Login
Struck-off lawyer holds fast to sensational corruption allegations
A former lawyer doubled down on the “scandalous and vexatious” allegations about the Chief Justice and other Supreme Court judges that saw him kicked out of the profession a year ago.
Naomi Neilson
In a decision handed down last January, Justice Claire Harris of the Victorian Supreme Court struck off Peter John Mericka from the roll for making a number of baseless and “extremely serious” allegations about judges of the court and other legal practitioners.
Instead of being deterred, Mericka continued to use his website to broadcast sensational allegations of corruption within Victoria’s Supreme Court, wage a campaign against former chief justice Warren, and defend the behaviour that saw him disciplined in the first place.
He also claims his striking off was the “latest example of corruption being laundered through the Victoria’s [sic] highest court”.
In a page recently shared with Lawyers Weekly, Mericka – who holds himself out as a “retired lawyer” on the site and on his social media – claimed his allegations of corruption have been “thwarted by those who were duty-bound to investigate and report”.
Apparently having decided to take the investigation into his own hands, Mericka shared lengthy “articles” about the allegations, a transcript of proceedings, and a “corruption timeline”. A credentials section also points to him being a “professional investigator”.
“It has been left to me, as both a victim of corruption and whistleblower, to gather and present evidence on which I base my accusation that former Chief Justice Marilyn Warren aided and abetted the covering up and laundering of corruption through the Supreme Court of Victoria,” Mericka wrote by way of introduction.
He added that as of 11 January this year, none of his so-called corruption complaints have been investigated.
On another page, also shared with Lawyers Weekly, Mericka detailed the apparent events that led up to the striking-off order. At the top of the page is a disclaimer that it is a “work in progress”, which Mericka intended to update “as my research and evidence-gathering allows”.
Several allegations were levelled against other practitioners and legal bodies, including the Law Institute of Victoria, which Mericka claimed forced him out of law because it regarded his so-called whistleblowing “as a threat to the legal profession generally”.
Mericka also claimed he was shunned by the institute’s president.
In last January’s judgment, the Victorian Legal Services Board said Mericka’s claims were made “without a proper basis” and demonstrated he was unable to “judge the ethical standards that his conduct must meet” as a legal practitioner.
Justice Harris also found Mericka’s allegations to be “quite plainly, unprofessional and discourteous”, and shared in connection with his legal practice on social media and on the website.
The judge added it was unlikely the allegations would end.
“Mericka has been sanctioned by the tribunal in disciplinary proceedings in 2014 and 2018. This has not, apparently, had any material effect on his conduct, given his continuing publication of scandalous and unfounded allegations up to the time immediately preceding the hearing of this application,” Justice Harris said.
“I consider that the evidence establishes that Mericka is likely to continue indefinitely to remain not a fit and proper person to practise as a lawyer.”
VLSB did not respond to a request for comment.
The January 2024 judgment is Victorian Legal Services Board v Mericka [2024] VSC 1 (12 January 2024)
Naomi Neilson
Naomi Neilson is a senior journalist with a focus on court reporting for Lawyers Weekly.
You can email Naomi at:
