Israel Folau's future in Australian rugby may be decided within two weeks with his code of conduct hearing set for Saturday, 4 May.
Israel Folau Photo: Photosport
The Wallabies superstar has been charged with a high-level code of conduct breach following his latest controversial social media post, and will front a three-person panel at Rugby Australia HQ in Sydney.
The following day has been reserved in case the hearing runs into a second day.
Respected Sydney barrister John West QC will chair the tribunal, with Rugby Australia representative Kate Eastman SC and Rugby Union Players' Association representative John Boultbee the other panellists.
Former Solicitor-General of Australia Justin Gleeson QC will be Rugby Australia's counsel at the hearing.
Unless successful at the hearing, Folau faces the sack after being issued with a high-level breach notice last Monday over the posts he made on Twitter and Instagram on April 10.
There's no guarantee the outcome of the hearing will be the final chapter of the saga, as the loser could could consider court action.
Folau was stood down by the NSW Rugby Union on April 12.
In their first match without him, the Waratahs scored a crucial Super Rugby win over Australian conference leader Melbourne last Saturday.
The RA Integrity Unit deemed Folau had committed a high-level breach of the Professional Players' Code of Conduct, warranting termination of his employment contract.
Folau was given 48 hours to accept that sanction or have the matter referred to a code of conduct hearing, opting for the latter.
The religiously motivated Folau attracted a fresh storm of controversy when he posted on Instagram: "Warning. Drunks, homosexuals, adulterers, liars, fornicators, thieves, atheists, idolaters. Hell awaits you. Repent! Only Jesus saves."
Rugby Australia chief executive Raelene Castle said Folau was warned formally and repeatedly last year about expectations of him as a Wallabies and Waratahs player in regards to his social media use, following similar controversial posts.
She has stressed the action taken against Folau is about the issue of responsibilities an employee owes to their employer, rather than punishment for his religious beliefs.
-AAP
