NSW chief justice says Tony Abbott’s criticism of Harbour Bridge march judge ‘misconceived and ignorant’ | Australian law

The chief justice of New South Wales has criticized former prime minister Tony Abbott for what he described as a regrettable, misunderstood and ignorant attack on a judge’s ruling on last year’s pro-Palestinian Sydney Harbor Bridge march.

Speaking on Thursday evening, Andrew Bell said Abbott’s post about X in August last year threatened social cohesion.

Abbott commented on the NSW supreme court decision ahead of the Gaza harbor bridge march, which was attended by an estimated 225,000 to 300,000 people.

The former Liberal leader stated that “it should not be up to judges to decide whether a political protest is justified.”

_{Sign up: AÜ Breaking News email}

“The decision to close the Sydney Harbor Bridge to facilitate this protest is a political decision and should be made by elected and responsible ministers who feel the march should not go ahead,” Abbott wrote at the time.

“We are on slippery slopes when unelected judges start making political decisions.”

Bell said in a speech at a dinner to mark the opening of the legal term on Thursday that Abbott had shared “regrettably” about justice Belinda Rigg’s decision. He said the comment about X was “misunderstood”.

The chief judge told diners: “The judge’s decision was not a decision about ‘whether a political protest is justified as an understanding of the legal framework and case law set out in the judge’s reasons will be available to anyone who takes the time to read it.'”

“The judge did not make the ‘order to close the Sydney Harbor Bridge.'” The authorities had already made the decision to close the harbor bridge in any case, that is, regardless of the judge’s decision, which was recorded twice in the decision and was influential in the final decision.

“Responsibility for the decision that is the subject of criticism is a responsibility expressly assigned to the court by the legislature, not an unwarranted assumption of power by an ‘unelected judge’.”

Bell concluded that Rigg’s decision “was not a ‘political’ decision, but involved careful weighing of the common law and the constitutionally protected right of free speech and public assembly.”

He added that the subsequent appeals court decision, which he presided over and which blocked the march to the Opera House, was not a “political decision” but involved a similar weighing exercise.

Earlier in his speech on Thursday, Bell criticized other “simple but often deeply personal criticisms” in the press and on social media of some judges who granted bail even though the prisoner later reoffended.

“While judicial decisions on matters such as bail and public hearings should not be immune from scrutiny or criticism where warranted, the social cohesion to which I have already referred is not enhanced when judicial decisions are attacked on grounds and in terms that reveal ignorance of the legal framework of the decision and, in many cases, ignorance of the judge’s reasoning process and the evidence before the court in which the decision was made,” Bell said.

“Such attacks, which often stop ‘suddenly’, are a form of misinformation that undermines trust and respect for the judiciary and the rule of law.”

The chief justice added: “In this context, I must note that two judges of the supreme court, who have been subject to highly personalized and misunderstood criticism in some sections of the media for certain decisions, have received death threats in the last 18 months. This is clearly a cause for serious concern.”

Abbott has been contacted for comment.