NACC Commissioner Paul Brereton engaging “in officer misconduct” has met and exceeded the NACC’s own “exceptional circumstances” criteria to justify a public hearing into Brereton’s “misconduct”.
Failure to have a public hearing will leave a stench of corruption hanging over the NACC until Brereton resigns and maybe long after and that I argue meets the NACC’s own “exceptional circumstances” criteria to justify a public hearing.
On Wednesday (30/10/24) the Inspector of the NACC, Gail Furness, SC, published a report into “an investigation into agency maladministration or officer misconduct in relation to the decision of the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) not to investigate the referrals of six persons from the Royal Commission into the Robodebt Scheme (the Royal Commission).” (Click here to read the full report)
As it stands, the Inspector of the NACC made a finding NACC Commissioner Paul Brereton engaged “in officer misconduct” by failing to properly recuse himself from the 6 Robodebt referrals matter.
But the Inspector of the NACC, Gail Furness, SC, also found that NACC Commissioner Paul Brereton’s conduct was “being
conduct that is not unlawful but arose from a mistake of law or fact.”
Background
I’ll skim over the background, but click on the links for a better understanding if you are new to the story.
The National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) started operations on the 1st of July 2023.
On or about the 7th of July 2023 the NACC received a sealed section of the Robodebt Royal Commission Report which had 6 names of people recommended for further investigation by the NACC.
On the 6th of June 2024 the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) issued a press release saying they would not investigate, nor take any action, including against NACC Commissioner Paul Brereton’s good friend Kathryn Campbell, after sitting on the referral for 11 months. (Click here to read more)
On the 13th of June 2024 the Inspector of the National Anti-Corruption Commission, Gail Furness SC, announced that she will investigate the NACC for alleged “corrupt conduct” regarding the Robodebt cover-up” because the NACC has refused the investigate the 6 people that the Robodebt Royal Commission referred to them for investigation.
It’s also worth noting that on the 20th of June 2024 I published an article titled “Scott Morrison outed as 1 of the 6 referred to the NACC by the Robodebt RC – The prima facie case”. (Click here to read the article)
On the 8th of August 2024 Twitter journalist Jommy Tee posted documents and emails he received, via a Freedom of Information (FOI) request he made to the NACC, about Commissioner Paul Brereton recusing himself from the Robodebt referrals.
The Guardian sent questions to the NACC and published an article on the 15th of August 2024 with the NACC’s response.
The key new information in the NACC response was:
The NACC said Brereton “retained visibility of significant steps taken” in relation to the Robodebt royal commission referrals, and “contributed his own views on some issues when requested or when he considered appropriate”. (Click here to read more)
Every lawyer in Australia would not be able to stop laughing if they read a judge recused himself but then “retained visibility of significant steps taken” in relation to the matter and “contributed his own views on some issues when requested or when he considered appropriate”. (Click here to read more)
It was all over bar the shouting when The Guardian reported the above admissions by the NACC. Any police officer will tell you the best evidence is a confession, and the NACC admission is in effect a confession that Paul Brereton lied about recusing himself from the matter.
NACC Commissioner Paul Brereton’s personal relationship with Robodebt’s Kathryn Campbell
The personal relationship that NACC Commissioner Paul Brereton has with Robodebt’s Kathryn Campbell, and her husband Paul Brennan, are detailed in 2 articles I published in July 2023. (Click here and here to read the articles)
The bottom line is they know each other from the Army Reserve as per the below picture:
(Above are 3rd from left Paul Brereton, 3rd from right Kathryn Campbell and her husband Paul Brennan 2nd from right) (Click here to see the source – “Frontline” Dec 2022, Vol 22 No. 4. Page: 20)
How well they know each other does not seem to have been explored by the Inspector of the NACC which is very disturbing.
The cornerstone of all recusal judgments is that all the details of any personal conflict are detailed in the judgment. The fact that they are not adds weight for the need for a public hearing.
I should note it is not up to Kathryn Campbell, or her husband, to make Paul Brereton recuse himself and so there is no allegation she did anything wrong regarding Brereton’s fake recusal.
Gail Furness’s executive summary
I published a video on Gail Furness’s executive summary on Wednesday (30/10/24) as per below:
Some of the key details in the Executive Summary are:
The main issue which emerged from the material gathered during the investigation, was the actions taken by the NACC Commissioner following his declaration of a conflict of interest in relation to one of the referred persons.
The NACC Commissioner made a number of declarations describing the interest in relation to that person as a person “he knows well”, “who is well known to me” and “with whom I have had a close association”.
