- 2 days ago
In this powerful and deeply personal interview, Melbourne solicitor Thomas Flitner breaks his long-held silence to reveal the true origins of his 15-year battle with the Victorian Legal Services Board (VLSB) — a campaign he describes as one of systemic persecution, targeted regulatory abuse, and institutional betrayal.
Flitner recounts in detail how his professional life was upended after he won a rare legal victory against the VLSB in the Supreme Court of Appeal. That case exposed discriminatory conduct by the Board, including its attempt to vilify his diagnosis of Asperger’s Syndrome to deny his right to practise law. Although vindicated by the Court and awarded significant costs, Flitner explains how this legal win triggered years of retaliatory audits, malicious regulatory actions, and an unrelenting “lawfare” campaign against him — one that has devastated his practice, reputation, and wellbeing.
Flitner also speaks candidly about:
The targeting of his barristers, including Glen Muhammad, for defending him in court;
The VLSB’s refusal to investigate complaints against government solicitors while aggressively pursuing those who supported Flitner;
His attempts to seek justice through IBAC, the Victorian Ombudsman, Parliament, and the media — all of which failed or declined to act;
The psychological toll of being ostracised by the profession, defamed through whisper campaigns, and effectively blacklisted; and
The failure of oversight mechanisms, including human rights bodies, to hold the VLSB accountable for its discriminatory and abusive conduct.
With clarity, courage, and evidence, Flitner describes a regulatory regime that acts with impunity, suppresses dissent, and punishes those who challenge its authority — even at the cost of their careers and mental health. His story is not just a personal account — it is a warning to lawyers, the public, and policymakers about the unchecked power of legal regulators in Victoria and the impotence of institutions meant to keep them in check.
⚠️ Trigger Warning: This video contains discussion of discrimination, mental health decline, and institutional abuse. Viewer discretion is advised.
🔍 KEY TOPICS COVERED:
Abuse of regulatory power by the VLSB
Discrimination on the basis of disability (Asperger’s Syndrome)
Suppression of whistleblowers and legal supporters
Institutional failures of IBAC, Ombudsman, and Equal Opportunity Commission
Legal warfare and reputational destruction in the Victorian legal system
📌 If you believe in justice, the rule of law, and the importance of institutional accountability, share this video.
💬 Comment below if you or someone you know has been subject to abuse of power by legal or police institutions. Your voice matters.
📢 Subscribe for more investigations into legal corruption and whistleblower cases.
Flitner recounts in detail how his professional life was upended after he won a rare legal victory against the VLSB in the Supreme Court of Appeal. That case exposed discriminatory conduct by the Board, including its attempt to vilify his diagnosis of Asperger’s Syndrome to deny his right to practise law. Although vindicated by the Court and awarded significant costs, Flitner explains how this legal win triggered years of retaliatory audits, malicious regulatory actions, and an unrelenting “lawfare” campaign against him — one that has devastated his practice, reputation, and wellbeing.
Flitner also speaks candidly about:
The targeting of his barristers, including Glen Muhammad, for defending him in court;
The VLSB’s refusal to investigate complaints against government solicitors while aggressively pursuing those who supported Flitner;
His attempts to seek justice through IBAC, the Victorian Ombudsman, Parliament, and the media — all of which failed or declined to act;
The psychological toll of being ostracised by the profession, defamed through whisper campaigns, and effectively blacklisted; and
The failure of oversight mechanisms, including human rights bodies, to hold the VLSB accountable for its discriminatory and abusive conduct.
With clarity, courage, and evidence, Flitner describes a regulatory regime that acts with impunity, suppresses dissent, and punishes those who challenge its authority — even at the cost of their careers and mental health. His story is not just a personal account — it is a warning to lawyers, the public, and policymakers about the unchecked power of legal regulators in Victoria and the impotence of institutions meant to keep them in check.
⚠️ Trigger Warning: This video contains discussion of discrimination, mental health decline, and institutional abuse. Viewer discretion is advised.
🔍 KEY TOPICS COVERED:
Abuse of regulatory power by the VLSB
Discrimination on the basis of disability (Asperger’s Syndrome)
Suppression of whistleblowers and legal supporters
Institutional failures of IBAC, Ombudsman, and Equal Opportunity Commission
Legal warfare and reputational destruction in the Victorian legal system
📌 If you believe in justice, the rule of law, and the importance of institutional accountability, share this video.
💬 Comment below if you or someone you know has been subject to abuse of power by legal or police institutions. Your voice matters.
📢 Subscribe for more investigations into legal corruption and whistleblower cases.
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00Thanks for being here Thomas. Thanks for having me Shavish to tell my story.
