Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Attorney-General George Brandis quietly restricted access to Solicitor-General Justin Gleeson four days before the federal election was called.
And legal experts have questioned the move, suggesting it is an "unnecessary impediment" to expert advice and that it will allow Australia's first law officer to assert control over the second law officer.
Solicitors-General provide high-level legal advice to ministers and the public service and represent the Commonwealth in important cases, such as matters before the High Court.
On May 4, Senator Brandis issued a Legal Services Direction that no one "may refer a question of law to the Solicitor-General except with the consent of the Attorney-General".
That means all ministers - including the Prime Minister - and departments must now seek permission in writing from Senator Brandis and receive his signed consent.
Fairfax Media has spoken to Queens Counsels, Senior Counsels and other members of the legal community and many expressed surprise at the move, although most declined to comment publicly.
Several suggested the relationship between Senator Brandis and Mr Gleeson had grown frosty over matters, including the 2013 same-sex marriage High Court case, the 2015 advice Mr Gleeson provided over changes to citizenship laws and over the drafting of same-sex marriage plebiscite legislation.
University of New South Wales professor Gabrielle Appleby, who recently published the book The Role of the Solicitor-General, said she was "perplexed" by the direction because Mr Gleeson had gone further than his predecessors and had "put in place a system where he makes the Attorney-General aware of requests for advice".
"This is George Brandis seeking to formalise and assert control over the Solicitor-General but it's perplexing, because there is already a high level of control over the advisory function," she said.
Asked if the change could damage the independence of the office of Solicitor-General, Ms Appleby said: "It would depend on how the Attorney-General acts on referrals of law. It would be worrying if an Attorney-General took the view that access to the Solicitor-General should be restricted."
University of Sydney constitutional law professor Anne Twomey said the changes were impractical because Solicitors-General are often asked to advise on urgent matters.
She said that, for example, Quentin Bryce had needed urgent advice when Julia Gillard replaced Kevin Rudd and asked: "Do you seriously have to have someone with a letter go to the Attorney-General and get it signed before the Solicitor-General can advise the Governor-General?"
A spokesman for Senator Brandis said the direction had been under consideration since last year and was issued to "clarify the procedure for briefing and taking advice from the Solicitor-General".
"There was uncertainty in government about the procedure for briefing the Solicitor-General and the nature of the matters that were appropriate to be briefed to the Solicitor-General. In particular, there was uncertainty as to the circumstances in which advice should be sought from the Australian Government Solicitor, or the Solicitor-General."
Solicitors-General have been advising Australian governments since 1916.
