Walter Sofronoff KC, a former judge, is challenging the ACT Integrity Commission’s finding that he engaged in serious corrupt conduct by leaking confidential information from an inquiry into the prosecution of Bruce Lehrmann. His legal team argues that Sofronoff’s actions were motivated by a genuine intent to promote transparency rather than any form of corruption.
Sofronoff’s request to the Federal Court seeks to overturn the Commission’s March ruling, which arose from his communications with a journalist, prompting an investigation. His barrister, Adam Pomerenke KC, characterises the Commission’s finding as a grave misjudgement that undermines the integrity of judicial administration. During a court hearing, Pomerenke contended that Sofronoff acted neither maliciously nor dishonestly and believed he was serving the public interest by sharing documents, such as witness statements, with media outlets.
Although Sofronoff’s actions may have been misguided, his barrister insisted that he sincerely held the belief that transparency in public discussions was paramount. Pomerenke described the leaks as an attempted effort at accuracy and openness rather than acts of corruption. He highlighted that the inquiry led by Sofronoff into the ACT’s criminal justice system followed the controversy surrounding Lehrmann, who was accused of raping Brittany Higgins in 2019. The initial criminal trial was dismissed without a verdict due to juror misconduct.
Lehrmann’s subsequent defamation lawsuit against media outlets, which reported on Higgins’ allegations, ended unfavourably for him, although he is appealing a court’s determination that the rape claim held credibility based on probabilities. Sofronoff’s inquiry concluded that ACT’s Chief Prosecutor, Shane Drumgold, had become biased in the Lehrmann case, with findings suggesting he misled about details regarding a meeting with journalist Lisa Wilkinson, leading to Drumgold’s resignation and a legal appeal against the inquiry’s conclusions.
The integrity commission acknowledged that most of the findings from the inquiry were not unreasonable. However, they also indicated that Sofronoff’s behaviour during the process raised concerns about potential bias, particularly due to his interactions with journalist Janet Albrechtsen, including sharing an advanced copy of the final report with her.
Pomerenke informed the Federal Court that the integrity body recognised an erroneous assertion regarding contempt accusations against Sofronoff linked to media leaks despite existing directives to maintain document confidentiality. He argued that it was nonsensical to claim that the head of an inquiry could contempt himself, suggesting that this acknowledgment should invalidate the findings against Sofronoff. He maintained that any single error in the commission’s reasoning could not be cleanly separated from the overall conclusion that implicated Sofronoff in corrupt conduct.
This ongoing case remains a significant focal point in discussions around legal ethics and transparency in the judiciary.