The ACT's Attorney-General has defended the government paying the legal costs for the head of the Education Directorate in a case against the Integrity Commission.
Shane Rattenbury has also revealed he declined to intervene in the matter, saying the territory government had nothing to add.
Education Directorate director-general Katy Haire launched a legal bid against the ACT Integrity Commission and integrity commissioner Michael Adams KC seeking to stop an investigation by reason of an alleged apprehended bias.
The watchdog is examining decisions made during the procurement to construct an expansion of Campbell Primary School.
The government is paying Ms Haire's legal fees in the Supreme Court matter.
An ACT government spokesman said she was entitled to seek assistance and the government could provide this under the Law Officers Legal Services Directions 2023.
Under the direction, an employee who is the subject of a legal claim out of the course of the performance of their duties can receive assistance.
However, the direction said assistance is generally not provided to an employee if they are "defending professional or personal disciplinary investigation or action".
Opposition Leader Elizabeth Lee said the direction was for employees who were defending matters in the course of their employment, not commencing a case. She said the government needed to be upfront about why they were footing the bill.
"Who approved the payment of the legal fees for this Supreme Court application and what were the reasons," she said.
"And having agreed to pay the legal fees, does the ACT government support this Supreme Court application seeking to shut down the Integrity Commission investigation."
Mr Rattenbury said it was appropriate for the territory to cover the legal costs as Ms Haire did not initiate the integrity investigation.
"The particular action Ms Haire was taking, she was not initiating the action in the sense that it is part of the discussion of the process of how the Integrity Commission [was conducting] the investigation that was happening," he said.
"It's quite different, I think, to, for example, initiating a defamation case against somebody because of comments they made and this is very much within the conduct of the proceedings that are underway."
The government is not involved in the legal proceedings and a spokesman said they were unaware of the status of the proceedings.
Court documents show the ACT Attorney-General was given the opportunity to intervene in the matter on behalf of the ACT government.
An intervention would be in the role as a "friend of the court" to provide legal advice. The government would not have been a party of the litigation.
Mr Rattenbury was informed of Ms Haire's court action on September 4, 2023. He was given one week to respond to the court but he decided against the intervention after seeking advice from the Solicitor-General.
"The decision I took was there was no particular role for the ACT government," he said.
"The ACT Integrity Commission itself was quite capable of running the matter and making the points that needed to be made. There was no need for the ACT government to add further information."
Mr Rattenbury said he did not inform Education Minister Yvette Berry of the court case given she was a witness in the integrity investigation.
However, he said he did tell Chief Minister Andrew Barr. A spokeswoman for Mr Barr confirmed he did not inform Ms Berry of the case.
Ms Berry said on Tuesday she only became aware of the matter when it was reported in The Canberra Times.
Ms Lee said it was concerning Ms Berry had not been informed about the matter from her colleagues.
"Something appears very wrong with this Labor-Greens government when two senior members are aware of a serious court case between the head of the Education Directorate and the integrity commissioner but fail to alert the relevant minister," she said.
"The Attorney-General says he cannot disclose something as important as this to her because she is actively participating in the Integrity Commission investigation. What else has the Chief Minister and the Attorney-General kept from Ms Berry?"
The commission is investigating whether education directorate officials failed to act honestly and/or impartially when making recommendations and decisions about an expansion of Campbell Primary School.
Ms Haire alleged there was an apprehended bias as her lawyers were initially refused the option to cross-examine a key witness, court documents show.
However, her lawyers were granted this opportunity in hearings in December. Despite this, the legal action is continuing with a date set aside for November.
