That’s how PM Scott Morrison replied when @auspolwatch asked him about his legal credentials.

Actually he didn’t (and we didn’t ask).  But it is true that Scott Morrison is not a lawyer. (He qualified in ‘Economic Geography’ by the way)

Unlike during the bushfire crisis when he was happy to leave the firefighting to the expert hose holders (ie actual firefighters), on this occasion Mr Morrison has been happy to don the wig and get lawyerly.

As The Guardian reported, our nation’s number one bush lawyer and Prime Minister accused those calling for an inquiry into the Porter allegations of ‘undermining the principles of the rule of law’.

Bush Lawyer #1 continued, ‘I don’t accept this proposition that any Australian should be subject to a rule of law that is different to anyone else.’

Today Morrison said that Christian Porter ‘is an innocent man under the law and will retain the position of Attorney General.’

The trouble is not many actual lawyers agree with him.  

Prof Ben Saul from University of Sydney pointed out that coronial inquiries, royal commissions, civil suits and any number of non-legal independent inquiries are conducted frequently, often deal with potential criminal matters, and do “not at all undermine” the rule of law or presumption of innocence.

Esteemed lawyers, senior counsel and human rights groups who have supported the call for an independent inquiry include Leah Marrone, President of Australian Women Lawyers (AWL), and Pauline Wright former President of the Law Council, and President of the NSW Council for Civil Liberties.

Senior lawyer and director for the Centre for Public Integrity, Geoffrey Watson SC, described Mr Morrison's dismissal of a further inquiry based on such grounds as "nonsense". 

So how did Scott Morrison come to such a different conclusion?    Although Morrison himself isn’t a lawyer, his Government is full of them. And the most senior, of course is the Attorney General. Normally on legal matters the PM would get advice from the Attorney General, first law officer in the land.

In this case, that’s a bit tricky of course for the AG to advise on his own case. The PM could consult the acting AG or one of any number of other lawyers in cabinet. But it’s hard to expect a Cabinet colleague and potentially a friend of the AG to give impartial advice.

Luckily, the PM can seek independent advice from the Solicitor General (who is a public servant, not a politician), regarded as the country's second highest-ranking law officer, after the Attorney General. The Solicitor General is the perfect person to seek advice from when you can’t go to the AG.   

So what does the Solicitor General think?  Auspolwatch doesn’t know. And Scott Morrison doesn’t know either because he didn’t ask him.

But that’s exactly what the former Attorney General Justin Gleeson advised that he should have done.

"This matter should have been referred directly to the second law officer, the Solicitor-General, who could have provided advice on a couple of key legal questions," Mr Gleeson told the ABC.

"The key one of those questions would have been: is the material sufficiently credible to justify an executive inquiry being instituted?

"Can that occur consistently with our constitution and our rule of law? And if so, what form might that inquiry take?"

The former Solicitor General also advised that the PM should have read the full 31 page dossier of detailed allegations against the AG written by the complainant before she died, in order to be able to make a fully informed executive decision.

Now that sounds like good advice.

Scott Morrison, you don’t hold a hose and you don’t wear a wig. Whether it’s fire-fighting or lawyering, listen to the experts.
_______________________________________
Now at 7,500 signatures, thank you!  Let's get to 10,000! Please share the petition change.org/christianporter

And follow us on social media:

facebook.com/auspolwatch
instagram.com/auspolwatch