Don’t follow ICAC lead on reports of corruption, Senate told

Publicly labelling people “corrupt” in findings by anti-corruption watchdogs should be limited, an expert has warned.

Publicly labelling people “corrupt” in findings by anti-corruption watchdogs should be limited and even abandoned because of the damage it poses to a presumption of innocence in any subsequent criminal trial, an expert has warned.

Former judge John Nicholson SC yesterday told a Senate committee inquiring into the possibility of establishing a national integrity commission that it should be wary of following the operating model of the NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption because it had often overreached itself.

Mr Nicholson, the acting ICAC inspector for the NSW government, said the NSW body acted more like a court in many ways.

He said ICAC was intended as an investigative body for alleged corruption by public officials — and legislation governing its operation did not require publication or even reports before referral of alleged offences to police.

Mr Nicholson said the problem of ICAC’s operation in practice was how it undermined a presumption of innocence.

Besides often naming people corrupt in its public findings, ICAC appeared to operate like a court because it was typically headed by a retired judge, had court-style formality, and witnesses swore on oath in a room like a court.