Traditionally, judges have been appointed to lead royal commissions and inquiries due to their expertise in fairness and procedural integrity. However, the ACT Integrity Commission challenged this norm when it reported that Walter Sofronoff, a former judge, engaged in serious corrupt conduct while overseeing a board of inquiry linked to the Bruce Lehrmann trial. The investigation stemmed from prosecutor Shane Drumgold's concerns about the handling of the case. The findings indicate a need for reevaluation of the appropriateness of appointing judges to leadership roles in public inquiries.
For many years, appointing judges to head inquiries was deemed prudent due to their background in fairness and ethical dispute resolution. However, the ACT Integrity Commission's recent report challenges this assumption.
The report by the ACT Integrity Commission concluded that Walter Sofronoff, despite his distinguished background, engaged in serious corrupt conduct while presiding over the inquiry into the Bruce Lehrmann trial.
The Integrity Commission's findings were particularly striking given Sofronoff's previous respectability, bringing into question the longstanding reliance on judges for such oversight roles.
In light of the findings against Sofronoff, the traditional expectation that judges can manage public inquiries without exhibiting personal biases or misconduct is now under critical scrutiny.
Collection
[
|
...
]