Attorney-General George Brandis has attempted to hose down claims he is seeking to "shackle" the government's chief legal adviser as he faces a growing backlash over his move to stop colleagues seeking advice without his approval.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The country's first law officer is at the centre of a political firestorm over a binding direction he issued before the July 2 election requiring ministers to obtain his written permission before seeking advice from Solicitor-General Justin Gleeson, SC.
Both men are set to face a Senate inquiry on Friday into allegations Senator Brandis misled Parliament by claiming Mr Gleeson was consulted about the change, a claim Mr Gleeson has denied.
The Attorney-General was initially slated to appear first but it is understood he was seeking last night to change the order of appearance.
Senator Brandis went on the attack on Thursday and accused Labor of hypocrisy, pointing to comments shadow attorney-general Mark Dreyfus made about his own relationship with the Solicitor-General.
Fairfax Media has previously revealed Senator Brandis sought the advice of a former Solicitor-General during the Howard government, David Bennett, QC, on the same-sex marriage plebiscite rather than relying on advice from Mr Gleeson.
It has led to allegations he was "opinion shopping" for advice he regarded as politically convenient.
It is understood Senator Brandis also sought advice from a Sydney barrister on proroguing Parliament, and the advice was not consistent with Mr Gleeson's views.
Mr Dreyfus, who was Attorney-General during the final year of the Gillard/Rudd government, said in the recently-published book The Role of the Solicitor-General that the Solicitor-General's advice was given a "higher status" in government than other legal advisers including private barristers but "she or he is still just a barrister".
He told the author, UNSW Law associate professor Gabrielle Appleby, that in some cases he would obtain "very senior advice" from two sources to "outweigh the Solicitor-General's advice" on politically significant issues.
Senator Brandis said in Parliament: "I find it very difficult to understand how Mr Dreyfus could, without hypocrisy, have attacked me for allegedly doing the very thing that he said he did."
But Mr Dreyfus said there was a "world of difference between seeking second opinions, and cutting the Solicitor-General out of the advice process altogether".
"In my time as both Attorney-General and shadow attorney-general, I have never acted to undermine the role of the Solicitor-General," he said.
Legal experts have expressed concern the legally binding direction could see Mr Gleeson, who holds a statutory office and provides independent, apolitical advice, "frozen out" of advising the government.
In a blistering submission to the Senate inquiry, former Solicitor-General Gavan Griffith, QC, said the change created an office "shackled" to the Attorney-General and it was akin to keeping "a dog on a lead".
