George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to Senator Evans, representing the Prime Minister. Is the minister aware of the comments of the Attorney-General on Monday, when he described the terrorism trial of Abdul Benbrika and others as ‘the most successful terrorism prosecution that this country has seen’? Does the minister regard the Attorney-General’s remarks as appropriate?

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the senator for his question. I understand that the Attorney-General made some public commentary on a very important trial held in Melbourne recently where the jury returned guilty verdicts against six defendants on charges concerning terrorism. As a result of very good and effective cooperation between the Australian Federal Police, ASIO, the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions and the Victorian police, there was a successful prosecution. The Attorney-General, in learning of that, appropriately spoke publicly about his support for the actions of those agencies and his pleasure and the government’s pleasure, and I hope all senators’ pleasure, that these matters were successfully prosecuted—that we were able to successfully prosecute those who were charged with very serious offences concerning terrorism.

Those matters have been dealt with by the court. As I understand it, on Monday the Attorney-General sought to comment not on matters still before the court but on matters related to the decision on those matters that was made on Monday. I think it is the Attorney-General’s role to assure the community that the government is doing all it can to protect Australians. It is important for him to show support for the agencies, to recognise the contribution that many in the Muslim community in Australia made in assisting with the investigation and, I think, to generally reinforce the need to tackle any threats of terrorism within our society. I think it was important for the Attorney-General to speak of behalf of the government to recognise the work that was done in the successful prosecution of these terrorism charges and acknowledge the important work of the security and police agencies. I think, as I say, the Attorney-General was commenting appropriately in responding to the decision on that case.

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. I thank the minister for the forthrightness of his expression of the government’s view that the Attorney-General spoke appropriately. Does the government then not accept the criticism of the Attorney-General by the trial judge, Justice Bongiorno, that:

It’s abundantly clear it would have been to the enhancement of justice in this country if these comments had not been made … They were unnecessary and had the potential to cause difficulties in this trial.

Does the government not accept that reprimand of the Attorney-General by the trial judge?

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the senator for his supplementary question. I did read those comments in the newspaper today. Obviously, they are a very forthright expression of view by the judge. All I can say is that the Attorney-General has made it clear that his comments were not directed at matters still before the court and that he thought it was important that he speak publicly about what was a highly publicised trial and charges in a most important matter within his portfolio. I think the Attorney-General was acting appropriately when responding to that decision. I think the public would expect him to. As I say, he made it clear that those comments were not directed at matters still before the court but at the decision that had been made on Monday.