ICAC Act review: Politicians should be exempt from investigation, corrupt individuals not named as full report remains hidden | NT Independent

ICAC Act review: Politicians should be exempt from investigation, corrupt individuals not named as full report remains hidden

by | Jan 26, 2022 | News, NT Politics | 0 comments

Parts of a secret review of the NT ICAC Act commissioned by the Gunner Government have been released through a public “discussion paper”, including recommendations that politicians not be investigated by the ICAC for unsatisfactory conduct and that individuals found to have engaged in misconduct not be publicly named.

Chief Minister Michael Gunner has avoided questions about the review for months, which was commissioned nearly a year ago to explore possible reforms to the Act, carried out by former Department of Attorney General chief executive Greg Shanahan behind closed doors.

On Tuesday, Mr Gunner released a “discussion paper” that contains some of the recommendations of the Shanahan review, however the full review has been kept under wraps, as have the names and identities of the people Mr Shanahan conferred with while making his recommendations.

The discussion paper repeatedly references the secret review and some of its recommendations, including that the ICAC should “have no further responsibilities” after transferring a complaint to a department for investigation; that departmental whistleblowers should have their protections weakened; that those ordered not to disclose an investigation can confide in a “spiritual advisor or other similar confidant”; and that the ICAC develop a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the very departments they would be investigating to allow staff to share information about investigations “as necessary”.

It also suggested that individuals found guilty of misconduct not be publicly named.

The review, as reported in the discussion paper, also suggested that the ICAC’s ability to investigate “elected politicians” be re-considered.

“The review considered whether the ICAC is the appropriate body to carry out investigations into the conduct of elected politicians, particularly that which falls within the less serious levels of improper conduct, namely unsatisfactory conduct,” the discussion paper stated.

It continued that, “how the jurisdiction of the ICAC overlaps the role of the Privileges Committee in the Legislative Assembly was also raised”, but did not say who had raised the issue.

Back in 2017, shortly before the ICAC Act was enshrined, a Labor-run parliamentary committee attempted to exempt all of the NT’s politicians from an “unsatisfactory conduct” clause in the legislation.

Mr Gunner was forced to publicly denounce the measure after it became public, but it appears the matter of politicians being exempt is back on the table as part of possible reforms to the ICAC Act currently being discussed.

The review also recommended that the ICAC enter into an MOU with the Department of Legislative Assembly to address “how complaints against MLAs will be handled”, to whom reports about MLA conduct are to be presented, and “how claims of parliamentary privilege are to be dealt with”.

It also suggested the MOU could specify which body investigates complaints against MLAs, which could see politicians ultimately investigated by a politically-appointed Privileges Committee run by Labor, instead of the independent anti-corruption body.

Those found guilty of misconduct should not be named: Report

The paper stated that the Shanahan Review recommended not disclosing the names of people found to have engaged in misconduct or unsatisfactory conduct “unless exceptional circumstances exist”.

It also recommended, after consultations with unnamed parties, that an ICAC report must not “include an opinion by the ICAC as to the guilt” of a criminal offence, must not mention the intention to refer a person to police or the DPP and must not comment on the potential success of a prosecution.

The discussion paper also raised the issue of whether the ICAC should be permitted to make public statements.

It recommended that the ICAC retain that power.

“Public commentary can ensure that the Northern Territory public has confidence that improper conduct will be dealt with appropriately, there is increased consciousness within the public service about the importance of good governance and there is a deterrent for those who may consider engaging in such conduct for their own gain,” the paper stated.

“Nonetheless affected parties should be given an opportunity to correct any errors to protect natural justice.”

The discussion paper also recommended the Office of the ICAC develop a public policy on public and media statements.

The discussion paper, which is now open for public comment until February 25, also made suggestions and recommendations relating to journalist shield laws – recommending the ICAC retains the power to compel journalists to reveal sources.

It also raised issues relating to the role of the ICAC Inspector; the appointment of deputy commissioners; limitations for laying charges for breaches of the Act; the use of compelled evidence in disciplinary meetings and the overall jurisdiction of the ICAC.

Full Shanahan Review must be released: Opposition

Deputy CLP Opposition Leader Gerard Maley demanded the government release the full findings of the Shanahan Review.

“In June, the CLP Opposition moved a motion to establish a full and thorough investigation and parliamentary review of the operation of the ICAC Act, which was quashed by Labor,” he said.

“The ICAC is an important institution and must operate independent of government – and to the highest standard.

“It (is) very clear there needs to be greater scrutiny with respect to the operation of the Act regarding journalistic privilege, the conduct of the Commissioner, the role of the ICAC Inspector, and the appointment of the Deputy Commissioners, and whistleblower protections.”

Mr Gunner said his government implemented the ICAC to “restore trust in our democracy and ensure integrity in our public institutions”.

“The discussion paper seeks Territorians’ views on the operation and jurisdiction of the ICAC Act, including preliminary recommendations and how they should be implemented,” he said in a release.

“We want feedback to ensure the ICAC has sufficient powers to meet public expectation and maintain confidence in a government accountability body.”

Anyone interested in commenting on the proposed reforms can read the paper and offer opinions on the proposed reforms here.

Ads by Google

Ads by Google

Adsense

Adsense

Adsense

Adsense

Adsense

Adsense

Adsense

Adsense

Adsense

Adsense

Adsense

Adsense

0 Comments

Submit a Comment