The Abbott government has denied that it asked the President of the Australian Human Rights Commission, Gillian Triggs, to resign and said it did not offer her an inducement of a senior legal role.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The denial came as a prominent criminal barrister said it could be likely that the Attorney-General Senator George Brandis and his department secretary Chris Moraitis could be found to have breached the criminal code if it could be proved that the offer was done dishonestly.
Both Prime Minister Tony Abbott and Foreign Affairs Minister Julie Bishop used question time to reject suggestions that Professor Triggs had been asked to resign or given an opportunity for a new role during a meeting with Mr Moraitis on February 3.
"I have spoken to the secretary of the Attorney-General's department this morning and he confirmed to me that Professor Triggs was not asked to resign, that she was not offered an inducement to resign and I would back the secretary of the Attorney-General's department over any one on that side [of Parliament]," Ms Bishop said.
Mr Abbott then dismissed the furore as "Canberra insider nonsense", repeating that he had "lost confidence" in Professor Triggs as the commission's president.
Their comments are at odds with evidence given by Mr Moraitis to a Senate estimate hearing on Tuesday. Mr Moraits admitted that he had offered a role to Ms Triggs during their meeting after informing her that Senator Brandis, had lost confidence in her as president. But Mr Moraitis said it was not an inducement.
When questioned on Tuesday, Mr Moraitis said: "My understanding was that resignation was one option that could be considered, but it was made very clear to me within the first minute of our discussion that this was not going to be an issue."
The aftermath of Tuesday's hearing continued as Liberal Senator Ian MacDonald, who was heavily criticised for his bully-like behaviour during the hearing, defended his actions saying the "perpetrators" during the estimates hearing just happened to be women.
"For those who have accused me of being sexist for trying to protect witnesses by admonishing senators who were shouting, yelling and interjecting constantly in an orchestrated campaign of disruption, my admonishment was to the perpetrators regardless of their gender," he said.
"It just so happens that all of the Labor and Greens senators at the hearing, who were the perpetrators, were females."
The Australian Federal Police also confirmed to Fairfax Media that they had received the referral from Labor's Shadow Attorney-General, Mark Dreyfus, who accused the Abbott government of breaching the criminal code by allegedly offering an inducement.
"The AFP will evaluate this referral as per usual processes," a spokesman said. "While this process is ongoing it would not be appropriate to comment further."
Prominent criminal barrister, Robert Richter QC, said it could be likely that Mr Moraitis and SenatorBrandis could be found to have breached section 142.1 of the criminal code if it could be proved that the offer was done dishonestly and for an improper purpose, or with political intent.
"My reading of it is that it is capable of being construed as having been made for an improper purpose, that is to get rid of a senior public officer for political reasons, rather than because the public official is not performing their functions properly," he said.
"In my view Gillian Triggs is magnificent ... to the extent that politicians who have not read her report purport to condemn it, which is disgraceful."
Criminal barrister Stephen Keim agreed that, for the allegation to stand, the benefit offered would have to influence a public official and it would be beneficial to another person.
"The overarching element is that the offer must be made dishonestly," he said.
With Michael Gordon
