Brittany Higgins’ Government compensation to be investigated by anti-corruption commission
Brittany Higgins’ taxpayer-funded compensation claim is set to be investigated by the anti-corruption commission.
At Work
Don't miss out on the headlines from At Work. Followed categories will be added to My News.
Former Defence Minister Linda Reynolds will contact the new anti-corruption commission to ask it to investigate the Government’s decision to award compensation to Brittany Higgins.
Senator Reynolds has long complained the compensation claim - first revealed by news.com.au - was paid without allowing her to participate in the mediation process or dispute the claim.
2GB host Ben Fordham said that Senator Reynolds has confirmed the matter will be sent to the anti corruption watchdog for consideration.
“In order for this to be investigated by the new anti corruption body someone will need to refer it,” Mr Fordham said.
“We can reveal that if nobody else refers it Linda Reynolds will.”
Shortly after the trial collapsed last year, Ms Higgins’ lawyers indicated she was ready for mediation talks.
Senator Reynolds said she was sent correspondence by the Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus indicating if she wanted to be part of the mediation they might not have access to Commonwealth legal assistance.
The mediation settled the case shortly after the trial.
The original claim for compensation was believed to be up to $3 million.
Ms Higgins has not revealed how much compensation was paid but has indicated it was “nowhere near” that amount.
There is no suggestion of wrongdoing by Ms Higgins in the mediation process.
Finance Minister Katy Gallagher grilled
Finance Minister Katy Gallagher has repeatedly stated she had nothing to do with the compensation payout and was kept at arms length from the process.
She was mentioned by Ms Higgin’s partner David Sharaz in a five hour recorded off the record chat with Lisa Wilkinson in 2021.
Speaking on Radio National, ABC broadcaster Hamish McDonald said: “Your name has been mentioned in several reports in recent days relating to the Brittany Higgins’ allegations in an audio recording her partner David Sharaz said ‘I’ve got a friend in labor, Katy Gallagher.’
“I want to give you the opportunity to respond on the record - are you comfortable with that association and that description?’,” he asked
“Look, I have nothing further to add to this, Hamish,” she replied.
“I’ve been very clear with those that are reporting this story about my responsibilities and how they relate.
“Particularly, it’s been raised in relation to a settlement or a compensation package in relation to Ms Higgins and that I had absolutely no role in that at all, and I think that’s all I need to say.”
Senator Reynolds accuses top prosecutor of ‘breaching her human rights’
It comes after Ms Reynolds accused the ACT’s top prosecutor of breaching her human rights by criticising her in a letter he sent in the aftermath of Bruce Lehrmann’s rape trial.
In a submission to the ACT board of inquiry, the Liberal senator accused Director of Public Prosecutions Shane Drumgold SC of causing her “distress and harm”.
It follows a dramatic courtroom confrontation last year, when Mr Drumgold sought permission to treat her as a hostile witness and accused her of offering “cross-examination tips” to the defence lawyer for the accused Bruce Lehrmann.
Mr Lehrmann pleaded not guilty, was never convicted and the charge was ultimately dropped based on advice that a second trial posed a risk to Ms Higgins’ mental health.
In the aftermath, Mr Drumgold wrote a letter to the ACT AFP commissioner Neil Gaughan where he described the events of the trial as “disturbing”.
The letter was subsequently released under freedom of information laws to journalists.
In the correspondence, Mr Drumgold said Senator Reynolds’ partner was regularly seen conferencing with the defence “during the course of the entire trial”.
“During the conduct of the trial, a number of disturbing events have occurred, including prosecution witness [redacted] firstly giving evidence directly contradictory to her chief of staff, then directly soliciting transcripts of other evidence to tailor her evidence direct from the defence barrister Steven Whybrow,” he said.
“She further engaged in direct coaching of the defence cross-examination of the complainant by directing them to evidence she should not have access to.”
‘Human rights breach’
In response, Senator Reynolds has told the inquiry that the release of the letter was a breach of her human rights.
“I consider that the disclosure of the Letter by the DPP clearly affected my right not to have my “ reputation unlawfully attacked,’’’ she said.
“There does not appear to have been any proper or lawful basis for the DPP to attack my reputation in correspondence with the AFP .
“Further , the disclosure of the Letter without such consultation violated my legal right not to have my ‘reputation unlawfully attacked’, pursuant to section 12 ( b ) of the Human Rights Act.”
“I consider that is likely that the relevant decision -maker within the ODPP would have known that their decision to disclose the Letter , without consulting me , was not a decision that was open to them under the FOI Act .
