Photograph: Joel Carrett/AAP
The University of Sydney is reviewing its association with Dyson Heydon as three women prepare to pursue the former high court justice for compensation over harassment allegations.
Heydon has held the title of emeritus professor at University of Sydney for some time. But the university told the Guardian on Tuesday that it was now “reviewing his appointment to that title in consultation with the Dean of our Law School”.
“Professor Heydon was last employed by the University in 1981. He has no on-going employment relationship with us,” a spokeswoman said.
“As is the case with many retired members of staff, he was appointed an Emeritus Professor some time ago. It is not an employment relationship and does not involve any remuneration.”
The university’s law school dean, Professor Simon Bronitt, expressed solidarity and support for the women who have come forward.
“I wish to commend the courage of our alumna, Chelsea Tabart, one of our best and brightest students, and other female associates, in righting these wrongs – they no longer need suffer in silence,” Bronitt said.
“The failure of many institutions in our community to prevent this type of abuse, to provide real remedies for those affected, and to prevent re-victimisation by the legal process itself, must be addressed. The rule of law means, at its core, that no-one, however high and powerful in their office, is above the law.”
Earlier on Tuesday, Maurice Blackburn said it had been instructed to seek compensation from Heydon from three of his former associates, whose allegations of harassment were upheld by an independent investigation commissioned by the high court. Heydon denies the allegations.
Lawyer Josh Bornstein said compensation would be sought from the commonwealth, which had already indicated its willingness to negotiate and resolve the matter quickly, and from Heydon.
“My clients, when they commenced work at the high court, were the best and brightest graduates of law schools from around Australia,” Bornstein said. “They were young women in their first job in the legal profession.
“To their horror, they are sexually harassed by a judge of the high court. In a number of cases, the effect of that experience led to decisions to abandon pursuing a career in law, and profound disillusionment with the law.”
If Heydon did not negotiate, the complaint would be taken to the Australian Human Rights Commission, Bornstein said. The commission had discretion on whether it investigated complaints of conduct more than six months old, and if it refused to accept the matter, it could pose a barrier to further federal court action.
Bornstein rejected criticisms of the independent investigation process and flatly rejected suggestions that no complaint had been made about Heydon’s behaviour at the time he served on the high court bench.
Separately on Tuesday, ACT policing also told the Guardian it was aware of “media reports about an independent report commissioned by the high court into alleged sexual harassment”, but could not comment on “whether an individual is under investigation or not”.
Earlier on Tuesday, Scott Morrison described the allegations against Heydon as “very disturbing and very concerning”. But the prime minister stopped short of calling for him to be stripped of Australia’s highest honour, saying it was “not appropriate to presuppose” the proper process.
That followed questions from former Labor leader Bill Shorten about whether Heydon should remain a companion of the order of Australia.
Heydon has also been the subject of a separate Sydney Morning Herald investigation, which named two of the associates – Rachael Patterson Collins and Chelsea Tabart – and alleged harassment of a leading female member of the New South Wales bar, a judge, a student at Oxford University, and the former ACT Law Society president Noor Blumer.
Morrison, when asked whether Heydon should be stripped of the honour, said there were formal processes that must be followed “where those allegations have been upheld”.
“It’s not appropriate to presuppose those processes,” he said. “That’s not the way these things should be handled. There should be a proper process to deal with this. There will be. They’re very serious allegations. They’re very concerning. And very disturbing. And on that basis, I would expect those processes to do their job.”
Shorten earlier questioned how Heydon could keep the honour.
“If you believe the women, this guy was using his job in a very predatory fashion. How does he keep the highest honour in Australia?” he told Channel Nine.
The high court on Monday issued an extraordinary statement saying it was made aware of allegations against Heydon last year and set up an independent investigation led by a former inspector general of intelligence and security, Vivienne Thom.
Thom found Heydon had harassed the six associates and she made six recommendations for reform at the court, all of which are being adopted.
In a statement denying the allegations, Heydon’s lawyers said the investigation was administrative in nature and had no investigative powers or legal standing.
‘‘The inquiry was an internal administrative inquiry and was conducted by a public servant and not by a lawyer, judge or a tribunal member,” the firm Speed and Stracey said in a statement. “It was conducted without having statutory powers of investigation and of administering affirmations or oaths.”
Sexual harassment within the legal profession has been the subject of successive reports in recent years. A global survey by the International Bar Association last year found one in three female respondents were sexually harassed, and a Women Lawyers Association ACT survey found 57% of women in the territory were harassed while at work.
In 2014, the Law Society’s national attrition and re-engagement study found one in four had experienced sexual harassment in their workplace.
The shadow attorney general Mark Dreyfus, a former barrister, said the problem was long-standing.
“It’s still going on. We need to do more,” he told the ABC on Tuesday. “We need to take the opportunity that’s presented by this report, by the response, the magnificent response of the chief justice of the high court of Australia, who says that it’s a matter of shame for the court. She’s apologised to the women.”
The sex discrimination commissioner, Kate Jenkins, said no industry was immune to the problem. She said the current gender balance in the high court made it much more likely it would properly deal with such complaints.
“It probably makes the most difference. I think it is absolutely no coincidence that this is a high court that for the first time has gender balance, has three women and the chief justice is a woman,” Jenkins said.
“For sexual harassment across the board, if people come forward, gender balanced leadership teams are the best environments for reduced sexual harassment but also the best place where people’s complaints are taken on face value and acted upon.”
