Zhu Minshen's "very unique" Australian law school will be subject to China's HK security law: NSW LPAB Chairman Tom Bathurst, Law Council Australia still silent about their dealings with Zhu, his Top Group and his Sydney City School Of Law despite obvious undermining of Australian standards of legal education and practise

by Ganesh Sahathevan

My law school is also very unique. There is only one law school in private universities across Australia-Zhu Minshen speaking in China https://new.qq.com/omn/20180625/20180625A0F60L.html…

The Law of the People's Republic of China on Safeguarding National Security in HKSAR,states,among other things: 

Article 37 This Law shall apply to a person who is a permanent resident of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region or an incorporated or unincorporated body such as a company or an organisation which is set up in the Region if the person or the body commits an offence under this Law outside the Region.


Article 38 This Law shall apply to offences under this Law committed against the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region from outside the Region by a person who is not a permanent resident of the Region.

Note that Article 37 of The Law does not say "incorporated" but rather "set up" in the SAR. Even if the Mr Bathurst (who was once this Australia's leading commercial silks) and the Law Council Of Australia feel they can formulate words that can exempt Zhu Misnhen's Top Education Group and its Sydney City School Of Law from the operation of The Law, they would be naive to think that their formulation is going to mean anything in China.

In any event, Article 38 provides for the application of The Law to persons who are not permanent residents. 

Australian law schools have had a reputation for fearless examination of laws anywhere. Similarly Australian societies of lawyers, including the Law Council Of Australia and the Australian Bar Association have been free in their criticism of foreign governments. The matter of Zhu Minshen's Top/Sydney City School Of Law will change all that for two reasons.

First, an Australian law school, its students and lecturers can be subject to prosecution pursuant to a foreign security law.

Second, enforcement, either directly or indirectly, can be affected given Top's HK listing. Indirect enforcement can include pressure of Zhu and his associate to impose sanctions against students and lecturers who have angered the Chinese Government or the Chinese Communist Party. 

TO BE READ WITH 

China-HK protest on Australian campuses but not at Minshen Zhu controlled campuses-Are legal profession admission rules being used (again ) to suppress complaints and protests

NSW's First Law Officer AG Mark Speakman, is also Minister for the Prevention of Domestic Violence but is silent about mistreatment of women within the legal profession

by Ganesh Sahathevan

                                                   AG Mark Speakman is considered
                                                   a future premier of NSW

NSW Attorney General Mark Speakman is also Minister for the Prevention of Domestic Violence. One has only to look at his Twitter account to see that violence against women is uppermost in his mind. 


In his latest Tweet he reminds, and exhorts us:
There’ve been 6 #domesticviolence deaths in NSW in 8 weeks. Imagine if these were one punch attacks? Or terrorist attacks? Awful incidents all - but I’m confident we’d be speaking about it more. These lives matter. Today we’re asking, if you hear or see #DV call

@nswpolice now.

He is a great believer in the power of investigative journalism:

Mark Speakman

@MarkSpeakman

Great loss for journalism:

@joanne2mccarthy

at

@newcastleherald

played no small part in exposing hideous child sexual abuse in organisations where kids should have been safe, which led to NSW Special Commission + indeed the Child Abuse Royal Commission

It's goodbye from me

After 40 years in journalism, Joanne McCarthy is leaving the newsroom

It is therefore incomprehensible that Speakman, being First Law Officer NSW, has had nothing to say about the Dyson Heydon investigation by Kate McClymont and Jacqueline Maley. He should have in fact, given the above, ordered an immediate inquiry into sexual harassment by NSW judicial officers.As reported on this blog, instances of sexual harassment are also instances of threatening anfdintimidating behaviour, which is much easier to prove.

TO BE READ WITH 

Dyson Heydon: Why did CJ Bathurst, AG Speakman not treat sexual harassment complaints as instances of threatening and intimidating behaviour, which is far easier to prove, and can lead to judicial officers involved being disbarred, removed, otherwise penalised

Dyson Heydon: Why did CJ Bathurst, AG Speakman not treat sexual harassment complaints as instances of threatening and intimidating behaviour, which is far easier to prove, and can lead to judicial officers involved being disbarred, removed, otherwise penalised

by Ganesh Sahathevan

Elizabeth Lee MLA

@ElizabethLeeCBR

It is not easy to speak up. It is also not easy to stay silent. But I would much rather speak up now - seven years later - than not at all, and do my small part to encourage others to stand with me

Why speaking up about sexual harassment is so hard to do

While it's easy for those on the sidelines to cry "why didn't you speak up?", there are many complex reasons why so many of us do not.

Elizabeth Lee's story is clearly one of threat and intimidation


The Australian's Nicola Berkovic reported on  JUNE 27, 2020:
........a NSW Supreme Court judge was told (that former High Court judge Dyson) Heydon had made unwanted advances towards one of its young female employees two years ago but did not take any action Dhanya Mani, 26, was working as a tipstaff to NSW Supreme Court judge Guy Parker in 2018 when she told him about alleged harassment by Heydon.

Parker informed NSW Chief Justice Tom Bathurst only this week of Mani’s allegations.

The court says Mani did not ask Parker to take the matter any further, but she told The Australian that she had hoped when she raised the matter he would do something about it.

Bathurst has now asked the state’s judicial commission to prepare an education program for judges on what to do if an allegation is made. The court says judges were not previously trained on the issue because it was generally expected they would have been educated in their previous careers.

Mr Bathurst, and the Attorney General Mark Speakman SC, have the option of treating complaints of  sexual harassment as complaints  of threatening and intimidating behaviour, which is far easier to prove, and thus less of a strain on complainants. Mr Bathurst, AG Speakman, and the NSW LPAB which Bathurst chairs and Speakman oversees, have found threatening and intimidating behaviour to be evidence that a person is not fit and proper for admission to practise.  A finding of threatening and intimidating behaviour can therefore be relied on to disbar, remove or otherwise publicly sanction any judicial officer. 

The  threshold for what constitutes threatening and intimidating behaviour is quite low; for example a PLT student questioning the qualifications and experience of his or her instructors, who are senior judicial officers, can constitute threatening and intimidating behaviour, regardless of the evidence against the instructors.

Additionally, reporting a senior lawyer to the NSW LPAB and its chairman, the Chief Justice, can be construed as threatening and intimidating behaviour against all concerned. Similarly communicating such matters to journalists  can be considered threatening and intimidating, despite the decision of the NSW Supreme Court in Carlovers Carwash,which concerns journalists, but which has implications for whistleblowers as well.

Clearly, if a senior judicial officer can be considered to be threatened and intimidated by the complaints of a PLT student, so can a junior female lawyer who is the subject of unwelcome advances from a senior judicial officer.The case ACT MLA Elizabeth Lee demonstrates why such advances should be treated as cases of threatening and intimidating behaviour(see tweet above). 

That Mr Bathurst and AG Speakman do not see it open to them to immediately pursue all complaints of sexual harassment as matters of threatening and intimidating behaviour is hard to comprehend. 

 The Chief Justice's request that the "judicial commission... prepare an education program for judges on what to do if an allegation (of sexual harassment) is made" is unnecessary, at best. 

END