Victoria anti-curfew lawsuit: Government wants to keep data secret

Daniel Andrews’ government is fighting to keep secret information about the most controversial element of Melbourne’s stage four lockdown.

Daniel Andrews’ government is fighting to keep secret data that informed the decision to impose a second curfew under stage 4 coronavirus lockdown this month.

The Victorian government is being sued by Liberal Party member and cafe owner Michelle Loielo over the curfew – initially 8pm to 5am, now starting at 9pm – which she blames for a “99 per cent drop” in her turnover.

Mr Andrews has not been able to give a straight answer over where the idea to impose a curfew came from, after chief health officer Brett Sutton distanced himself from the decision.

RELATED: Follow the latest coronavirus news

The first curfew was brought in on August 2, with the second order loosening the start time to 9pm signed by then-deputy public health commander Michelle Giles on September 13.

Appearing in court on Tuesday, Professor Giles said she made the second curfew order relying on government data proving “a clear and direct correlation” between the stage 4 restrictions and a reduction in case numbers, the Herald Sun reported.

But the data has not been tendered in court, and Victorian government lawyers have flagged they will resist its production on public interest immunity grounds.

The Victorian Supreme Court has given the government until 2pm today to decide whether it will fight to keep the documents secret.

Unica Cucina e Caffe restaurant owner Michelle Loielo is taking the Victorian government to court over lockdown restrictions. Picture: Jake Nowakowski

Ms Loielo’s lawyer Vanessa Plain said it was “critical that data be produced and is before the court so we may test the way in which Dr Giles reached the conclusion the orders were rational”, the newspaper reported.

Mr Andrews was asked about the issue at his daily COVID-19 press conference on Wednesday.

“I can’t give you an answer to that,” he said. “I have no knowledge of the status of that. I can say that it’s obviously before the court, as your question indicates, so I’m limited in what I can say.”

Pressed again on whether he would claim public interest immunity, he said the “absolutely frank answer to you is I do not know, nor am I acquainted with the documents the court has sought or the parties to that action have sought and that speaks to the fact that I‘m in no way involved in that matter”.

“That matter is being dealt with by the appropriate legal teams and others who are called in that action,” he said.

“That’s not a matter that is on my desk.”

But Mr Andrews said rules around issues like public interest immunity and cabinet-in-confidence were “well known and understood”.

“It is difficult to make broad statements unless you know and understand the context and nature of the documents being sought,” he said.

“I have no such knowledge and am in no position to provide even a broad commentary on that. These matters are before the court and it‘s appropriate they work through that process. That’s why I can’t engage in that nor do I have the knowledge. It’s not on my desk.”

Victorian chief health officer Brett Sutton. Picture: Daniel Pockett/NCA Newswire

In an affidavit filed with the court, Prof Giles said she signed off on the directive off her own bat and had no discussions with the Premier about the directions or the curfew.

“I always very clearly understood that the decision was mine to make,” the infectious diseases expert said.

“I inferred, based on my experience, that the reduction of case numbers was due to the stage 4 restrictions being imposed. Experience with outbreak management in Victoria has reinforced for me how infectious this virus is, how difficult it can be to control, and the kinds of measures required to control it.”

Prof Giles could be called for cross-examination when the case goes to trial next week.

State Liberals have called for lifting the curfew – something never imposed before in Victoria – after Professor Sutton’s revelation earlier this month that it was not based on his medical advice.

Mr Andrews subsequently said it was his decision to make the job of police easier, but chief commissioner Shane Patton stressed that Victoria Police had no input.

At his Wednesday press conference, Mr Andrews again insisted there were no plans to lift the curfew before the end of October despite case numbers falling ahead of schedule.

“I have no announcements to make about the curfew,” he said.

“Curfew provides police with an easily enforceable rule. It means less people going visiting friends and accordingly, it will be in place for as long as it needs to be in place to get these numbers down and keep them down. It won‘t be there forever.”

 – With NCA Newswire