A politician's duty to act in the public interest is not a matter of law but of conscience, "like a duty to be nice to your mum", a barrister for jailed former NSW MP Eddie Obeid says.
Obeid was sentenced to at least three years in December after being found guilty of lobbying a senior public servant in 2007 about lucrative Circular Quay leases without revealing his family's stake in the outlets.
But he is appealing his conviction and sentence in a three-day hearing before five NSW Supreme Court justices, with the 73-year-old appearing in a green prison jumper via video link on Monday.
His barrister Guy Reynolds SC said the jury in Obeid's trial was told it was his duty as a politician to act solely in the public interest and not use his position to promote his own pecuniary interests.
But Mr Reynolds said the judge could only have given that direction if it was a matter of law, when it was instead "a mere matter of conscience" or "a duty of imperfect obligation" that was judged by voters.
"It's like a duty to be nice to your mum, if you like," he said.
"You breach a duty or an obligation of this kind at your peril if you're an MP because you run the risk that you will or your party will lose at the ballot box."
Obeid's legal team is appealing on 13 grounds, with Mr Reynolds also saying the issues in his client's case were within the "exclusive cognisance" of parliament and should not have been determined in court.
Another of Obeid's barristers, Garry Rich SC, argued he suffered a miscarriage of justice when his trial lawyers failed to adduce particular evidence.
Mr Rich said the defence should have led evidence that a Circular Quay tenant spoke to Obeid about problems with his landlord and asked for the MP's help before the Obeid family owned leases.
He described it as "significant evidence on intent" that showed Obeid had a personal connection and involvement with tenants at Circular Quay over many years.
"That evidence, if led at trial, would have meant the jury wasn't likely to be satisfied that the only inference they could draw was Mr Obeid was actuated by an improper purpose," he said.
But Crown barrister Peter Neil SC said the man who spoke with Obeid was not a tenant of the state maritime authority, which was the government agency relevant to the case.
The hearing continues.
Share
