Among the comments made by the Minister included that he was pleased that the new legislation will “not give any power for outlaw bikie gangs”.

“It does not give them any chance to drag this through court with injunctions and legal moves, adjournments, gathering of evidence, cross examination, questioning witnesses, going after people to suggest they are not fit to sit over a case, and vexatious claims that would drag this out for years and would only give the upper hand to the outlaw bikie gangs and their criminal defence lawyers,” Mr Ferguson said.

“It is a safe haven until this legislation passes … We already have advice that it is no longer five groups that are currently here that meet the criteria. There is another one setting up, right now in our state – criminal organisation number six.

“You have had the advice. If you do not like taking the medicine, why do you not start siding with the victims of crime in our state, the people who have been harassed and intimidated, robbed, raped and murdered? There are three people missing and I am sick and tired of hearing the Labor Party fighting for criminal defence lawyers’ preferred model, which is unworkable and plays only to their interests.

“Who do criminal defence lawyers represent? They represent criminals.”

In response, the Tassie legal body president, Mr Justo, criticised the Minister, calling the aforementioned comments in relation to criminal defence lawyers “without foundation, dishonourable and disgraceful”, adding that the Society condemns them.

“The Tasmanian Liberals beliefs include a belief in the rule of law,” Mr Justo’s letter read.

VIEW ALL

“The maintenance of the rule of law requires a strong and independent legal profession. That profession stands up to government overreach and represents the vulnerable, including those charged with criminal offences.

“It is often not a popular thing to do, but fairness demands that everyone, including those charged with a crime, be given a fair go. Unfortunately, your comments demonstrate that you have little idea or regard for such important principles.”

Mr Justo added that Mr Ferguson’s “disregard for the rule of law” is evident in his comments belittling the idea that the “adjournment, gathering of evidence, cross examination, questioning witnesses” might form part of a challenge to exercise power under the bill.

“Your comments on 30 August clearly infer that in engaging in debate on the bill, criminal defence lawyers put the interests of themselves and their OMCG clients first,” Mr Justo said.

“You clearly suggest that the interests of criminal defence lawyers and criminals are one and the same. Such a suggestion is profoundly wrong and profoundly disappointing.

“The job of a criminal defence lawyer is hard enough without a Minister of the Crown denigrating that group of professionals for simply doing their job and suggesting amendments to a piece of legislation in good faith and based on sound policy.”

Mr Justo clarified: “The Society is the peak representative body for the legal profession in Tasmania”.

“To be clear, the bill was not supported by the Society. It is plainly not the case that opposition to the bill was from criminal defence lawyers only.”

In conclusion, he noted that the Society will continue to strive to engage in debate concerning law reform in both a professional and respectful manner.

“On August 28 this year, responding to a motion that the Law Society of Tasmania’s annual report be considered and noted, the leader of the government in the Upper House acknowledged the valuable contribution of the Society to law reform process and described the Society as a key legal stakeholder with which the government routinely engaged,” Mr Justo added.

“Your comments make a mockery of those words. I call on you to apologise.”