00:04So we've known each other for almost four months and in that period I've spoken with you extensively about your disputes with the Victorian Legal Services Board.
00:18And I understand that you make some very serious allegations against them and that some of these allegations go as far back as around 15 years.
00:32So why is it that you've decided to speak up now?
00:36It's not that I've been silent Shavish. I have spoken up. I have gone to IBAC which hasn't done anything.
00:46I've gone to the Victorian Ombudsman who's come back and said we can't look into your complaints.
00:53I've gone to Members of Parliament who've decided not to take any interest in my complaints and arguments.
01:04I've also tried fellow lawyers that have also been affected by the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner
01:10and have had adverse action taken against them over the years.
01:15And I've also tried finding lawyers to assist me.
01:19And the profession out there all know what's going on but they're all scared.
01:25Lawyers that I know for many, many years don't want to touch it.
01:28They just want to continue with their practice and don't want to be targeted
01:32because they know that if they get involved and I've had two lawyers and my legal team have been targeted
01:40because they've been assisting me.
01:42Okay. So when you say targeted, what happened to them?
01:47My lawyers specifically have had complaints lodged against them or reinvigorated by the Legal Services Commissioner
01:57because they assisted me. It's very, very obvious that because of their assistance they've been targeted.
02:07So can you give me an example of some of the adverse actions they've taken against your lawyers?
02:13One of my lawyers, Ben Mohammed Barrister, represented me in a malicious prosecution case
02:23where the government lawyer withheld information to the court that would exonerate me.
02:32And he raised that in a submission to the judge.
02:40And the judge considered it and basically said that he had every right to raise that issue with the judge.
02:51But the judge decided because it's a government lawyer to give her a free pass because the government lawyer said,
03:01well, I didn't intend to mislead the court.
03:04And so because it's a government lawyer, they're on a different level of accountability.
03:10And then the next step was that no costs were awarded against me because the government lawyer claimed costs against me
03:20for my barrister, Glenn Mohammed, raising that issue.
03:23So the judge said, no, Glenn Mohammed had every right to raise that issue in court.
03:29I'm not going to award costs against Mr. Flitner.
03:32And the upshot of that has been about a year later, I found out from Glenn Mohammed that this government lawyer,
03:41because she was questioned and because of Glenn Mohammed's submission and the judge having to look at this question,
03:50has raised an issue and made a complaint to the Victorian Legal Services Board to have Glenn Mohammed investigated
03:57for doing his utmost and his legal representative job to raise the issue about this information to exonerate me being withheld from the court.
04:15So he raised a complaint about why the government had been prosecuting you,
04:24making allegations that could be disproved by the information that they were withholding from the court.
04:33And the judge found that it was the right thing for him to do.
04:42And did the judge find anything about the substance of what Glenn had said about the relevance of the information to your case?
04:52Yeah, the judge said it was relevant and it should have been disclosed by the government lawyer.
04:57So if it was relevant and it should have been disclosed, then the government lawyer was in breach of their prosecutorial duty by definition?
05:08That's correct. That was Glenn Mohammed's submission.
05:12Okay. And the judge still decided not to enforce the standard as it set out in the letter of the law,
05:24because this government lawyer asserted that she did not have the intention of doing what she had in fact done.
05:35Is that what you're saying?
05:36That's correct. She told the government lawyer to leave the courtroom and seek legal advice and representation.
05:43And at the next court hearing, counsel appeared for the Victorian government lawyer to represent her
05:49and put an argument forward to the court that she didn't mean to mislead the court.
05:54Did she give evidence about that?
05:56No, she didn't. It was done on affidavit to the court and submissions by counsel for the court.
06:02So she filed an affidavit with the court?
06:05Actually, incorrect there, there were submissions made by the counsel for the government solicitor to the court, to the judge,
06:15that she had no intention of misleading the court.
06:19So the barrister essentially gave evidence on behalf of her?
06:24Gave submissions, written submissions.
06:26But this is not a legal matter, this is a matter of fact.
06:29That's correct.
06:31So you're saying that a factual matter was put from the bar table?
06:35My barrister Glenn Mohammed made submissions in written form to the judge
06:40and then in response submissions were made by counsel representing the Victorian government solicitor.
06:45But the submissions referred to a factual matter as if that factual matter was already established.
06:54That's correct.
06:55And no one got to cross-examine her?
06:58No, nothing was done like that, no.
07:00The decision was that she'll get a free pass and when they then felt that that had a win
07:06and the Victorian government solicitor's counsel asked the court for costs against me,
07:13the magistrate said no, I'm of the view that Mr Mohammed did the right thing
07:18and did ask the question, did point this out, I'm not going to award costs against Mr Flitner.
