Early test for new Bar president

The Haneef case led to a turbulent first week in the job for Hugh Fraser, QC

LEADING lawyers in Brisbane laud the Queensland Bar Association's new president, Hugh Fraser, QC, as unflappable, straight as an arrow, even a potential High Court judge.

An accomplished commercial lawyer, Fraser, 50, has eschewed the limelight throughout his career.

He is, according to one senior judge, "apolitical, completely professional and thorough - a very good advocate whose integrity is beyond reproach".

Perhaps it is something to do with the gene pool: his mother's father was Neal Macrossan, a former Queensland chief justice, while Fraser's uncle Hugh Macrossan also served as chief justice.

Fraser has needed to maintain his cool and roll with the punches since succeeding Martin Daubney, SC, who was appointed to the Supreme Court last week.

Fraser's first task, which fell on the opening day of a five-day trial, was speaking at the swearing-in of the District Court's newest judges, top criminal barrister Terry Martin, SC, and solicitor David Searles.

The next day, Fraser found himself on the fringe of a legal and media maelstrom. He was being pressed to defend lawyer Stephen Keim, SC, who had outed himself as the source of a police record of interview with his client, accused terror suspect Mohamed Haneef.

Such was the groundswell of support from fellow lawyers for Keim, who had come under attack from Australian Federal Police Commissioner Mick Keelty, Prime Minister John Howard and Attorney-General Philip Ruddock over the Haneef case, that the relative silence of the Bar Association offended several members.

"If all it takes to cower the association is for a politician or policeman to mutter the possibility of an undefined complaint to an unidentified authority, then we have failed as an independent bar," respected Brisbane lawyer Peter Callaghan, SC, wrote to Fraser.

Fraser says he has no qualms over the criticisms, which he does not take personally, but he expresses mild concern about the transition he knows he needs to make from relative obscurity to the leader of a robust Bar seeking to have greater influence in the court of public opinion.

"I think that Peter Callaghan and other members are driven by perfectly honourable motives, and I can well understand their strong feelings," he told The Australian yesterday from his Brisbane chambers.

"The Bar is an organisation of individuals who are independently minded. There is plenty of room for honest debate about controversial matters like this. I have been around a long time and I've had to deal with the adversarial system for 26 years. Judges have not always seen it my way, and nor have my opponents."

As for the Bar's role in stimulating and advancing public debate on vexed issues such as the appointment of judges and silks, Fraser believes the Bar needs to maintain its balance.

"I think it should be outspoken about serious attacks on the rule of law, and about any significant problems we see emerging in the system of justice. We should be outspoken and robust but at the same time we have to be careful that we get it right.

"We are not just an association of barristers - we are also a regulatory authority, and we have a statutory obligation to uphold a very strong tradition of ethics at the Bar. I think we have been striking a pretty decent balance, but I have a concern that the attacks on the rule of law are becoming more frequent and sourced at a higher level as we face these difficult things like terrorism and so on. That may mean we will need to become more robust."