Wall St was down 94 overnight, its biggest fall in a month, while the local market is down 66.
Should Justice Reeves excuse himself from NT Intervention case?
|
Northern Territory-based Federal Court judge John Reeves is hearing a case against the Australian Crime Commission [ACC], despite the fact it involves actions against the ACC’s role in the Northern Territory Emergency Response. Reeves had a direct involvement in the implementation of the Intervention in the months leading to his judicial appointment, yet he has not taken the customary approach of excusing himself from hearing matters in which he has had such an involvement. The identity of the party involved has been surpressed at the order of the federal court. An NT source told Crikey that in the current case, certain organisations [NTD8 is the only name that appears on court papers for one] have taken the ACC to the Federal Court to prevent the ACC taking certain actions. The ACC has specific powers conferred to it under the Northern Territory Emergency response legislation to pursue child s — xual abuse activities. Crikey understands the plaintiffs in the current matters are arguing that the ACC is exceeding those powers. Reeves was a strong supporter of the Intervention — he was appointed by John Howard and Mal Brough to serve on the Task Force attached to the Intervention. Reeves reported on the Intervention to the Bennelong Society on 31 August last year as “A personal report from the field”, in which he endorsed the additional powers granted to the ACC. As Crikey reported exclusively last year (24 September 2007), Reeves’ appointment was regarded as unusual—and controversial:
Crikey then went on to note:
Not so, it appears, as the matters still remain before Reeves. Since that time, new Labor Attorney-General Robert McClelland has moved to advertising for expressions of interest for future vacancies on the Federal Court and Federal Magistrates’ Court. |
|
|
|













