Disgraced former Australian of the year Eman Sharobeem refuses to answer court questions

IN the final minutes of a hearing which focused on her alleged rorting of not-for-profit organisations, Eman Sharobeem wailed, shook her head and refused to answer very simple questions, instead saying how many lives she had saved and how she was a victim of forced marriage.

IN the final minutes of a hearing which focused on her alleged rorting of not-for-profit organisations, Eman Sharobeem wailed, shook her head and refused to answer very simple questions.

Whenever she was backed into a corner about how she had used public funds meant for vulnerable women, she would repeat again and again about how many lives she had saved and how she was a victim of forced marriage.

Today she raised her voice a few notches and said, “The lives I have saved, and they come to me to say how much I did. I sacrificed a lot, a lot of my life – you have no right!”

Eman Sharobeem (centre) is accused of using more than $680,000 of public money. Picture: Dylan Robinson

Sharobeem, 54, is accused of using $680,000 of public funding meant for the Immigrant Women’s Health Service and the Non English Speaking Housing Women’s Scheme to fund her and her family’s lavish lifestyle.

At the time she was the head of the organisations and championed women’s rights through her various community roles and as an Australian on the Year Finalist.

On the final day of the hearing counsel assisting the commission, Ramesh Rajalingam, asked Sharobeem if she had intentionally inflated figures for NSW Health, suggesting she was helping many more women than she actually was.

One allegedly false document said 18,393 women had visited the small NGO at Fairfield in one year.

“Never. No, no, no, no,” she said.

Richard Sharobeem on a motorcycle his mother allegedly purchased using not-for-profit funds.

Later she said: “See you can try to tarnish my reputation. You can try to accuse me, abuse me, bully me, harass me, terrorise me but you cannot take away the fact that in my life I only raised two sons and worked for women migrants and refugees and helped and saved many, many life. You cannot take this away from me until the grave.”

When asked more than a dozen times whether she inflated figures she responded with long-winded statements.

“My work is known. My work is shown. The lives I’ve saved. Do not come now, sir, and try to take that away from me. You have no right. You have not right.”

In response to another question about her alleged corrupt behaviour, Sharobeem responded by saying she had been the victim of female genital mutilation – something she has never publicly said before.

“I did not want to raise my own profile. I was pushed to come out and talk about my childhood and what happened to me as a victim of, of forced marriage, as a victim of female genital mutilation, as a victim to come out and help Australian women and girls and I did and I cannot regret that because many lives were saved,” she said on the verge of tears.

Eman Sharobeem's husband Haiman arrives at the hearing today. Picture: Dylan Robinson

But the Independent Commission Against Corruption inquiry into the expense rorting scandal heard how Sharobeem used the organisations’ funds to buy her husband a Mercedes, pay for her son’s liposuction, and buy herself Botox injections, IKEA furniture and a fountain.

She is also accused of creating false invoices – for work that was never provided – and fraudulently paying herself and her two sons wages and unexplained lump sum payments, worth more than $30,000.

This week the ICAC hearing heard from sons Richard and Charlie Sharobeem and husband Haiman Hammo – the supposed beneficiaries of thousands of dollars of taxpayers’ money.

All of them suffered from severe memory loss when asked about payments and luxury items which had been bought for them by Sharobeem.

Sharobeem’s public profile soared after she conducted a series of media interviews purporting to be a child bride who was forced to marry her cousin when she was 14.

The inquiry has heard she was in fact aged 21 or 22 when she was actually married, casting doubts over her claims of hardship.

The ICAC is expected to receive final submissions from all parties by October 9.

A report with its findings will not be handed down until sometime after that.