‘Bullshit’: Wilkie slams A-G’s reason for not intervening in whistleblower trials

The attorney-general should use his power to halt the prosecutions of two men facing trial over their roles in providing information to the media about government wrongdoing, say crossbenchers and press freedom advocates, with independent MP Andrew Wilkie calling Mark Dreyfus’s justification for not intervening “bullshit”.

Wilkie told Crikey that he had discussed the impending trials against Australian Taxation Office (ATO) ex-employee Richard Boyle and army lawyer David McBride with Dreyfus. Wilkie said Dreyfus had told him he was not inclined to intervene because he did not want to override independent prosecutors.

In Dreyfus’ mind, Wilkie said, the fact that those cases were brought by independent prosecutors rather than under the authority of a former attorney-general made them different from the case of Bernard Collaery, who had charges against him dropped after Dreyfus intervened.

“He does have the legal power, but he feels he doesn’t have the license to intervene in the legal affairs within a government department,” Wilkie said. 

“I think that’s bullshit. That’s spelled b-u-l-l-s-h-i-t. There is a compelling case, and these are extraordinary circumstances — it is not in the public interest to continue the prosecution; it would be in the public interest to stop it.” 

Human Rights Law Centre senior lawyer Kieran Pender said Dreyfus could end the prosecutions with the “swish of a pen”. 

“There are two people in Australia with the power to end these injustices: the Commonwealth director of public prosecutions can at any time revisit the public interest in a prosecution and end it. And the attorney-general, who has ultimate responsibility for our prosecutorial system and the ultimate responsibility to the Parliament and the Australian people, has power under the Judiciary Act to drop this case,” Pender told Crikey. 

Wilkie told reporters at Parliament House today that it was “bizarre” McBride would face a court: “The first person to front a court over war crimes in Afghanistan is the whistleblower who told us about the war crimes.”

Boyle failed to convince a judge in March that he should be protected under the Public Interest Disclosure Act, and is facing 24 charges related to his decision to speak out about what he felt were heavy-handed tactics by the ATO to chase taxpayers over debts. McBride’s charges relate to his alleged leaking of a tranche of confidential Afghanistan war documents to the ABC. Both risk years in prison if found guilty. 

Alliance for Journalists’ Freedom executive director Peter Greste told reporters the prosecutions were a matter of press freedom: “If this prosecution goes ahead, it’s very difficult to see how journalists can guarantee the protection of sources and pursue stories that are clearly a matter of public interest.”

Dreyfus was contacted for comment but did not respond before deadline.

Should Mark Dreyfus intervene? Let us know by writing to letters@crikey.com.au. Please include your full name to be considered for publication. We reserve the right to edit for length and clarity.