Attorney-General George Brandis has taken another swipe at the nation's human rights chief, criticising a claim her commission is a check and balance on government.
He also rejected suggestions his remarks expressing a lack of confidence in Gillian Triggs amounted to character assassination.
The government's row with the Australian Human Rights Commission president shows no sign of letting up, despite internal concerns it has become a distraction from more important issues.
Senator Brandis took it a step further on Friday when he described as "inappropriate" remarks Professor Triggs made to a Senate hearing earlier in the week.
The commission provided a necessary, independent and respected check and balance on government to ensure "our democracy is a just one", she said.
Not so, Senator Brandis argued, saying the commission was a dispute resolution, inquiry and advocacy body.
This week's "furious debate" had been based on the false premise the commission was equivalent to a court with all the immunities from public scrutiny and political criticism that judges properly enjoy.
"It is absolutely critical to its credibility that it should have an unblemished reputation for freedom from political bias," Senator Brandis wrote in The Australian.
"Nobody could sensibly say the commission has that reputation today."
Senator Brandis described as "odd" how his reluctant criticism of Prof Triggs, tempered with acknowledgement of her reputation as an eminent international lawyer, was portrayed as a character assassination.
Yet the "substantially identical" remarks of his cabinet colleague Malcolm Turnbull were seen as a chivalrous defence.
Share
