James Gardner-Hopkins has been accused of using LinkedIn to intimidate women who made submissions against his returning to the legal profession. Photo / Supplied
Multiple female lawyers claim that a former senior partner who was suspended for drunkenly groping interns at a Christmas party has been using a social media platform to intimidate them.
James Gardner-Hopkins inadvertently became the face of New Zealand’s #MeToo movement after his conduct towards junior female colleagues at Russell McVeagh was made public.
The former partner at the top law firm was suspended in 2022 after he was found to have inappropriately touched five young women at two parties in 2015.
However, earlier this year, when his suspension ended, Gardner-Hopkins applied for a Practising Approval Certificate, which is a licence lawyers need to work in the legal profession.
Multiple branches of women’s law associations, and their individual members, opposed his readmission to the profession and made submissions to the New Zealand Law Society.
However, following those submissions, multiple women have complained that Gardner-Hopkins has found their profiles on the social media networking site LinkedIn, and has been repeatedly accessing them to “intimidate” them.
“This is a recognised form of intimidation. By viewing their profiles openly, he is making it clear to these women that he is watching them. This behaviour appears to be designed to intimidate those who have raised legitimate concerns,” the Wellington Women’s Law Association (WWLA) wrote to the Law Society after several of its members had their profiles viewed.
“There is an option to view LinkedIn profiles anonymously, yet he has chosen not to use it. Over the past few days, this behaviour appears to have escalated, with some women reporting it has occurred multiple times. There appears to be no legitimate reason for him to be doing this.”
The WWLA didn’t name Gardner-Hopkins in its own LinkedIn post about the issue, but said it had received complaints from 10 women, one of whom was a law student, claiming he had done the same to them.
Barrister Steph Dyhrberg, who represented three of Gardner-Hopkins’ Christmas Party victims, also wrote to the Law Society in June with similar concerns.
“He (Gardner-Hopkins) has for some time (starting around the time opposition to his application started emerging) been repeatedly viewing the LinkedIn profiles of many women who have spoken up about his misconduct and/or opposed his application, including those who made a written submission,” Dyhrberg wrote.
“This has been happening again over the past few days. Some women report he has done it to them at least three times. There is no possible legitimate reason for Mr Gardiner-Hopkins to do this. It is a recognised form of intimidation: he is doing it on an open basis so the women know he is checking their profiles.”
A spokeswoman for New Zealand Women’s Law Journal said they were also aware that since submissions were made against Gardner-Hopkins being granted a practising certificate, he had been viewing profiles of women associated with the journal on LinkedIn.
“We are appalled at Mr Gardner-Hopkins’ behaviour and it only reaffirms the concerns the Journal expressed to the Law Society in March,” they said.
“We call on the Law Society to condemn this behaviour and to take it into account in their decision regarding Mr Gardner-Hopkins’ practising certificate.”
In response to Dyhrberg, a spokesperson for the New Zealand Law Society said the concerns would be passed on to the decision maker from the Practising Approval Committee, and to Gardner-Hopkins’ lawyer.
A spokesperson for the Law Society told NZME that Gardner-Hopkins’ application for a certificate is still ongoing, and as yet, no decision has been made.
They said that when adverse comments are received about a person applying for a PAC, those are shared with the applicant along with the identity of the person who made the submission, but their contact details aren’t disclosed.
“The Law Society values the significant contribution members of the profession and commenters make to our decision-making processes, and we expect every commenter will be treated with respect, courtesy and professionalism by applicants,” the spokesperson said.
Gardner-Hopkins told NZME in July that he was going through a process and had been advised to let that take its course before commenting publicly.
He said the same thing when asked for comment this week about allegations he’d been using LinkedIn to intimidate women who had made submissions against him.
The approval process for a Practising Approval Certificate is confidential, but multiple branches of women’s law associations around the country published their submissions against Gardner-Hopkins rejoining the profession online, after they’d submitted them to the Law Society.
“Put plainly, Mr Gardner-Hopkins sexually assaulted multiple junior women staff members in his capacity as a partner on two separate occasions,” submissions from the Auckland Women’s Lawyers Association president, Karlene O’Halloran, read.
“There is obvious public concern regarding Mr Gardner-Hopkins’ fitness, which as a profession we must address properly. A practising certificate is a privilege, not a right, and its issuance must be aligned with the legal profession’s core values.”
The Wellington branch of the association said his readmission would undermine the integrity of the profession, while the New Zealand Women’s Law Journal said that issuing him a practising certificate would, in effect, be condoning sexual assault and harassment.
“It also undermines the efforts of those who compromised their career prospects in order for someone who is not fit and proper to be held accountable for their failings. Of course, if Mr Gardner-Hopkins is issued a practising certificate, their efforts will count for little,” the journal’s submission reads.
Jeremy Wilkinson is an Open Justice reporter based in Manawatū, covering courts and justice issues with an interest in tribunals. He has been a journalist for nearly a decade and has worked for NZME since 2022.