People vs Lewenberg
All of the below information is otherwise available on the public domain
Alex Lewenberg, a veteran Melbourne criminal lawyer, became controversial due to comments he made in 2011 while representing David Cyprys, a convicted sex offender.
On two separate occasions—once during a bail hearing in court and once in a recorded phone call—Lewenberg told a Jewish victim that Jews “should not assist police against fellow Jew,” invoking the tradition of “moser” (informer) and warning against helping secular authorities prosecute someone of the same faith.
In March 2016, the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) found he was guilty of professional misconduct, stating his views “were truly shocking” and “antithetical to the principle of equality before the law.” Judge Pamela Jenkins criticized his promotion of religious solidarity over justice.
As a result, Lewenberg received a 15-month suspension from practicing law (starting June 1, 2016), was ordered to complete a legal ethics course, and had to pay over $55,000 in costs to the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner.
This was not his first disciplinary action—he’d previously faced a two-year suspension in 1989.
Lewenberg’s controversial stance stemmed from advising a child‐sex‐abuse victim not to aid prosecutors based on religious grounds, a position that clashed with legal ethics and led to significant professional penalties.
Alex Lewenberg’s comments were considered bad and controversial for several serious reasons, especially from both a legal and ethical standpoint:
________________________________________
1. Undermining the Rule of Law
Lewenberg told a victim not to assist the police in prosecuting a fellow Jew, citing a religious principle. This undermines equality before the law—a foundational principle in democratic societies.
The law is meant to apply to everyone equally, regardless of religion, ethnicity, or community ties. Telling someone to withhold cooperation because of shared religious identity goes against this principle.
________________________________________
2. Obstruction of Justice
By advising someone not to help police in a child sex abuse case, Lewenberg was encouraging obstruction of justice.
Cooperation from victims and witnesses is crucial in such cases, and discouraging it can allow abusers to avoid accountability.
________________________________________
3. Intimidation and Harm to Victims
Sexual abuse victims already face a difficult road in seeking justice. When a respected legal professional tells them they’re violating religious norms by reporting abuse, it adds shame, guilt, and fear, reinforcing the culture of silence that allows abuse to continue.
________________________________________
4. Breach of Professional Ethics
As a lawyer, Lewenberg had a duty to uphold the law and act with integrity. The Victorian tribunal said his comments were “truly shocking” and incompatible with his obligations as an officer of the court. Encouraging someone not to testify violates legal ethics.