Prominent Malthusian up-in-arms about Tasmania adopting the uniform bar rules … Tasmanian rules should be the national model … Infliction of an interstate monstrosity … “Sydney view of the legal world” … Much to recommend Chinese criminal justice … Push for special general meeting of the bar … Latest from The Map   

LEADING light of the Van Diemen’s bar, Andrew Abbott SC, is never far from our thoughts.  

While TasBar is getting to grips with the introduction of a slightly modified version of the uniform barristers’ rules, as they apply in NSW and Victoria, Abbo is out of the blocks pressing for a special general meeting of Tas Bar Inc to consider the following resolution:  

“That bar council is ordered not to make new rules in the terms notified to the profession by email of Friday 29 July 2016 or in any terms without the prior authority of a general meeting.”  

The proposed new rules are an “interstate monstrosity” and Abbott says that instead of inflicting them on Taswegian barristers, the Tasmanian rules should be the national model. 

“We are to be enslaved to a national model for the sake of it, despite there being material differences.” 

According to the outspoken member of Malthouse Chambers the new rules will only promote the interests of barristers who do not have enough to do because busy briefs (like him) will need to spend “considerable time” to work out what the rules mean.  

Also, interstate barristers will benefit as they are likely to “take advantage of their superior knowledge of the proposed rules … to the detriment of local practitioners”.  

“As a general proposition, the rules reflect the Sydney view of the legal world rather than any reasonable view of the legal world.”  

He thinks rule 8(c), about conduct likely to diminish public confidence in the legal profession, is too wide. The conduct of lawyers acting for an “incorrigible murderer” in an appeal “is likely to be viewed by a strong majority of the public with great disapprobation”.  

He thought it was right that it was in the public interest this accused had been refused legal aid.  

Abbott gave an example of a Victorian case where a parolee killed a young girl and then raped another women because “he knew he was going to jail for a long time”. 

Abbott said there “is no doubt at all about his guilt”.  

“In all probability he will receive every further indulgence, including legal representation at the expense of the taxpayer; the case speaks volumes in favour of the Chinese criminal justice system.”  

(Emphasis from Abbo himself.)  

He thinks Rule 10, using professional qualifications for the advancement of other activities, is “ridiculous and pernicious”. He adds that in NSW a barristers’ committee has been formed, “which apparently intends to get in league with PETA [People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals] and diverse other anti-hunting groups”.  

“As a hunter I have no objection to that – it is a political issue – but I will stand hard against them.” 

He says that in any ensuing debate, barristers should be able to parade their qualifications.  

See an earlier report about Abbott’s spirited campaign for the right to shoot wildlife from his Porsche Cayenne while driving around the Kingston Beach golf course.  

As for the special general meeting to roll the bar executive, it doesn’t look at though Abbo has the numbers.