No legal reason for Premier to stay quiet on quarantine bungle
Since the launch of an inquiry into Victoria’s bungled hotel quarantine program, Premier Daniel Andrews has remained tight-lipped more than 20 times when quizzed on the fiasco, despite legal experts saying he and his ministers are free to be transparent.
VIC News
Don't miss out on the headlines from VIC News. Followed categories will be added to My News.
Premier Daniel Andrews has refused to answer questions about the state’s bungled hotel quarantine program more than 20 times since launching an inquiry into the failed scheme.
A Sunday Herald Sun analysis of the Premier’s press conferences since he announced the inquiry on July 2 has found he has refused to answer questions at eight separate media briefings when quizzed.
Mr Andrews has used the inquiry to deflect questions, saying it would be inappropriate to talk about matters likely to be central to the probe.
The Sunday Herald Sun can also reveal that the state’s Opposition Leader, Michael O’Brien, has written to inquiry chair, former judge Jennifer Coate, asking that he be allowed to cross-examine ministers or department chiefs during public hearings.
Mr O’Brien says in a letter to Ms Coate that there is a precedent for the request — during the Tricontinental royal commission in the early 1990s the Opposition was granted leave to appear and question witnesses.
“I respectfully request the opportunity (either directly or via a legal representative) to appear and cross-examine certain witnesses at inquiry hearings, particularly when senior departmental officials or ministers provide evidence to the inquiry,” Mr O’Brien writes.
He also calls for the public to be able to provide submissions, for Mr Andrews and his ministers to appear, and for an assessment of advice provided to the Chief Health Officer, Professor Brett Sutton.
As well as the Premier deflecting questions due to the inquiry, Health Minister Jenny Mikakos, Emergency Services Minister Lisa Neville and Jobs Minister Martin Pakula have also ducked and dodged.
Legal experts say neither Mr Andrews nor his ministers risked running foul of the law by being transparent with Victorians.
The inquiry, which will hold its first public hearing on Monday, will probe the failings of the quarantine program — including the use of poorly trained security guards — which are believed to have caused the second wave.
Media law expert Matt Collins QC said matters to be probed by the inquiry could be freely spoken about ahead of the hearings.
“Sub judice contempt, which seems to be what the politicians are hinting at when they refuse to answer questions, has almost no work to do in the context of a board of inquiry,” Mr Collins said.
He clarified that sub judice laws were aimed at preventing people from prejudicing the administration of justice, and were particularly important in matters that were to go before a jury.
But he said there was no risk of prejudicing Ms Coate: “You’re dealing with a highly distinguished retired judge who is going to be impervious to any political soundings.
“It’s very hard to see how notions of sub judice contempt have anything to do with a hearing of this kind.”
Mr Collins said pressuring a witness, pre-empting an outcome or attacking the suitability of the retired judge hearing the matter could lead to possible contempt of a board of inquiry.
Mr O’Brien told the Sunday Herald Sun that “by stuffing up hotel quarantine, Andrews has put us back into lockdown”. “This second wave is costing jobs, businesses and, sadly, lives. Victorians deserve answers, not Labor spin and smokescreens,” he said.
MORE NEWS
THE QUESTIONS ANDREWS MUST ANSWER ON HOTEL QUARANTINE
THREE MORE DEATHS, VICTORIA RECORDS 217 NEW CASES