Lawyers to call for ICAC charges to be dropped if unlawful investigation methods used
Charges in some of SA ICAC’s most high-profile cases could be withdrawn after a landmark judgment that found the anti-corruption body used unlawful investigation methods.
Police & Courts
Don't miss out on the headlines from Police & Courts. Followed categories will be added to My News.
Criminal lawyers will call for charges to be withdrawn in high-profile corruption cases linked to ICAC, if it is found that unlawful investigation methods were used.
A scathing judgment in Mount Gambier MP Troy Bell’s theft and dishonesty case has thrown into doubt a range of ICAC’s practices.
They include bypassing police to refer cases directly to the Director of Public Prosecutions, and continuing to investigate and pass on evidence once charges have been laid.
Earlier this month, District Court Judge Liesl Chapman found elements of ICAC’s investigation into Mr Bell were unlawful. But she refused to permanently stay the case.
The judgment has sent ripples across the legal community as prosecutors try to ascertain how to run cases where evidence may have been obtained unlawfully.
Current ICAC-related corruption cases before the courts include those against former Renewal SA executives John Hanlon and Georgina Vasilevski, suspended Correctional Services executive Paul Robinson and former magistrate Bob Harrap.
The Law Society’s criminal law committee co-chair Craig Caldicott said the judgment was having wide-ranging repercussions.
“We are all reviewing cases to see whether ICAC has acted similarly and if they have, there is a real possibility that we will write to the DPP to ask for the charges to be withdrawn,” Mr Caldicott said.
“They might be able to resurrect (the cases) before the Supreme Court and they might not. It does depend on where it gets to.”
“What ICAC has done is to not only lay the charges, arrest someone and then continue to investigate them after being charged. What they are doing is essentially usurping the role of the South Australia Police.”
Marie Shaw QC, for Bell, has applied to have all evidence that was obtained or transferred to the DPP unlawfully thrown out before the trial.
Documents released by the District Court show that Bell’s legal team want “all evidence compiled by the (ICAC) Commissioner and provided to the (DPP)” excluded before trial.
The scope of this evidence is unknown, but is likely to include large amounts of financial documents and evidence of interviews conducted by ICAC investigators.
Bell is accused of siphoning tens of thousands of dollars from education organisations he was running in the South East, a claim he has denied from the outset.
The case continues Monday when Mr Hinton will make further submissions supporting his request for the matter to be referred to the Supreme Court.
Ms Shaw is contesting the request, wanting Judge Chapman to rule on the validity of the evidence sent directly from ICAC to the DPP to be heard before any question of law or appeal is sent to the state’s highest court.
Mr Hinton last week said the cloud over the Bell case had “paralysed” ICAC, but ICAC said not all investigations were affected.
