The head of an inquiry was involved in the decision not to appoint a media adviser before he earned the Chief Minister's ire by leaking his findings to favoured journalists.
Walter Sofronoff KC has been under fire in recent days, with a furious Chief Minister Andrew Barr flagging the possibility of legal action after the former Queensland judge "breached his good faith".
Mr Barr attributed Mr Sofronoff's actions to "a lapse of judgement", raising what he said were "significant questions" about why the inquiry chairman thought it appropriate to give "select media" embargoed copies of his report.
The report's contents were then published prematurely, though The Australian, which had the initial story, denies breaching an embargo.
The board of inquiry, led by Mr Sofronoff, advertised for a media and communications officer before it began public hearings.
Despite the enormous media interest in the inquiry, which investigated the actions of authorities involved in the aborted prosecution of former Liberal Party staffer Bruce Lehrmann, the position was never filled.
The ACT government's Justice and Community Safety Directorate was unable to shed light on the reason, given the inquiry was independent.
"Staffing and other resourcing for the board of inquiry was managed by the inquiry's executive director, in consultation with the board's chair," the directorate said.
Mr Sofronoff did not respond to questions from The Canberra Times, which asked, among other things, whether he regretted not having a media adviser in light of the controversy that has erupted around his dealings with journalists.
In addition to providing his final report to the media before it had even gone to Mr Barr, the former Queensland Court of Appeal president has told the Chief Minister he "sometimes" briefed journalists during the inquiry.
Mr Barr has expressed bewilderment about the purpose of this, describing it as "concerning" and "not a good look".
He says the ACT government has sought advice about whether the premature release of the report constitutes a breach of the territory's Inquiries Act.
The Inquiries Act requires a board of inquiry to prepare a report and submit it to the Chief Minister, who then has control over when it is released.
At a press conference on Monday, Mr Barr said Mr Sofronoff had sought to provide an explanation.
He said the jurist had advised him that "his previous experience, as well as his experience in this inquiry, had led him to conclude that it was possible to identify journalists who are ethical and who understand the importance of their role in the conduct of a public inquiry".
Mr Sofronoff also referred during public hearings to his relationships with reporters.
"In the course of many dealings with experienced Australian mainstream journalists as part of my work over some decades, I have learned to trust their ethics and their professionalism," he said in May.
On that day, he said his trust in the media had been "damaged" by journalists who published "loathsome material" contained in a document the inquiry had itself uploaded to its website.
Notwithstanding his fury about that episode, Mr Sofronoff placed his trust in the media again by prematurely giving two journalists his report less than three months later.
