The Federal Government has put up a draft version of its planned Commonwealth Integrity Commission (CIC).

After years of outcry, rising to boiling point in recent weeks, the government says it will now move to strengthen integrity arrangements across the federal public sector.

“The CIC will be a centralised, specialist centre investigating corruption in the public sector. It will be established as an independent statutory agency, led by the Integrity Commissioner and assisted by the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner and the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner,” the foreword to the draft bill states.

The planned CIC will have greater investigatory powers than a Royal Commission, includ the ability to hold hearings and compel witnesses, enter and search premises, require people to surrender evidence, use telecommunication interceptions, and even have individuals arrested and confiscate passports.

The draft is accessible here.

The recent push for a federal corruption court has been led by the Australia Institute, which recently published a timeline of pledges and promises on the matter over the last few years.

After going over the new draft bill, the Australia Institute has found that it “falls well short of what is required for an effective anti-corruption commission”.

“The model proposed by the Government will fail to ensure corruption is stamped out at the Federal level. A toothless watchdog that fails to hold politicians to account risks further eroding confidence in our political and democratic processes,” said David Harper AM QC, former Judge of the Victorian Supreme Court of Appeal.

The institute’s National Integrity Committee has outlined a range of issues, saying:

  • The definition of corrupt conduct is too narrow. It excludes anyone outside the public sector who dishonestly or improperly influences or attempts to influence the probity and efficacy of public decision-making (this is not the case in most state jurisdictions)
  • Public sector corruption can only be investigated if a criminal offence has been or is being committed (contrast with the law enforcement division of “corruption of any other kind” where there is not a criminal threshold)
  • No findings of corrupt conduct are possible for parliamentarians or public servants in a final report
  • No public hearings for parliamentarians or the public sector
  • In the case of the public sector and for parliamentarians, no provision for whistle-blower complaints
  • The commission cannot investigate on its own initiative in the case of public sector and Parliamentary corruption (it can do so for law-enforcement corruption)
  • The threshold for investigation to proceed is too high – only if there is a reasonable suspicion that a listed offence has been committed or is being committed