Shane Drumgold vs Walter Sofronoff: Decision to be handed down

The former ACT chief prosecutor will on Monday learn if a report that found he engaged in grossly unethical conduct during the prosecution of Bruce Lehrmann will be quashed or upheld.

Walter Sofronoff and Shane Drumgold.

Former ACT chief prosecutor Shane Drumgold will on Monday learn if a report that found he engaged in serious malpractice and grossly unethical behaviour during the prosecution of Bruce Lehrmann will be quashed, or upheld.

After less than three weeks of deliberation, Acting Justice Steven Kaye will deliver a judgment ruling on whether former judge Walter Sofronoff KC displayed a bias when conducting an inquiry into Mr Drumgold’s conduct during the Lehrmann case.

If he finds Mr Sofronoff held an apprehended bias while conducting the inquiry, he could determine that parts or all of the final report should be deemed invalid.

Alternatively, he could find Mr Sofronoff displayed no bias and his findings could be upheld in full.

Mr Drumgold launched legal action in the ACT Supreme Court against the ACT government and Mr Sofronoff’s inquiry last year, challenging findings in the inquiry’s final report that he was in breach of his duties while prosecuting allegations that Mr Lehrmann raped Brittany Higgins on a couch in parliament house.

Mr Sofronoff’s report found Mr Drumgold intentionally directed a junior lawyer in his office to make a misleading affidavit and, in doing so, “egregiously abused his authority and betrayed the trust of his young staff member”.

Mr Sofronoff said he was “deeply disturbed” by Mr Drumgold’s ignorance of ethical principles and accused him of a “Pilate-like detachment”, finding Mr Drumgold treated criminal litigation as “a poker game” in which the prosecutor “can hide the cards”.

His report vindicated police involved in investigating Ms Higgins’s claims as having “performed their duties in absolute good faith”.

Throughout a three-day hearing in early February, Mr Drumgold’s lawyer, Dan O’Gorman SC, argued that Mr Sofronoff had an “unreasonable” relationship with The Australian columnist Janet Albrechtsen which gave rise to an apprehension of bias.

He told the court Albrechtsen wrote regular “negative” commentary pieces about Mr Drumgold, and “poisoned” Mr Sofronoff’s mind through her communications with him.

Mr O’Gorman said text messages, emails and phone calls shared by Mr Sofronoff and Albrechtsen – as well as a lunch in Brisbane – indicate Mr Sofronoff was “infected” by Albrechtsen’s bias, and the frequency of the communication was “so extraordinary in the circumstances” that he could not find comparable cases.

Counsel for the ACT government Kate Eastmann SC told the court allegations that Albrechtsen’s reporting somehow influenced Mr Sofronoff’s adverse findings against Mr Drumgold had “no foundation” and should not be accepted.

The court heard that Mr Sofronoff had 65 telephone calls with journalists between February 9 and July 31 last year – 55 with The Australian and 10 with other news outlets.

Justin Greggery KC, representing six police officers joined to the proceedings, told the court there was “nothing sinister” about Mr Sofronoff contacting the media personally throughout the inquiry.

Justice Kaye’s judgment is due to be handed down at 2pm.