Christian Porter could face a potential investigation by the Legal Practice Board of Western Australia as to whether he is “fit and proper” to remain admitted as a lawyer.
But the board has downplayed its role, telling Crikey on Monday that an investigation would require “sufficient evidence” of any alleged misconduct to deem him unfit to practise.
A group of academics has called on the board to investigate whether Porter should be stripped of his WA practising certificate after allegations of historical rape against him, the ABC revealed today.
Porter strenuously denies the rape allegations.
Crikey asked the law board earlier this week about its role in considering whether Porter should remain admitted to the board.
Libby Fulham, its executive director, says although the board’s job is to consider whether a person was no longer fit and proper to be a practising lawyer, forming that belief required “sufficient evidence” of any alleged conduct warranting an investigation.
“All practitioners have a professional obligation to disclose a matter affecting their suitability to currently hold a local practising certificate,” she said.
“However, for the sake of clarity, unsubstantiated historic allegations of criminal conduct, of the kind currently in the public domain, would not generally be a matter requiring disclosure that the practitioner is currently not a fit and proper person, particularly in the absence of a charge, evidence of that conduct, or findings from an investigation.”
All legal practitioners in WA must renew their practising certificate annually, between May 1 and June 30.
WA’s Legal Profession Act 2008 requires lawyers renewing their practising certificates to be “currently of good fame and character” and to be a “fit and proper person”.
It also considers whether the person is currently subject to an “unresolved complaint, investigation, charge or order” under the act or corresponding law.
The renewal process also requires those applying for renewal to disclose anything that might render them unfit, including “any other matters”.
A group of academics including Monash University law Professor Adrian Evans have called on the board to ask it to investigate Porter, the ABC’s Virginia Trioli reported this morning.
“There’s no barrier for the Legal Practice Board to investigate this matter,” Evans told Trioli. They have yet to file a formal complaint to the board.
The board told Crikey that it was aware of the media reports and if it received a complain it would consider “any appropriate response or action”.
An investigation by the WA board would pose a threat to Prime Minister Scott Morrison, who has continued to defend the attorney-general in the face of the shocking historical allegations.
This morning he ruled out seeking advice from the solicitor-general on whether Porter was a fit and proper person to hold his post, describing him as an “innocent man”.
It follows calls by former solicitor-general Justin Gleeson for Morrison to enlist his successor Stephen Donaghue to determine whether Porter is fit and proper to remain attorney-general.
Gleeson also called on Morrison to read the 31-page dossier outlining the claims Porter denied.
“Solicitor-General Justin Gleeson also called on Morrison to read the 31-page dossier outlining the claims Porter denied.”
This will go down as the Bill Clinton moment of Australian political history for Morrison.
“I did not read that 31 page dossier”.
Funny how the innocent till proven guilty excuse only seems to apply to coalition politicians, the opposite seems to apply to everybody else, and why isn
t the claims by the western Australian national party lady who made allegations of sexual harassment against Barnaby Joyce some time ago being followed up,, and Porter seems quite happy to maintain his accuser is a liar and hes the only one telling the truth while its a well-known fact that most if not all politicians are accomplished liars almost on a daily basis and Scomo is a shining example of that fact.I normally think very well, indeed, of Georgia’s work but fail to see why an investigation by the WA Legal Practice Board “would pose a serious threat to Prime Minister Scott Morrison”. After all, we are still talking about unsubstantiated allegations (that aren’t likely to acquire any evidentiary bulk any time soon). Adverse findings and consequent action against Porter are, consequently, extremely unlikely. As no fan of Porter, the loathsome, smug destroyer of the AAT and the Family Court, I find this disappointing, but, frankly, there was never going to be any other outcome.
Perhaps it’s because he has called Porter an innocent man without any evidence to support it, including reading the dossier he was given so that he would understand the seriousness of the accusation. On the other hand Porter was clearly not innocent when witnesses saw him canoodling with young female staffers in dark corners. There are many things I would call both Schmorrison and Porter. ‘Innocent’ is not one of them.
Ask your self why don’t we give politicians the benefit of the doubt any more?
Because everything we are told by them contains spin and half truths.
That’s the problem isn’t it? Truth flies away in the face of spin, leaving most of them looking sleazy. Maybe if they considered truth instead of PR and marketing spin we wouldn’t distrust the vast amount of them so much. Please give us integrity in politics. How can we make that happen?
I don’t think Christian Porter is unfit because of ‘historical’ alleged rape.
I think he is unfit because he has no regard for the Rule of Law.