Shane Drumgold SC explains decision to drop charge against alleged Brittany Higgins rapist Bruce Lehrmann

Director of Public Prosecutions Shane Drumgold SC announced the move on Friday as Ms Higgins received mental health treatment and support in hospital.

This is Mr Drumgold's full statement on the decision to drop the charge of sexual intercourse without consent levelled at Ms Higgins' former colleague, Bruce Lehrmann, who denies raping her at Parliament House in March 2019.

"I have prepared a statement in relation to the matter of the Director of Public Prosecutions v Lehrmann. I will read the statement and will not be taking questions.

"Principal considerations in whether or not to continue a prosecution are outlined in section 2 of the ACT prosecution policy. Section 2.1 of the policy states: 'The decision to prosecute should not be made lightly nor automatically, but only after due consideration.'

"Broadly, there are two considerations as outlined in section 2.4 of the prosecution policy, which states: 'The decision to prosecute can be understood as a two-stage process. First, does the evidence offer a reasonable prospect of conviction? And if so, is it in the public interest to proceed with the prosecution?'

"A non-exhaustive list of considerations for the reasonable prospect of conviction test are found at section 2.7 of the prosecution policy and the public interest test can be found at section 2.9 of the prosecution policy.

"I closely considered the reasonable prospect of conviction test when I first examined the brief of evidence in the week of the 21st of June, 2021, and I formed a clear view that there was a reasonable prospect of conviction. This is a view that I still hold to date.

"The non-exhaustive list of public interest tests include section 2.9, paragraph p, being the actual or potential harm occasioned to any person as a result of the alleged offence, which, in this context, includes the actual or potential harm occasioned by the ongoing prosecution of an alleged offence.

"In short, I need to consider the harm that could be occasioned to a party, particularly a complainant, from an ongoing prosecution.

"I have recently received compelling evidence from two independent medical experts that the ongoing trauma associated with this prosecution presents a significant and unacceptable risk to the life of the complainant.

"The evidence makes it clear that this is not limited to the harm of giving evidence in a witness box. Rather, it applies whether or not the complainant is required to enter a witness box during a retrial.

"Whilst the pursuit of justice is essential for both my office and for the community in general, the safety of a complainant in a sexual assault matter must be paramount.

"In light of the compelling, independent medical opinion and balancing all factors, I have made the difficult decision that it is no longer in the public interest to pursue a prosecution at the risk of the complainant's life.

"This has left me no option but to file a notice declining to proceed with the retrial of this matter, which I have done this morning. This brings the prosecution to an end.

"Before concluding, during the investigation and trial, as a sexual assault complainant, Ms Higgins has faced a level of personal attack that I have not seen in over 20 years of doing this work. She has done so with bravery, grace and dignity, and it is my hope that this will now stop and Ms Higgins will be allowed to heal."