Former speaker Kezia Purick is suing the NT Independent Commissioner Against Corruption in a last-ditch legal effort to quash his findings that she acted corruptly and postpone criminal charges stemming from an investigation earlier this year.
Ms Purick’s legal action filed in the NT Supreme Court seeks to delay the ICAC’s referral of her matter to the Director of Public Prosecutions, and will also likely delay her referral to the NT Parliament’s disciplinary tribunal that also has the power to jail Members of the Legislative Assembly if found guilty of misleading Parliament.
According to reports, Ms Purick is seeking to quash Commissioner Ken Fleming’s findings that she acted corruptly by using the resources of her office as speaker to interfere in the establishment of a new political party and the findings that she later lied about it to the ICAC.
The action also reportedly seeks to block Mr Fleming from “personally conducting, or continuing to conduct, an investigation … into alleged improper conduct by [Ms Purick]”.
Ms Purick resigned as speaker in June after the report was handed down, but has claimed she was denied “natural justice and procedural fairness” throughout the investigation – a claim that was has been rejected by Mr Fleming.
His June report included transcripts of interviews the ICAC conducted with Ms Purick in which she was given the opportunity to explain the matter, but which Mr Fleming found Ms Purick used to deceive the investigation.
Mr Fleming revealed in September that his office had not yet referred a brief of evidence to the Director of Public Prosecutions in relation to the matter despite the understanding by many that it had occurred at the time of the report.
Ms Purick was re-elected to her seat of Goyder at the August 22 NT election despite suffering a massive 23 per cent swing against her by voters.
The unusual legal manoeuvre is reminiscent of the actions taken by former Labor leader Delia Lawrie who unsuccessfully sued John Lawler, the commissioner of the Stella Maris Inquiry to quash his findings, that ultimately resulted in the end of her political career.
While knowingly under investigation by the ICAC, Ms Purick attempted to establish and sit on a parliamentary committee that would have oversight of the anti-corruption body earlier this year. She denied at the time that she was under investigation, but conflicts of interest allegations were raised by independent parties after the investigation concluded.
It remains unclear if taxpayers are picking up Ms Purick’s legal expenses.
In the space of a few months ICAC has had to hand Whistle Blowers details to a legal team and now is being sued by a Politician to stop the process of a investigation.
Obviously ICAC is not safe for Whistle-blowers details to be kept confidential and I fear that’s the original intent of the organization.
No political party would make a so called independent organization that would actually pose a threat to the political party.
The speed at which ICAC acted upon alleged Election tampering/Kezia Purick actions is called into question given the mountain of cases dating back from the woefully managed Office of Public Disclosures, cases which have not seen the light of day.
Mr Fleming was sworn into the position of ICAC by the Administrator of the Northern Territory on 13 June 2018, and formally commenced in the role on 2 July 2018 .What has he and his tax payer funded office been doing for the last 2 years and 3 months?
Respectfully working to fix the failngs of the office he replaced and to make sure those responsible for those failings are held to account.
Judging by the courts decision to expose WB’s and Kezia’s action in the Supreme Court, there will be long delays for the truths to finally be known.
A town full of Government paid lawyers and a public service stacked with staff who have law qualifications means there will always be a legal argument and opinion to consider.
ICAC will come and go with little changes I reckon. Too much politics involved both inside PH and the corridors of NTG occupied buildings.
“It remains unclear if taxpayers are picking up Ms Purick’s legal expenses” Why should the tax payer pick up the tab! Shades of Delia Lawrie and the Stella Maris affair where she wanted the taxpayer to fund her legal defence.