EXCLUSIVE: Chief Minister Lia Finocchiaro has refused to take action against, or publicly identify, a “senior executive public officer” who was found in a new ICAC investigation to have engaged in improper conduct amounting to “negligence and incompetence” concerning the mismanagement of a conflict of interest, who the NT Independent can reveal at this time is the head of a major government agency.

The “senior public officer” has also repeatedly refused to comment or explain his actions.

Ms Finocchiaro was sent a series of questions by this masthead on Friday morning regarding Operation Apollo, which found the “senior public officer’s” actions resulted in a “substantial detriment to the public interest and was also an inappropriate use of public resources…”. The matter involved hiring practices in the agency.

The Chief Minister refused to say if she would take any action against the senior public officer or stand him down, given the magnitude of his position and the public trust required to hold the role.

Ms Finocchiaro sent a response full of motherhood statements on Friday, including that his actions fell “well short of the expectations the community places on the public service, especially leaders within the public service”, refusing to acknowledge his identity despite specifically being notified of his name and rank and seemingly aware that senior figures in the government and the agency know who he is.

Instead of seeking legal advice about the damning ICAC findings against the senior public officer, the Chief Minister said she “sought advice” from head public servant Luccio Cercarelli regarding “actions being taken to ensure public sector leaders uphold proper conflict of management and recruitment practices”.

The NT Independent reminded Ms Finocchiaro’s office of her duty as an elected Member of Parliament and the Chief Minister to uphold the public’s trust, including her obligation under various codes of conduct to explain to the public why she has taken a particular position on a matter and that “accountability fosters integrity and probity in official decision-making, good governance, and the prevention and detection of corruption”.

Ms Finocchiaro’s office has not responded in two days.

Political operatives from both sides of politics told the NT Independent the Chief Minister needed to act on the matter immediately, given the high-ranking position of the public officer and the necessity for public confidence to be maintained in the role.

“She should have been out on this on Friday or at the latest [Saturday],” one CLP source said.

The media director of the agency involved refused to provide comment on Friday and did not respond to a later message reminding the senior public officer of his responsibilities to the public and his large workforce.

Following receipt of legal advice, The NT Independent is concerned that naming the “public officer” may be an offence under provisions of the ICAC Act, which was amended last year following a government review.

However, this masthead believes the public has a right to know who the subject of the investigation is, given the importance of their position, and the NT Independent is currently reviewing its position and legal options, which was explained to the Chief Minister’s office on Friday.

What the ICAC investigation found

NT ICAC delegate and retired SA judge, Patricia Kelly, released a public statement Friday morning regarding Operation Apollo, which probed the conduct of the unnamed “public officer”.

According to Ms Kelly’s statement, the “public officer” was a panel member for recruitment of a “senior position within their department” early last year and was also a “long-time friend” of the candidate. She found there was “a close and current relationship between the public officer and the candidate”.

The “public officer” had verbally declared his friendship to the other panel members, but did not provide “any particulars of the extent of the relationship”.

The subject of the ICAC investigation had also acted as a referee for the candidate while sitting on the hiring panel. Ms Kelly found one of the other panel members also acted as a second referee for the candidate.

“Whilst it may not be improper per se, to act as a referee as well as a panel member, nevertheless doing so has the potential to cause conflicts of interest and can lead to perceptions of bias in the recruitment process,” she said.

“That is so when a panel member provides a positive reference for one candidate and not others.”

The “public officer” also provided the candidate with their previous successful job application, prior to the candidate applying for the job. He did not provide it to any of the other candidates.

“The provision of the previous job application was a matter that should have been disclosed to the other panel members,” Ms Kelly said.

The ICAC delegate found the actions amounted to improper conduct, “namely unsatisfactory conduct”, that involved “negligence and incompetence”.

“The conduct did result in a substantial detriment to the public interest and was also an inappropriate use of public resources in the recruitment process,” she said.

Current ICAC Act prevents disclosure of those found to have engaged in improper conduct

Ms Kelly said she determined not to publicly name the “public officer” in part because the evidence was obtained under compulsion, including through interviews with the subject and others, as well as being prohibited from naming him under recent changes to the ICAC Act.

“Because I required each individual to answer questions asked of them at their examination, the ICAC Act prohibits me from publishing that evidence,” she said.

Despite the significant position the “public officer” currently holds, Ms Kelly said the ICAC was bound under law not to identify the subject as it would be “unfair to publicly name, or otherwise identify an individual as having engaged in unsatisfactory conduct in circumstances where I cannot also explain the evidence, or at least some of the evidence, that supported my conclusion”.

Ms Kelly later referenced section 54(4)(c) of the ICAC Act that expressly prohibits the naming or identification of a person in relation to a matter that amounts to “unsatisfactory conduct”.

The NT Independent understands that section of the Act was recently altered as part of the Labor-ordered Greg Shanahan review of the ICAC Act.

Surprisingly, Ms Finocchiaro appointed Mr Shanahan, a long-time senior public servant, as the acting Independent Commissioner Against Corruption in December, while Michael Riches remains suspended from the role.

The ICAC Act does not prohibit the Chief Minister from taking action against a “public officer” when she becomes aware of unsatisfactory conduct.