Speech
Published:

The Hon PLG Brereton AM RFD SC, National Anti-Corruption Commissioner, at the 10th session of the Conference of the States Parties to the UN Convention against Corruption, special event. Atlanta, Georgia, 13 December 2023.

Acknowledgements 

Thanks, to our colleagues in the Pacific Islands Forum, and to UNODC, for organising this event. I’d particularly like to acknowledge the leadership of the President of Kiribati, HE Taneti Maamau, in the promotion of Pacific unity against corruption, as expressed in the Teieniwa Vision, in which the signatories, including Australia, recognise that our collective aspirations for a peaceful, harmonious and prosperous Pacific cannot be realised unless we address corruption.

Two commitments undertaken by the parties to the Teieniwa Vision underpin my remarks today. 

The Commission – introduction

The first is the commitment to developing independent integrity bodies that prevent and fight corruption. 

Although various Australian states have had anti-corruption commissions, some for many years, we have never had a national body to investigate corrupt conduct involving public officials at the federal – Commonwealth – level. This was an important issue in our last federal election in 2022, when there was strong support for an independent anti-corruption body with broad jurisdiction over the Commonwealth public sector. And so, in accordance with the Teieniwa Vision commitment, the National Anti-Corruption Commission commenced operations on 1 July 2023.

Our mission is to enhance integrity in the Commonwealth public sector, by deterring, detecting and preventing corrupt conduct involving Commonwealth public officials, through education, monitoring, investigation, reporting and referral. Our jurisdiction is concerned with corrupt conduct that involves Commonwealth public officials. That includes Parliamentarians, and staff members of Commonwealth agencies, including individuals providing services under a contract with the Commonwealth.

Anyone can refer a corruption issue to us, and there are powerful whistleblower protections, from any form of liability and from reprisals, for anyone who does so. 

We have extensive investigatory powers, in some respects unique. Evidence cannot be withheld on grounds of legal professional privilege, or public interest immunity. The privilege against self-incrimination is abrogated, but evidence obtained under compulsion cannot be used in a criminal prosecution of the witness from whom it is obtained (though it can be used against others). In accordance with the legislation, we will conduct public hearings where the circumstances and the public interest justify an exception to the general rule that they be held in private. 

We do not conduct prosecutions, although we can, where appropriate, refer matters to a prosecuting authority. Our corruption investigations may result in an administrative finding of fact that a person has engaged in corrupt conduct, but that is not a finding of criminal guilt, for which different rules of evidence and proof apply. However, it is where it may not be possible to satisfy the high criminal standard of proof that the Commission’s work can be most important – by exposing corrupt conduct, even where it cannot be prosecuted in a criminal court. 

No less important than the conduct of investigations, we also have a prevention, education and engagement function – to inform and educate agencies, officials and the public about corruption risks and vulnerabilities. From the outset, I have considered support of anti-corruption efforts in the Pacific as the prime focus of our international engagement.

Up to 3 December 2023, the Commission received 2,247 referrals. We have opened 9 new investigations and 14 preliminary investigations, and referred 3 corruption issues to other agencies for investigation. We have made 67 prevention and education presentations to stakeholders across the federal public sector, and to CCPCJ in Vienna in September, when we also presented to UNODC our credentials as Australia’s preventive anti-corruption body under Article 6 of UNCAC.

Regional anti-corruption co-operation

The second aspect of the Teieniwa Vision that I wanted to address is the commitment to endeavour to unite our voice as a Blue Pacific, to ensure that regional anti-corruption priorities are being presented, where possible, as a collective, and I want to propose some ways in which we can work together to achieve that. 

The Teieniwa Vision Implementation Strategy refers to enhancing knowledge sharing and targeted technical assistance, and a Pacific-wide communication strategy. Ours is a very young organisation. My commission and I have much to learn from older organisations, not only in Australia, but elsewhere – for example, the Fiji ICAC has 15 years of experience from which we all can learn. And we are also keen to share our knowledge and experience with other members of the Pacific family. 

One way we can do this is through staff exchanges. Recently, supported by the UNDP, the NSW ICAC has seconded an investigator to the Solomon Islands ICAC.

We would be interested in supporting similar arrangements – with any Pacific island country – and in both directions, with staff from our Commission seconded to other regional anti-corruption agencies, and staff from agencies in other countries seconded to us. From my experience in other fields, this is a most effective means of knowledge sharing.

Secondly, we can co-operate in regional anti-corruption efforts through the exchange of information, in particular by sharing information about corruption that impacts other members of the Pacific family. Notably, our collective priority to combat climate change, and the funding that accompanies it, presents its own corruption vulnerabilities; we need to co-operate to address the risks of the diversion of resources dedicated for addressing environmental challenges. For example, I would like to hear of any suggestion that an Australian official was involved in corrupt conduct, and would urge other Pacific countries to report any such matter of which they may become aware to us; just as I would wish to refer issues of which we might become aware abroad to the relevant country.

Thirdly, when a corruption issue falls within multiple jurisdictions, there may be opportunities for co-operative investigations. Formal procedures for mutual assistance are cumbersome, and confined to criminal investigations. We are already exploring the possibility of co-operative investigations and information sharing with our PNG colleagues, and although we must each comply with our own legislative conditions, I believe that there are circumstances in which we can do so to mutual advantage. 

Finally, we have proposed a panel discussion on regional co-operation, including representatives of the Pacific family, as an event at the Australian Public Sector Anti-Corruption Conference, to be held in Darwin from 29 to 31 July 2024. I hope we may continue this important dialogue, not only this week, but also there.