Moves to suspend Justice Gregory Geason in chaos over constitutional concerns

Plans to suspend a Tasmanian judge charged with assault hang in the balance, with MPs across the political divide concerned the move may be unconstitutional.

Supreme Court judge Gregory Geason. Picture: Sam Rosewarne.

Plans to suspend a Tasmanian judge charged with assault hang in the balance, with MPs across the political divide on Monday night concerned the move may be unconstitutional.

The minority Liberal government has recalled state parliament for Tuesday specifically to pass a motion calling on the Governor to suspend Justice Gregory Geason, who has pleaded not guilty to one count of assault and one of emotional abuse.

However, on Sunday night The Australian revealed Justice Geason had received a legal opinion from two silks that the state legislation relied upon for the suspension was unconstitutional.

That has caused independents, Labor and the Greens to either oppose the suspension outright or refuse to support it until or unless the government adequately addresses the constitutionality concerns.

Attorney-General Guy Barnett on Monday indicated the parliamentary recall would proceed. But he declined to respond to the claims of unconstitutionality, or say whether the motion would still be moved or what further advice if any the government had sought.

The Greens appeared the government’s best hope of securing the two votes needed to pass the motion in the House of Assembly, but on Monday night were yet to be convinced. “In principle we support the move to suspend Justice Geason … but it has to be appropriate – and it has to be constitutional,” Greens leader Rosalie Woodruff said.

Labor also held serious concerns about the motion, adopted after the government’s original plans for a commission of inquiry were scrapped due to concerns they were unconstitutional and unfair.

“This whole situation has been a mess, which the government has handled very poorly,” Labor justice spokeswoman Ella Haddad said. “The government has had to change positions significantly, multiple times over recent days.

“There are now serious questions hanging over whether what the government is proposing is even constitutional. The opposition will continue to seek advice to get clarity on that matter.

“Clearly, the government needs to demonstrate that what they are proposing is constitutional. We have asked that the government share all advice they have received from the Solicitor-General or elsewhere.”

Independent MPs, including some who previously supported the motion, were now opposed or uncertain.

“It is an embarrassment – such a lack of thinking and not seeking proper legal advice,” former Liberal MP turned independent Lara Alexander said.

She would “definitely not be supporting” the suspension motion, given the constitutional concerns and Justice Geason’s signed undertaking to not sit as a judge while criminal proceedings against him are under way.

Fellow former Liberal MP turned independent John Tucker was also inclined to oppose the motion, and upper house independents were demanding further detailed legal advice.

On Sunday night, Justice Geason’s lawyers wrote to MPs providing a legal opinion from two SCs that the section of the state Supreme Court (Judges’ Independence) Act 1857 relied on for the suspension motion was unconstitutional.