A long-serving former solicitor-general has launched a withering assessment of Attorney-General George Brandis' relationship with the nation's second law officer.

Key points: Former solicitor-general criticises Brandis' decision to restrict how Gleeson gives advice

Former solicitor-general criticises Brandis' decision to restrict how Gleeson gives advice Griffith said it brought the image of "a dog on a lead" to mind

Griffith said it brought the image of "a dog on a lead" to mind Brandis maintains it is a formality and does not limit independence

Brandis maintains it is a formality and does not limit independence Turnbull expresses his confidence in both Brandis and Gleeson

Gavan Griffith QC was solicitor-general from 1984 to 1997, under the Hawke, Keating and Howard governments.

In a submission to a Senate inquiry, he has examined a decision by Senator Brandis QC to restrict how the current solicitor-general Justin Gleeson SC gives advice.

Senator Brandis said the legal direction was something of a formality, and merely meant his office must be approached first, before the solicitor-general can provide his expert legal opinion to the Government and public servants.

Mr Griffith said it was an example of a significant breakdown in the personal working relationship between Senator Brandis and Mr Gleeson.

"The image of a dog on a lead comes to mind," Mr Griffith wrote.

"No doubt that for future appointments a counsel will be found to accept a shackled office, but at a reduced level of competence and performance, from counsel unlikely and unprepared to say no to those who call for partial rather than dispassionate impartial advice.

"It is not so much paying peanuts and getting monkeys, as the salary has never been an inducement.

"However, the result will be the demeaning of the office to the equivalent of attracting monkeys."

When contacted for comment, Senator Brandis’ office referred the ABC back to his original submission to the Senate inquiry.

He maintained the legal direction did not "in any way limit the independence of the Solicitor-General".

Senator Brandis said that since the direction came into effect in May this year, there had been 10 requests made to his office for advice from the Solicitor-General.

"I have referred all 10 of them; in the majority of cases, I have done so on the very day that the request was received in my Office," Senator Brandis wrote in his submission.

"I am advised that my Office has recently received one additional request, which is currently being processed."

Turnbull expresses confidence in both men

Earlier in Question Time, Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull said he had confidence in both Senator Brandis and Mr Gleeson.

"Both the Attorney-General, the first law officer of the Crown, the solicitor-general, the second law officer, are distinguished barristers," Mr Turnbull said.

"I've had the benefit of their legal advice at different times and I have confidence in each of their legal capacity and ability and we are very fortunate to have the benefit of their advice."

Mr Griffith said the legislation creating the solicitor-general's office "might be better to be repealed, than the office demeaned to this level of deferential engagement and closet counsel provided for in the direction".

He said it brought political influence into play.

"If maintained, the explicit terms of the direction … signal more than the unfortunate breakdown in personal working relationships between the first and second law officer."

"Apart from being of uncertain effect and practically unworkable, if remaining implemented in its form or substance (whether valid or not) to establish a gateway through the A-G's political office to all opinion work, this direction will covert this great office — and I use the word 'great' advisedly — into one of 'closet counsel' within the A-G's political office."

Mr Griffith's wide-ranging submission also examined the legality of making the direction, arguing it relied on a mistaken understanding of key legislation.

Loading...