Pro-Indigenous voice to parliament barristers are creating ‘culture of fear’, says Stuart Wood KC

Stuart Wood KC lashes critics of his claims that lawyers are backing the Indigenous voice to parliament for financial gain, saying they are trying to suffocate opposition to this year’s referendum.

Stuart Wood has received about half a dozen written complaints from Victorian barristers claiming personal offence. Picture: Liam Kidston

Victorian barrister Stuart Wood has launched a scathing attack on critics who took offence at his claims that lawyers who supported the Indigenous voice to parliament were doing so for financial gain, accusing them of perpetuating a “culture of fear” that suffocates opposition to the referendum.

In a blistering critique of some in his industry, Mr Wood last week told The Australian barristers supporting a Yes vote for the voice were commercially motivated and would gain financially by appeasing government and large corporate clients with their “woke” politics.

Since his comments were published, Mr Wood has received about half a dozen written complaints from Victorian Barristers claiming personal offence.

A screenshot from the Bar Mums WhatsApp chat.

The Australian understands one of those complaints was aired in a large WhatsApp group called the ‘Bar Mums’, which is made up of about 200 female Victorian Bar members.

Known widely to be a left-wing echo chamber, messages sent within the group have allegedly abused Mr Wood for his comments, and suggested a campaign be launched to reprimand him.

However, The Australian understands some of those messages were swiftly deleted by group administrator Emily Porter SC.

In a letter sent to those barristers who had written directly to him to condemn his comments – some of whom, but not all, belong to ‘Bar Mums’ – Mr Wood said he had not directed his remarks at any specific person, nor did he single out anyone in the media.

He also noted his comments were not directed at the 300 Bar members who signed a petition to the Victorian Bar Council, urging it to issue its public support for the Indigenous voice to parliament.

“My comments about the voice, which were reported in The Australian, were not directed to and did not concern the letter or petition sent to the Bar Council, or any of its signatories, individually or collectively,” he wrote.

“Not only did I not single any one out in the press – but also on TV the very night the article came out – made it repeatedly clear that my comments were not directed to, nor intended to offend, any individual in particular.”

Emily Porter

In his letter, sent on Thursday, Mr Wood also accused the lawyers of fostering a “culture of fear about speaking out against the voice.”

“I have never seen this level of fear in my three decades as a lawyer,” he wrote.

“I have received a large number of communications from barristers suggesting that they are afraid of expressing their view.

“Examples of those views (in direct quotes) are as follows: ‘many others agree but don’t speak up for fear of being blackballed’; ‘I ... have serious reservations about questioning the referendum in any public forum – primarily for fear of professional retribution’ and ‘my gratitude to you for saying publicly what many of us believe privately’.

“Relatedly, I am currently briefed to give some advice regarding the legal arrangements for the referendum on the voice and although I have the help of quite a few juniors – all of them, to date, have told me that they do not wish their name to appear on the advice.”

In his letter, Mr Wood objected “to anyone who may try to weaponise the institution of the Bar in aid of their preferred political cause.”

This, he said, has a lasting impact, pointing to how the attempt by some Bar members to pass a motion opposing the appointment of Lionel Murphy to the High Court in 1975 still rankles elements of the members today because it was “an attempt to use the Bar for a political purpose”.

The Victorian Bar Council is gearing up for a meeting next Tuesday to decide whether to issue a public statement backing the voice.

The Australian understands 11 of the 21 councillors have indicated support for the Bar backing the voice proposal, while nine seem likely to oppose. The remaining councillor is Bar president Sam Hay.

Meanwhile, a notice to convene a special general meeting has been widely circulated among Bar members, proposing all 2200 vote on whether the ­association should announce a public stance on the voice or keep quiet.

The notice has now received all 40 of the signatures needed to get over the line, and is expected to be lodged on Friday.