A dispute between the ACT's chief prosecutor and the territory's police force is continuing, with the public release of a letter alleging interference in the now-abandoned rape trial of Bruce Lehrmann.
The letter written by ACT Director of Public Prosecutions Shane Drumgold to ACT Chief Police Officer Neil Gaughan was originally obtained last week under freedom of information (FOI) law by the Guardian, and called for a public inquiry into political and police conduct during the prosecution.
This morning, that letter was made public.
In the letter, Mr Drumgold complains of "blatant misrepresentations" and "cherry-picked" summaries of evidence by officers, as he alleged police pressured him not to charge Mr Lehrmann on a number of occasions.
Mr Lehrmann, a former Liberal party staffer, had been charged with the alleged rape of his then-colleague Brittany Higgins at Parliament House in Canberra in 2019.
His trial was aborted after misconduct by a juror, and although a retrial was planned for February, it was abandoned by Mr Drumgold earlier this month, amid fears any trial would have adversely affected Ms Higgins's health.
Mr Lehrmann has maintained his innocence and there have been no findings against him.
In the letter, sent after the first trial but before the retrial was cancelled, Mr Drumgold told the ACT's top police officer that the alleged pressure not to prosecute was present from the start, when he was invited for "a briefing in relation to a sensitive matter".
"My immediate perception of this meeting was that it was not a briefing at all, rather a clear and overt attempt to use [the] loaded characterisation of some very select evidence in an attempt to persuade me to agree with a position police had clearly adopted," Mr Drumgold said.
He went on to describe other meetings and correspondence which he alleged were purported to seek his advice but were clearly attempts to pressure him into not pursuing a rape charge.
'Too much political interference': police
Mr Drumgold said in the letter that he had also become aware of diary notes of a meeting in June 2021, where police discussed his decision to prosecute.
The names have been redacted in the public version of the letter.
According to the letter, one person at the meeting advanced the view that there was insufficient evidence to proceed.
Another person said: "If it were my choice I wouldn't proceed, but it's not my choice, there is too much political interference."
Mr Drumgold's letter did not reveal any details about what the alleged political interference was.
Mr Drumgold also used the letter to complain about the conduct of a prosecution witness during the trial, who sought transcripts of evidence from the defence team.
He also alleged senior police who attended the latter stages of the trial were "regularly conferencing with the defence team during the breaks".
Finally, Mr Drumgold alleged there was then an attempt to influence how a decision about a retrial should be determined.
"On the discharge of the jury on 27 October 2022, defence barrister Steven Whybrow spoke to my junior ... and stated that he had a meeting with the investigators and that they had suggested that he contact me and firstly suggest I was not impartial, and consequently request that I should outsource the decision as to whether or not to re-run the trial to someone outside of the office."
Mr Drumgold told the chief police officer he was of the view that after the end of the then-scheduled retrial, there should be a public inquiry into both political and police conduct.
'Erosion of public confidence'
This morning, Canberra Liberals leader Elizabeth Lee wrote to ACT Attorney-General Shane Rattenbury about Mr Drumgold's letter, urging him to establish a wide-ranging inquiry into the allegations of interference in the trial.
In her letter to Mr Rattenbury, Ms Lee warned the public could lose confidence in the legal system.
"There are serious allegations of 'political interference', and the published correspondence between the ACT Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) and the ACT Police Commissioner is alarming," Ms Lee wrote.
"Unanswered questions surrounding these serious allegations and the trial could have a devastating and irreversible erosion of public confidence in our legal system."
Ms Lee said the Australian public would be interested to know what was meant by "political interference".
"The Australian public would be very interested to know what that means, who it has come from and what that has involved," she said.
"A wide-ranging inquiry into the matter will provide an opportunity for a holistic review of not only these serious allegations but the entire prosecution, trial, and subsequent mistrial.
"This inquiry would provide confidence to the Canberra community, that the ACT government is dedicated to maintaining the highest and most robust legal standards."
ACT government to 'consider best way to proceed'
The matter has already been referred to the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity.
ACT Attorney-General Shane Rattenbury said the government was "concerned by the allegations made about the investigation and conduct of the Lehrmann trial".
He said, noting that the matter had been referred to the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity, the ACT government was "currently considering whether further investigations [were] warranted".
ACT Chief Minister Andrew Barr confirmed this afternoon that Mr Rattenbury and the Director-General of the Justice and Community Safety Directorate had briefed the cabinet "regarding the issues raised by the actions of authorities involved in the Lehrmann trial".
"The cabinet discussed how a broad-ranging, independent inquiry could help to identify the roles played by the parties involved in the trial and whether these actions were appropriate," Mr Barr said.
"These discussions also noted that an ACLEI investigation is currently underway."
Mr Barr said the government would provide further updates in the coming days.
Ms Lee welcomed the independent police review but said it did not go far enough.
"That is limited in terms of police involvement," she said.
"A board of inquiry will provide an opportunity for a wide-ranging and holistic independent review of all of the issues that have been raised amongst all stakeholders and the questions that are in the minds of the broader community about things that have happened in this trial."
The Australian Federal Police have also acknowledged calls for an inquiry and said it would fully cooperate if one were to be established.
In the meantime, Mr Lehrmann has retained top defamation lawyer Mark O'Brien, although no legal action has yet been mounted.