07:24So essentially what you're saying is that because of your barrister's initiative, you had exonerating evidence entered into the record of the proceeding.
07:43Your barrister was found to have done the right thing and when the government complained about his conduct,
07:55the judge found that there was no basis to make that allegation and refused to give them a cost order.
08:02So what could they possibly complain about?
08:09What they complained about there was just because they lost, because she had to get legal representation
08:17and she also threatened him, I'm told, through Gwen Mohammed in the courtroom in front of the police informant.
08:25And that has now taken a turn that he's been now under investigation.
08:31And I've waived privilege to assist him with his defence.
08:36How long has he been under investigation?
08:39At the moment, it's been six months or so.
08:43Six months?
08:44And he's responded to the allegation of this Victorian government solicitor who has lodged the complaint,
08:51this solicitor from the court.
08:53This particular solicitor has reported him to the Victorian Legal Services Board.
08:59I also reported her conduct to the Victorian Legal Services Board.
09:03And they said they wouldn't investigate any complaint of mine against her.
09:07So, essentially...
09:09There's a double standard here.
09:12I'm there trying to send a message that if people do their job honestly...
09:17That's correct.
09:18Then there will be...
09:20There's ramifications.
09:21Yeah.
09:22If not through the courts, then outside of it.
09:26So, I would have thought that the investigation would have ended naturally once Glenn produced a transcript of the court proceeding, showing that the judge had made that determination, which was not appealed.
09:43Right?
09:44That's correct.
09:45That's correct.
09:46So, there was a...
09:47At the end, I was exonerated with costs against the Victorian Police Commissioner in that matter.
09:51And part of it was because of the evidence that Glenn...
09:54That's correct.
09:55Okay.
09:56Okay.
09:57So, it achieved...
09:58And that took four years to get to that point.
09:59And the decision was not appealed.
10:01Okay.
10:02So, you've also told me about another matter where you were successful in the Court of Appeal.
10:11Can you tell me a little bit about that?
10:13Thank you very much.
10:14That was a number of years ago.
10:15I was successful in the Supreme Court of Appeal in a matter where the Victorian Legal Services Board vilified my diagnosis of Asperger's to try to limit my ability to practice law.
10:35In that case, the court found, the judges found that the Legal Board had tried to vilify me and make an example out of me because of my Asperger's autism in the way that by saying that I'm not competent to be a lawyer.
10:55I should not be running a practice.
10:57It's a form of discrimination, of course, under the law.
11:02And the judges found that they'd done the wrong thing there.
11:08And that was my appeal there.
11:10And I was successful in that appeal against the Legal Services Board.
11:14And I was awarded close to $100,000 in costs against the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner in that case.
11:22And I would have thought after that judgment and me having spoken up, because these cases are very rare, that it would have made media attention even though it was reported mostly.
11:34It's there for everyone to see.
11:36But the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner have so much power.
11:39They have some way of preventing the media and public and my profession getting knowledge of this case.
11:52But the upshot was, after that decision, the payback from the Legal Services Board was under the Commissioner McGarvey at the time, unbeknownst to anyone, was that I had to provide an undertaking to the Commissioner and the Legal Services Board that I would undertake Asperger's treatment for 12 months for the whole year of 2015, which I did at my own cost.
12:16And I had to have four or five reports put in, as I recall, from my treating Asperger's psychologist to prove that I was being treated properly and I could function as a lawyer.
12:31But Asperger's syndrome is high functioning.
12:39Autismal.
12:41Autismal.
12:42Autismal.
12:43Autismal.
12:44Autismal.
12:45Autismal.
12:46Autismal.
12:47Autismal.
12:48Autismal.
12:49Autismal.
12:50Autismal.
12:51Autismal.
12:52Autismal.
12:53Autismal.
12:54Autismal.
12:55Autismal.
12:56Autismal.
12:57Autismal.
12:58Autismal.
12:59Autismal.
13:00Autismal.
13:01Autismal.
13:02Autismal.
13:03Autismal.
13:04Autismal.
13:05Autismal.
13:06Autismal.
13:07Autismal.
13:08Autismal.
13:09Autismal.
13:10Autismal.
13:11that can be cured? No it's not cured, it's a lifelong condition, not being
13:16neurological. So what treatment did they want you to take? They said you must
13:20undertake treatment and I had many discussions with my psychologist about
13:26what treatment I needed. Anord was just talking about how I've been taken
13:32advantage of all in my life and through many different facets including the
13:36Legal Services Board, taking away my right to practice, my enjoyment in life,
13:42being a lawyer and helping people out and doing a lot of pro bono work and the
13:48discussion I had with that psychologist in 2015 was what can you change?
