Adjudication No. 319 (February 1987) [1987] APC 6

ADJUDICATION No. 319 (February 1987)

Ms Helen M Robinson and Mr Peter G Richards complain to the Press Council concerning the decision of The Age not to publish letters following its editorial opinion on Thursday, 23 October 1986, entitled "Lionel Murphy an unresolved tragedy". That editorial opinion was in the words of the editor "... an attempt - perhaps an unsuccessful attempt, but nevertheless a sincere one - to set Mr Justice Murphy's death in context. It is a matter of wide public knowledge that The Age published certain material which began the chain of events which led to certain parliamentary and legal enquiries into Mr Justice Murphy's conduct. The views expressed in that editorial are largely ones which we had expressed before. The editorial itself was published with considerable reluctance and only after public suggestions that this newspaper was somehow responsible for Mr Justice Murphy's tragic death."

The editorial concluded that it was right that Mr Justice Murphy be honoured generously for the good he did. The Age also published two feature articles on 22 and 23 October - "Triumphs and tempests'" by John Shauble and "Murphy's judgements shook the 'tax avoidance temple"' by Kenneth Davidson - which highly praised the work of the judge. However, the paper stated it was a tragedy that the unanswered questions which overshadowed his last years be smothered by perpetual silence. The Age's position was that, had the Government appointed an independent inquiry with full powers in the first place, and had Mr Justice Murphy answered the accusations candidly and completely, his name could well have been cleared long before his death.

Among the letters that The Age received were ones written by the complainants strongly criticising The Age. The editor has informed the Council that more critical letters were received, but that others were critical of the judge. He directed his letters editor to hold all letters discussing Mr Justice Murphy's death and earlier career because he considered it unfair, demeaning and rather sick to be conducting what he termed "a debate over his coffin". In doing this he had no apologies to make.

The editor clearly was in a difficult position. The newspaper by publishing what were to be generally referred to as "The Age tapes" had played an important role in the subsequent events surrounding the career of the judge. The editor felt himself under an obligation to restate the newspaper's position. However, it is understandable that during the period of mourning, the public debate should be suspended. The Press Council does not believe that The Age, in suspending further publication, acted improperly. The complaint is dismissed.