The NACC Commissioner dealt with his declared conflict by delegating the decision as to whether to investigate the referrals, to a Deputy Commissioner.
I found that, in light of the conflict of interest, the NACC Commissioner should have not only designated a delegate but removed himself from related decision-making processes and limited his exposure to the relevant factual information. This was not done.
I found that the NACC Commissioner’s involvement in the decision-making was comprehensive, before, during and after the 19 October 2023 meeting at which the substantive decision was made not to investigate the referrals.
The NACC Commissioner contributed to the discussion at that meeting, settled the minutes of that meeting and was involved in formulating the reasons for decision and also the terms of the media statement.
I concluded that a third-party, fair-minded observer might reasonably apprehend that the NACC Commissioner involvement might have impinged on the impartiality of the decision-making of the delegated Deputy Commissioner. My conclusion is based on an apprehension of partiality rather than actual partiality. I make no finding against the delegated Deputy Commissioner.
I found that natural justice or procedural fairness required the NACC Commissioner not to participate in the decision-making with respect to the referred person. By participating in the decision-making in the way he did, the NACC Commissioner made a mistake of law or fact.
The mistake was as to the requirements of procedural fairness, which amounts to an error of judgement rather than a matter of mere procedure.
I concluded that the NACC Commissioner engaged in officer misconduct as defined in section 184(3) of the National Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2022 (Cth) (NACC Act), being conduct that is not unlawful but arose from a mistake of law or fact.
These findings about the declared conflict of interest are based on advice provided by the Hon Alan Robertson SC, former Federal Court judge, whom I engaged to assist me. His advice is contained in the Robertson Report which is attached to this Report. (Click here to read the full report)
Commissioner Paul Brereton only told Gail Furness that his personal interest was a person ““he knows well”, “who is well known to me” and “with whom I have had a close association”.
But the NACC issued a statement today (30/10/24) saying, “The Commissioner declared, immediately and repeatedly, that he had a perceived (not actual) conflict of interest, arising from a prior professional, not personal, relationship with one of the referred persons. The Commissioner and that individual have never socialised other than at official functions, nor visited each other’s homes.”. (Click here to read the full statement)
Paul Brereton and Gail Furness would both know that Paul Brereton should have supplied Gail Furness with a detailed list of all the times (when, where and for how long etc) he met with Kathryn Campbell and her husband. That was clearly not done. What is Brereton hiding?
The SMH reported (30/10/24):
Former NSW Supreme Court judge Anthony Whealy, who chairs the not-for-profit Centre for Public Integrity, said the inspector’s report showed misconduct by Brereton.
“I think we’ve got to draw a distinction between unlawful conduct by a commissioner and this type of misconduct, which is reprehensible but not necessarily [deserving] of termination,” he said.
I think it’s a joke for anyone in the legal fraternity or media to defend Paul Brereton as Anthony Whealy has done but the SMH did go on to say:
Melbourne Law School associate professor William Partlett, who is a fellow at the Centre for Public Integrity, was more critical of Brereton for not removing himself entirely from the decision over the robodebt referrals.
“The commissioner of an anti-corruption commission should be completely above reproach, and the fact that the inspector has made that finding, I think, is not a good position for him to be in,” Partlett said. “I think he should resign for that reason.” (Click here to read more)
Summary
The problem with NACC Inspector Gail Furness, SC, finding it was “a mistake of law or fact” is that not even a first-year law student would make that mistake and if they did in an exam, they would fail.
Yet here we have NACC Inspector Gail Furness, SC, saying is was a “mistake”. Looks like the old Attorney-Attorney respect law kicking in where they all look after each other.
What Gail Furness should have said is:
NACC Commissioner Paul Brereton’s CV on the NACC website says: The Hon Paul Brereton AM RFD SC has been a solicitor, barrister, senior counsel, judge and judge of appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales, Deputy Chair of the NSW Law Reform Commission and Deputy President of the Defence Force Discipline Appeal Tribunal. He has extensive experience leading complex and sensitive investigations, including as Assistant Inspector-General of the Australian Defence Force when he delivered the Afghanistan Inquiry Report.
He has also held several senior leadership positions in the Australian Defence Force Reserves.
Based on that CV, it is not plausible that Commissioner Paul Brereton’s actions were a “mistake ” that even a first-year law student would not make and therefore I find Paul Brereton acted deliberately when he failed to recuse himself from the Robodebt 6 matter.
Paul Brereton should be referred to the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions for criminal charges to be commenced.
But as we know NACC Inspector Gail Furness, SC, did not say that which is further reason why we need a public hearing.