“Accordingly , having considered this issue , I ask that the Inquiry give consideration to whether the DPP or the relevant decision - maker within the ODPP has committed an offence under section 89 of the FOI Act .
“At the very least , serious consideration should be given to making an adverse finding against the decision - maker and the ODPP that they have committed a breach of the FOI Act .”
“I believe that the DPP appears to have violated my legal right not to have my “reputation unlawfully attacked “ , pursuant to section 12 (b ) of the Human Rights Act .”
Courtroom drama
The former Defence Minister had walked into court in October 17 last year wearing a coral pink blazer and swore an oath on the Bible.
“Have you attempted to inform yourself of the evidence of Ms Higgins in this trial?” Mr Drumgold asked Ms Reynolds.
“Only what I have seen in the media,” she replied.
“Listen to the question,” Mr Drumgold then asked.
“Have you attempted to obtain the evidence of Ms Higgins in this trial?”
“No. Do you mean recently?” Ms Reynolds said.
She then suggested the prosecutor needed to be clearer.
“Well, let me ask it this way,” he replied. “You have sought the transcripts of Ms Higgins’s evidence in this trial, haven’t you?”
“Yes,” Ms Reynolds replied.
“Because I was – I was curious to know what had been said but I was advised by my lawyer that that wasn’t appropriate.”
Mr Drumgold then told the court that Ms Reynolds “wrote to my friend”, defence barrister Steve Whybrow.
“You wrote an SMS to my friend asking him to send transcripts to your lawyer at the conclusion – at the commencement of Ms Higgins’ cross-examination, didn’t you?” he said.
“Yes, but I was advised that it was not appropriate. I hadn’t realised it wasn’t appropriate because I haven’t been in this situation before, so my lawyer made it very clear that it wasn’t appropriate,” she replied.
Partner in courtroom listening to evidence
Mr Drumgold then put it to Ms Reynolds that she had arranged for “your husband to sit in the back of the court, didn’t you?”
“No, he’s not my husband, but my partner has been here in the court, yes,” she replied.
“And he’s been talking to you about the evidence that Ms Higgins gave, hasn’t he?” Mr Drumgold said.
“No, he has not. My lawyer was very – my lawyer was very clear and I have been in Rwanda for the last week. I came back early to testify today.”
Mr Drumgold noted that during Ms Higgins’s evidence, “You’re in Rwanda?”
“Yes,” she replied.
“And your partner lives in Perth? And your partner finds himself in the back of the court listening to Ms Higgins’ evidence.
“And two hours into Ms Higgins’s cross-examination you texted my friend asking him to send your lawyer transcripts of the trial?
“Yes,” she replied.
At one point, Mr Lehrmann’s barrister Steve Whybrow objected and said, “This is getting well beyond any rational unfavourable evidence.”
“It is. I am aware of the test and I am going to extend the leave,” Chief Justice Lucy McCallum said.
Senator asked defence lawyer for Higgins evidence
Mr Drumgold said to Ms Reynolds: “I’m going to put this to you directly that at our time 4.27pm on Thursday, 6 October, you were aware that Ms Higgins had just started her cross-examination. Were you aware of that? At 4.27pm on Thursday, 6 October, you sent a text to the defence lawyer saying, ‘Hi, do you have the daily transcripts? If so, are you able to provide my lawyer?’”
Mr Drumgold said: “I am suggesting that your lawyer had no interest in these transcripts, it was you that had interest in these transcripts and that message is to say, ‘Can you send them to my lawyer,’ with a clear understanding that your lawyer would pass them on to you.”
“Yes, I did ask for them. But, again, it was explained to me that it wasn‘t appropriate to make that request. So they were not sent.”
The Senator conceded she probably was aware that Ms Higgins’ cross-examination had commenced because it was reported.
“Then you sent a text one minute later, ‘Also, if you have text messages between Brittany and Nicky, they may be revealing?’” Mr Drumgold said.
“Yes,” she replied.
Nicky is a reference to Nicole Hamer, a witness in the trial and a former press secretary to Ms Reynolds.
The Senator said she did not have the texts.
“Well, what were you trying to do then? You‘re instructing the defence lawyer two hours into the cross-examination?” Mr Drumgold said.
“So you are injecting yourself by trying to assist him in his cross-examination?”
More Coverage
Originally published as Brittany Higgins’ Government compensation to be investigated by anti-corruption commission
How Aussie 20yo makes $120k minus degree
An Australian woman has revealed how she earns $120k per year without a degree, encouraging other young women to follow their aspirations.
Push to give every worker 12 extra leave days
All Australian workers could get an extra 12 days of leave a year for severe period pain, hormone therapy and vasectomies, under a new push by a powerful union.