"My point is that there is absolutely a risk. That was the advice we had ... There will be others who I imagine will be looking at whether they should have been inflation-adjusted.
"The way the decision is written, it now throws into question every single payment of any sort that a Government might make that isn't specifically provided to be inflation-adjusted.
"Time will tell."
Adams said the initial decision not to include inflation was based on a number of factors including previous payments and international levels of compensation.
"Every other previous claimant hasn't had their compensation inflation-adjusted. In my view, it is important that justice and guidelines like this are applied equally and fairly.
"It seems to be, in this case, they have simply rewritten the rules for Mr Pora. That is their right as Cabinet to do that, but it's for them to explain why that is."
She also questioned the way in which the inflation-adjustment was calculated, given that initial estimates were for about $600,000 to $700,000.
Little said none of the previous compensation claims could be appealed.
"No previous settlement reached for compensation for wrongful conviction can be reopened. Of course for future applications, and there is a couple current at the moment, obviously the issue about inflation adjustment will now be real and I expect to get advice on them as they go through the process."