Interview with Ms Anne Trimmer AO
In celebration of the Law Council of Australia’s 90th Anniversary, the Law Council is celebrating this significant milestone by highlighting its rich history and key achievements throughout the years. As part of this campaign, the Law Council had the privilege to interview a selection of past Presidents, gaining a unique perspective on their time in the role.
Reflecting on your time as Law Council President, what were the three key policy priorities within your term?
While I started my term as President with certain issues in mind, I found that the big policy issues were those that emerged during my term requiring a strong Law Council response.
While president-elect I had commenced a major project within the Law Council to look at the challenges for the legal profession 10 years head, in 2010. One challenge was the way in which technology would be used to sweep up areas of practice that lent themselves to commodification – a development that is now ubiquitous within the profession. Another focus of the project was the challenge to retain women within the profession – challenge that continues.
Among the issues that emerged during my term was the delay in referral of powers by the governments of the Australian states to the Commonwealth Government to solidify Australia’s corporate law regime. This was a significant concern for Australian business. The states were concerned that the referral would be used by the Commonwealth to extend its control in areas such as industrial relations and environmental regulation. Business leaders were looking for long-term certainty so a state could not unilaterally amend the Corporations Law or withdraw the referral of powers. In the end sense prevailed, with the Corporations Act passing in 2001, with a commencement date of 15 July 2001. That legislation continues to be the primary statutory vehicle to regulate business entities in Australia, albeit with many subsequent amendments.
Another policy area that had also concerned some of my predecessor Presidents was that of Indigenous justice. In March 2001, the Law Council established an advisory committee on Indigenous legal issues looking at mandatory sentencing, a treaty, customary law, and increasing the number of Indigenous people entering the legal profession. Regrettably little has improved to address mandatory sentencing with continuing high levels of Indigenous incarceration.
Towards the end of my term Australia was forced to consider its immigration policy with the mandatory detention of ‘unauthorised arrivals’. The Law Council had always opposed mandatory detention, a practice that was questionable in the context of Australia’s obligations under the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and the Convention on the Rights of the Child. The issue came to a head with the so-called Tampa crisis, when more than 400 refugees were intercepted on the high seas and rescued from a sinking boat by the Norwegian ship, MV Tampa. Under the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention, states are bound to render assistance to a ship or its passengers in serious danger. Once the ship entered Australian waters, the primary responsibility to offer assistance lay with Australia. The rescued passengers indicated that they wished to apply for asylum. Notwithstanding this, they were removed from the MV Tampa by SAS troops, an action later upheld by the Full Court of the Federal Court which held that the asylum seekers had not been inappropriately detained. The Law Council described as ‘draconian’ the package of refugee legislation which subsequently validated the government’s actions over the Tampa and banned court actions.
What was your most memorable Law Council moment and why?
There were many very memorable moments that stay with me for different reasons. It was an extraordinary period with my term traversing the start of a new millennium, 2000-2001.
One of the most memorable was the First International Women Lawyers Conference, held in London in February 2001. The conference was organised by the International Bar Association, at that time led by Diana Kempe. More than 900 women lawyers from 90 countries participated. In the lead-in to the conference Diana Kempe convened a Bar Leaders Meeting involving the women presidents of some 20 other bar associations and law societies. A highlight was an invitation by Cherie Booth, a senior barrister and wife of the UK Prime Minister Tony Blair, to a small reception at 10 Downing Street. A very memorable occasion.
A second memorable moment was attending a commemorative meeting, called ‘A Nation United’, convened by the Commonwealth and Victorian governments to celebrate the centenary of the first sitting of the Australian Parliament. The event was held in the Royal Exhibition Building in Melbourne on 9 May 2001, one hundred years after, and in the same venue, as the original sitting.
A third event, memorable for other reasons, was the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center on the morning of 9 September 2001. As President of Law Council, I wrote on behalf of the Australian legal profession to Robert Hirshon, the President of the American Bar Association, expressing support and condolences. In his reply to me Robert commented that “[t]he shocking events of this past week underscore the frailty of human life and the precariousness of open democratic societies. Yet as lawyers, we know that despite our vulnerability to terrorism, the rule of law is our strongest weapon in the battle against anarchy and human destruction. As special guardians of the law, we must not allow this evil to undermine our democracy, which remains the beacon of hope to all who are oppressed.”
What do you believe was your greatest achievement as Law Council President and why?
The first major political issue that I had to deal with immediately following my election was the proposed establishment of a new Administrative Review Tribunal (ART), expected to commence on 1 July 2001. The ART amalgamated four other tribunals – the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, the Social Security Appeals Tribunal, the Migration Review Tribunal and the Refugee Review Tribunal. The Law Council had three primary concerns: the removal of the automatic right of a citizen or company to be represented by a lawyer before the tribunal; the impact of ministerial directions; and the inflexibility of single-member tribunals. A further concern was that the tribunal’s president and members were not required to be legally qualified. While the Law Council was successful in defeating the legislation, a similar regime was introduced by conservative governments more recently.
A second major achievement was the successful campaign by the Law Council to have the Commonwealth Government relax dual citizenship laws. The Law Council argued that if Australia was to remain internationally competitive, then quick action was needed to permit Australians to hold dual citizenship. Under the laws then in place, an Australian was required to give up their Australian citizenship if they wanted to continue living and working in a foreign country. Or, they could retain their Australian citizenship and be treated as a foreign alien. The campaign was successful with many young professionals (including many lawyers) able to live and work overseas for long periods without having to give up Australian citizenship.
Based on your unique perspective as a Law Council President, how has the role of the Law Council been important over the last 90 years and how is the role relevant today?
The Law Council has taken a lead role in ongoing advocacy to uphold the rule of law in Australia and elsewhere. It has often been the only voice in giving support to those who are otherwise unheard, and to hold governments to account for their actions. There is a ‘social trustee’ element to the profession of lawyer which the Law Council reinforces and articulates. While the social and political issues of the day may vary, this to me is the most important role of the Law Council.
Ms Anne Trimmer AO
Biography
After graduating from the Australian National University, Anne Trimmer practised law in Canberra and in Sydney as a commercial lawyer focusing on corporate governance and technology contracting. She was a partner of several firms, including Minter Ellison from which she resigned as a partner in 2006 to take up a career in the private sector. After leaving legal practice, Anne spent seven years as the CEO of the Medical Technology Association of Australia, an industry body engaged in the promotion of public policies to support medical technology, and to develop an effective Australian medical technology sector. In 2013 Anne was appointed the Secretary General of the Australian Medical Association, the peak body representing Australia’s doctors. Anne served five years in this role, participating in many challenging policy issues on behalf of Australia’s medical profession. Anne was elected the first female president of the Law Society of the ACT in 1995 and, during her second term in 1996, was elected to the executive of the Law Council of Australia, becoming the second female president in 2000. Since completing her term as Secretary General of the AMA, Anne has continued to hold board roles in the health sector. She is a Foundation Fellow of the Australian Academy of Law, and a Fellow of the Australian Institute of Company Directors.
Last Updated on 28/02/2024