Not a single applicant for Mr Justice Heydon’s dismissal claimed that he had shown any bias during his hearings in 2014 or 2015. Nor was the submission that an apprehension of bias could be held supported by any factual evidence presented by the ACTU or individual unions. He noted that neither former prime minister Julia Gillard nor Opposition Leader Bill Shorten had been called before the commission because of their political careers — but to testify about their trade union activities. In discussing the spurious claim that an email had been doctored, he said a fair-minded reasonable observer “knowing all the facts that have now emerged” and concluding that an email had been edited “would be a reckless, irrational, perhaps even malevolent-minded person”. His reasoning for his decision is clear and precise. Those who raised the claims of bias should contemplate the fate of individuals who “intentionally insults or disturbs a royal commission, or interrupts the proceedings of a royal commission, or uses any insulting language towards a royal commission, or by writing or speech uses words false and defamatory of a royal commission, or is in any manner guilty of any intentional contempt of a royal commission”. The penalty is a meagre $200 fine or three months in jail. Mr Justice Heydon has been insulted by those who don’t want the spotlight of justice brought bear on their grubby affairs. It is in the interests of the nation and above all those who are still represented by unions, to let him continue his work.