ACT government weighs charges against Shane Drumgold after Sofronoff report

Shane ­Drumgold faces possible ­charges of attempting to pervert the course of justice or misconduct in public office after the ACT government ­endorsed findings that its chief prosecutor acted grossly unethically.

Shane Drumgold resigned at the ACT Director of Public prosecutions yesterday, in the wake of the Sofronoff report.

The ACT government has ­endorsed findings that its chief prosecutor, Shane ­Drumgold, acted grossly unethically, but the capital’s Labor-Greens administration will not investigate other cases he led and has not decided whether to charge him.

On Monday afternoon, the Barr government released the full ­report of the Sofronoff inquiry, announcing it supported its 10 recommendations but saying it did not consider it necessary to look at any of the 18 cases Mr Drumgold conducted or participated in since his appointment as Director of Public Prosecutions in 2019.

Mr Drumgold has announced his resignation as DPP and conceded he made mistakes in his prosecution of Bruce Lehrmann for the alleged rape of Brittany Higgins but rejected the key findings of the inquiry that he had lied to the Supreme Court and engaged in serious malpractice and grossly unethical conduct.

In an extraordinary move, ACT Chief Minister Andrew Barr suggested inquiry chairman Walter Sofronoff could face charges or a referral to the national corruption watchdog over the premature leaking of his report into the handling of the trial of former Liberal staffer Bruce Lehrmann.

Mr Drumgold claimed the early release of the report had ­“denied him procedural fairness”.

ACT Attorney-General Shane Rattenbury on Monday said the government was reviewing its ­options following the findings of the Sofronoff review and had written to Mr ­Drumgold inviting a response “before the government takes a final ­decision.”

Mr Rattenbury said the report, in his view, “meets the threshold under Section 28 of the Director of Public Prosecutions Act, which is the standard of misbehaviour in office which can lead to dismissal”.

“On that basis, the government is also considering what other ­options may be available to it,” the Attorney-General said.

Mr Drumgold could face ­charges of attempting to pervert the course of justice or the common law offence of misconduct in public office.

Bruce Lehrmann is questioned by police over the alleged rape of Brittany Higgins. Picture: Seven News

The Office of the DPP will now also face a multimillion-dollar claim by Mr Lehrmann on the grounds of malfeasance, following Mr Sofronoff’s findings of gross misconduct by Mr Drumgold.

By contrast, Mr Sofronoff found police investigators and their immediate superior officers “performed their duties in absolute good faith, with great determination although faced with obstacles, and put together a sound case”.

The key findings of the ­Sofronoff report were leaked to The Australian and published last week.

Mr Barr criticised the leaking of the report to media outlets prior to its official release, saying the move was very disappointing.

 

“Mr Sofronoff has confirmed to me in writing that he provided a copy of the report to a newspaper columnist and a broadcast journalist,” Mr Barr said, suggesting these had been provided under embargo.

The Australian did not breach an embargo and will not reveal the source of the leak.

Mr Barr said “a reasonably straight reading” of the Inquiries Act would indicate Mr Sofronoff had breached the law by providing journalists with copies of the ­report prior to its release by the government.

“We will consider our position in relation to that,” the Chief Minister said.

“I’m not making any pre-judgments at this point. I think there is a degree of objectivity that is required in assessing whether this constitutes a breach.”

Mr Barr said Mr Sofronoff’s actions had been “a significant lapse of judgment” but “a question of whether there are any mitigating circumstances remains to be seen”.

Mr Barr also suggested the government might refer the ­conduct of the inquiry to the ACT Integrity Commission but said he remained confident in Mr ­Sofronoff’s findings and recommendations.

The government said it had written to Mr Sofronoff and received a response from him that was now subject to a Freedom of Information request.

It would also consider changes to the Inquiries Act to strengthen provisions relating to the obligation of non-disclosure of information prior to the formal release of an inquiry report.

The government said its examination of Mr Drumgold’s previous cases found most were appellate, meaning the facts and evidence had already been determined and what was in issue was the findings or sentence based on those facts.

He appeared at first instance, or was briefed to appear at first instance, in only three matters, the government said, two of which were not the subject of any significant dispute between the parties.

The other matter involved a trial for murder of which Mr Drumgold had carriage until approximately two weeks before the trial commenced, at which point it was re-briefed to a private barrister who appeared as counsel for the prosecution during the trial.

The Barr government said on the material available at this point, it did not consider a more detailed examination was warranted. “Defendants in historic and current matters have the opportunity to raise any specific concerns through existing judicial processes,” it said.

Mr Sofronoff ruled that every one of the allegations made by Mr Drumgold that sparked the inquiry was baseless and the chief prosecutor “did not act with fairness and detachment as was required by his role”.

“The result has been a public inquiry, which was not justified by any of his allegations, that has caused lasting pain to many people and which has demonstrated his allegations to be not just incorrect, but wholly false and without any rational basis,” he concluded.

“The cost of a six-month public inquiry … has been huge.”

Deputy DPP Anthony Williamson SC, who has been acting in the position since Mr Drumgold went on leave in May, will continue in the role while the government considers who will get the top job.