Police, DPP rift over Bruce Lehrmann case must be resolved

It is clearly apparent the relationship between the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions and the AFP is now so toxic as to appear to be beyond repair.

That has to have significant ramifications for the administration of justice, and the preservation of law and order, in this jurisdiction.

While Attorney-General Shane Rattenbury repeatedly claimed relations were in good shape early on in the piece, that is clearly not the case.

Mr Drumgold's rejection of the Moller report as "akin to somebody just offering gratuitous, stereotyping assessments of credibility" speaks volumes about his opinion of the officers involved.

Other evidence presented to the inquiry has already made it clear that the feeling is mutual.

While it is essential for all the parties concerned that the inquiry chair, Walter Sofronoff KC, finds out just how such a high profile and politicised case was so badly managed and eventually abandoned, questions also need to be asked about what appears to have been undisguised hostility between the DPP and the AFP.

One could reasonably assume, given the nature of communications from the start of the case, that this hostility predated the accusations against Mr Lehrmann. They were not necessarily the result of them.

How long have these two agencies, both of which are fundamental to the administration of justice in the ACT, actually been at loggerheads?

Is this a relatively recent phenomenon or is it a cultural failing that has evolved over a long span of time?

While it is inevitable, given their respective roles, that there will always be disagreements between the DPP and the police over individual cases, it is hard to recall another matter in which relations became so acrimonious confidential documents were leaked to the press and senior law officers had their competence publicly questioned.

An obvious irony in this case is that it was the police who argued the matter should not be proceeded with because they did not have confidence in the strength of their case, while the DPP seemingly wanted to prosecute come what may. In the movies it is usually the other way around.

READ MORE:

This appears to have resulted in a situation where the police may have formed too close an association with Mr Lehrmann's legal team on the one hand, and Mr Drumgold may have lacked sufficient objectivity towards Ms Higgins on the other.

An unbiased onlooker, if one could be found given the depth of emotion this case has aroused, could be forgiven for concluding that Ms Higgins and Mr Lehrmann inadvertently became pawns in an ongoing conflict between two law agencies.

One thing is very certain. Both of them have been denied the justice that every resident of the ACT is entitled to expect from our courts.

Ms Higgins will now never have an opportunity to have her claims vindicated and Mr Lehrmann will never get the chance to clear his name.

That is not only a tragedy for them, it is also a grievous blow to the whole community.

The Attorney-General, who presides over both the DPP and the AFP, has to clean this mess up as a matter of urgency.

The two agencies should be fighting crime, not each other.