Do as I say, not as I do, in Government legal services

The recent Kim Dotcom litigation and the so-called ‘tea tapes’ saga paint a disturbing picture of National's conduct of Government legal services, says Labour’s shadow Attorney-General Charles Chauvel.

“We’ve now had formal confirmation from the Government that it won’t pursue Bradley Ambrose for more than $14,000 worth of legal costs arising out of the civil part of the tea tapes litigation. 

“As Parliament's Hansard shows, I predicted that this would happen on 28 March when I asked the Attorney-General during question time: ‘Has the Crown agreed as part of the withdrawal of the Prime Minister’s criminal complaint against Mr Ambrose, or otherwise, not to pursue all or any of the costs of defending the declaratory judgment application that Mr Ambrose filed in the High Court last year?’

“The Attorney-General refused to give a straight answer to that question, yet it seemed clear to many in the legal community that this was precisely the deal that was likely to have been done some 6 weeks ago. 

“John Key should never have laid the tea tapes complaint in the first place.  It put impossible pressure on police.  And ultimately, as was universally predicted, it was a waste of scarce police time, and of Crown Law resources.

“Worse, Mr Ambrose should never have been put in the position where he felt it necessary to bring civil proceedings to defend his position.  Now, the cost of the Government's intervention in those proceedings will be an added dead weight on taxpayers.

“Still worse, we now hear from Kim Dotcom's lawyers that he is considering his own civil case against the Government.  This follows on from the High Court's finding that the original warrant issued to seize Mr Dotcom's property was invalid, as it was applied for without notice to Mr Dotcom. 

“All this comes against growing disquiet as to the propriety of the proceedings against Mr Dotcom, including whether the application to extradite him can even succeed, and the level of police and prosecutorial resource that has been devoted to the case.

“It will be highly embarrassing to the Government if the Dotcom litigation collapses in a manner similar to the tea tapes case.  It will be a nightmare if Mr Dotcom recovers damages against the crown for not having conducted itself correctly in the litigation.

“Politicians should not decide who should be the object of criminal proceedings, and should be slow to involve themselves in civil ones.  But it's hard to avoid the impression that more, not less, independent decision-making from crown lawyers in each of these two cases would have been advantageous.  And, once decisions about whether to proceed have been reached, a good deal more accountability for the effective conduct of cases seems warranted.

“The Government cannot swing the axe in some areas of the legal budget - like legal assistance for ordinary Kiwis who can't afford their own defence in court - unless it is prepared to run its own legal services transparently and effectively,” said Charles Chauvel.