13:53What can you tell me? I already know that I have been taken advantage of all my
13:57life and it's been very hard. I'm not good in social settings and I've worked
14:01very hard to be able to be a lawyer and represent people and make eye contact
14:05and be able to speak and do public speaking and having done a lot of
14:09courses and a lot of self-development at my own expense. So the
14:15undertaking was to say well you are not allowed to have your own practice even
14:21though you've been in practice for by that time at least 13 years because you
14:29have now have been diagnosed with Asperger's, autism. It's not against the
14:36rules to have Asperger's? That's correct and it's discrimination under the
14:41Equal Opportunity Act, federally in state. So are you doing something about that? Have
14:47you made any complaints? I have lodged a complaint with the Equal Opportunity
14:51Commission Victoria last year and I'm still waiting for a mediator to be
14:55appointed. And has that been reported anywhere? No. And did you raise these
15:07matters as part of your IBAC complaint and your complaint with your Ombudsman? I did
15:12yes and I raised those issues and the first step was to lodge the complaint with the
15:16Equal Opportunity Commission and then have it vetted whether there was a basis and that
15:21took some number of months to have it vetted first and then to be told yes there is a
15:25case here and it will go to conciliation. So you told me earlier that your
15:32complaint had been dismissed both by the IBAC and the Ombudsman. When you say
15:43dismissed do you mean that they investigated your complaints and found
15:47that there was no basis to make those complaints? No they didn't even investigate.
15:52They just said it's not in their area to investigate. And also the Legal Services
15:58Board investigating that government lawyer blanketly just said no we're not going to
16:02investigate and that's a fait accompli. So the IBAC regulations and well rather the
16:11legislation requires IBAC to investigate any serious allegation of corruption because you'd
16:23have to be psychic to know beforehand whether or not the allegations are serious. And I know
16:31from all the marketing material of the IBAC that they're very poorly funded so they can barely afford
16:38competent lawyers lawyers and investigators let alone psychic ones. So what reason did they give you for
16:46not even agreeing to investigate your complaint? They just said that they didn't want to investigate. That was basically the response in a nutshell.
16:58Did they give you any further explanation about what it was? No. No. The Ombudsman did say that they didn't have jurisdiction to investigate.
17:12Okay. So what you're saying is that you've been trying to make complaints and get your allegations investigated. A narrative out there and story out there, yes. For almost one and a half decades. Yeah. But no one's been willing to air your complaints or give you a forum because
17:41because of the influence and the fear that the Victorian Legal Services Board and Commissioner's Office invoking people.
17:54That's right. And also a whisper campaign that's come back to me to people I don't even know. Saying that I'm a bad lawyer and I'm a bad person. And putting things out there. And I've not had an opportunity to tell my story until now.
18:09Now. And it's officially to the public and to my profession. And fellow lawyers. How I've been ostracised, singled out, harassed, etc.
18:25Okay. So can you tell me how your disputes with the Victorian Legal Services Board commenced?
18:34They commenced in around about 2011, 2011, with some allegations made against me and I defended myself in a matter, which eventually ended up in the Supreme Court of Appeal.
18:52So it's the same case that you were talking about earlier?
18:54That's correct. And that case, in damages, etc., even though I was vindicated in the end, cost me around about $700,000.
18:59Okay. Which led to the Legal Board then requiring me to undertake Asperger's treatment and give an undertaking, that I would undertake Asperger's treatment and do a course.
19:14Which then led to my lawyers at the time saying, and the late John Salemi was my counsel in that matter, as well as Gerry Nash, QC, saying they won't let up.
19:25They will keep on my back, the Legal Services Board, because you've won against them. A rare win.
19:30So therefore they then sent auditors in on my trust account looking around how I could have afforded all these costs and expenses.
19:39They found nothing. And also my mum died at that time as well, in 2014, on the 19th of November 2014.
19:48So that was when, just at the point of time when they required me to undertake Asperger's treatment.
19:55So the Asperger's treatment was really about retribution for...
20:02Winning that matter and having costs awarded against them.
20:06For basically...
20:07For one day's hearing, yes.
20:09For essentially...
20:13Holding them to account.
20:15Okay. And that's obviously a horrible precedent for them, because they don't want other people to follow in your footsteps.
20:24I followed my... I had a lot of pride in myself, but I still went through it because the importance to me was my practice and the practice of law and my clients.
20:37I have an involvement for them all, which is why they would
Recommended
9:35
|
Up next
0:12
0:46