Landmark review paves way for release of CCC report into former Queensland deputy premier Jackie Trad

A secret anti-corruption watchdog report into Jackie Trad could be released after a landmark review recommended the CCCC be handed retrospective reporting powers.

Former Queensland deputy premier Jackie Trad. Picture: AAP

A secret anti-corruption watchdog report into Queensland’s former deputy premier Jackie Trad could be released after a landmark review recommended the Crime and Corruption Commission be handed retrospective reporting powers.

Finalised more than three years ago, the CCC’s report stemmed from its investigation into whether Ms Trad improperly interfered in the 2019 appointment of her under-treasurer and was later widened to examine ­recruitment processes across the ­bureaucracy since Labor came to power in 2015.

Purported to be critical of the government, the investigation looked at alleged politicisation across the state’s public service and forced a 2021 internal directive that appointments should be “merit-based” and properly documented by selection panels.

Ms Trad, who has denied wrongdoing, launched taxpayer-funded action in the ­Supreme Court to block the ­release of the report. Her legal ­action was discontinued last year after a separate High Court decision muzzled the CCC from publicly reporting on most of its investigations into ­politicians and public servants.

CCC chair Bruce Barbour called for urgent law changes ­immediately after the High Court decision, warning the inability to report on matters uncovered during investigations reduced transparency and was not in the public interest. The government has for eight months stalled on giving the CCC powers it asked for, with Premier Steven Miles instead ­appointing former Queensland chief justice Catherine Holmes to lead an independent review into the watchdog’s reporting powers.

The Holmes review, considered by Mr Miles’s cabinet on Monday, recommended legislation be introduced to state parliament with new public reporting thresholds to clarify when the watchdog could release findings from its investigations.

It is understood the review recommends changes be retrospective, paving the way for the release of the Trad report and findings from a separate investigation into former public trustee Peter Carne.

It is unclear whether the ­reports into Ms Trad and Mr Carne would meet new recommended thresholds.

Mr Carne won his protracted legal battle in the High Court in September, suppressing a draft CCC report detailing ­alleged wrongdoing during his time in the public service. The CCC did not pursue any criminal charges against Mr Carne, but compiled a report into alleged misconduct and sent it to the parliamentary crime and corruption commission committee (PCCC).

If the document had been ­tabled in parliament, it would have been protected by parliamentary privilege and therefore immune to legal challenge, ­including for defamation.

Mr Carne argued its airing would breach his human rights, and claimed he had been denied procedural fairness.

In a submission to the Holmes review, made on behalf of Ms Trad, Angus Scott KC wrote that handing the CCC the powers it had requested would put it in the position of “ investigator, prosecutor and adjudicator over allegations which have profound impacts on the reputations of public officials”.

“Empowering the CCC to make public findings – especially of a normative kind – about public officials risks making the CCC a participant in the political process, whereby its ‘judgment’ on questions of political interest may be weaponised by political actors and become influential over ­electoral outcomes and government decision-making,” the submission read.

In their submissions, former CCC heads Brendan Butler and Ross Martin implored the government to back law changes to allow the CCC to publicly report on its investigations.

Mr Martin, who led high-profile prosecutions against corrupt former Labor minister Gordan Nuttall and surgeon Jayant Patel before being appointed head of the watchdog in 2012, said law changes should be retrospective.

“These matters can be of great public significance,” he wrote.