Or does it just come to an end with Gail Furness’ findings it was a mistake?
Anything less than a public hearing into Paul Brereton’s “misconduct” is a cover-up.
The NACC and Commissioner Paul Brereton are not just under fire for the above scandal. They have failed right across the park and once the dust settles I think the government will realise Commissioner Paul Brereton is too big a liability, of the governments own making, and he will be tapped on the shoulder to resign.
Please use Twitter, Facebook, email and the other buttons below and help promote this article.
Kangaroo Court of Australia is independent media and is 100% crowdfunded by readers like yourself so please support on the links below. Click on the PayPal button below to donate or for other donation options click here to go to the Donations page.
Thank you for your support.
For the KCA t-shirt shop click here.
For the Fugitive Clothing t-shirt shop click here
Join the free email subscription below and you will be notified immediately I publish new articles which is normally twice a week.
Discover more from Kangaroo Court of Australia
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: National Anti-Corruption Commission
Great work, but you are missing the biggest crime in history, and it is right in front of you.
Why don’t you tell us all what that is Harvey?
Robo-Debt, was the “Crime of the Century”! To think that those that planned it, implemented it, repeatedly ignored all advise that it was illegal and only stopped after Shortens successful class action court challenge against it, could escape prosecution would probably be the second, “Crime of the Century!”
If this Robodebt investigation proceeds and Brereton is removed from his position, will it change the perception that NACC is simply a Pollie Protection Racket, as it most certain is, to date? I think it’s too late.
The Inspector’s claim that Breretons actions were a “mistake” is obviously not credible. This is not just a case of Brereton needing to go but all the Deputies that failed to point out his “mistake” and the Inspector that failed to call it what it is – evidence of corruption in a criminal case. The Nacc is completely compromised. I was disappointed with Sen Shoebridge fence sitting this morning. All trying to be diplomatic about events, always a bad sign.
Brereton is not a liability for the government, he’s working exactly as intended
He’s a liability now his corruption has been exposed
I wonder who they’ve got waiting in the wings…
Well said, my thoughts exactly.
Brereton should resign or be sacked.
At the very least, he lacks judgment.
Your tenacity is paying off.
Keep it up Shane.
This is but one example that goes towards explaining why thinking Australians no longer have faith in the politicians of the major parties, nor the system they have created and have no intention of fixing.
Our only hope seems to rely on the Independents, and we really need a lot more of them!
Lawrie
Agreed.
They certainly know how to dress up and have a nice formal dinner. I wonder who pays for that?
Well done, Shane, on your tireless efforts to bring some justice to this travesty. Looks like the cosy legal club will keep protecting these individuals for as long as possible.
These days the only difference between the LNP and Labor Party is in the names. Corruption flourishes unchecked with the 2 party back scratching.
Take all perks and allowances away from MPs and reduce the number of career politicians. Then see those who genuinely wish to represent the people.
No Australian federal politicians serve the people. In fact, the only allegiance they swear is to the UK king and his heirs and successors. We the people have no representation in the Australian parliament. None!
No, they don’t serve the people, and the more Australians realize that the better. As it stands, they will keep voting the two major parties in, and nothing will change for years. In fact, their primary vote has been going down each election cycle, and the UniParty knows this. But instead of changing their policies, it would much rather put a limit on donations when it comes to other minor parties like theirs, making sure that new people don’t get a foot in.
Great work KCA. Put a smile on my face in the midst of this corrupt country that’s being destroyed by these disreputable politicians and their mates in the judiciary. Poor Country Poor people And then there is you with your tenacity and decency. Countless thanks.
Great work KCA. I’ve just read Robertson’s opinion on Brereton’s misconduct. What strikes me about the details of the meeting of the Commissioner with his Deputies is what is missing; what is not said. First, the so-called ‘discussions’ and ‘participation of Brereton’ in those discussions. It’s only Brereton speaking…its not a discussion, it’s a lecture or monologue from the ‘boss’. Second, Brereton, only puts arguments in support of NFA. At no point does he raise the counter argument, for example the public interest in being served by the NACC making different findings of fact to the RRC. In my view this shows His interventions involve ‘actual bias’, not just ‘apprehended bias’. Thirdly, at no point do any of his Deputies put forward contrary views or the arguments against NFAing the referrals…they meekly accede to the bosses wishes…This shows they do not apply their own minds to the issue…they just mirror the views of their boss….they need to be sacked too. Fourthly, the argument that the NACC should not investigate because it may make findings of fact and law different to the RRC is shown in the actual outcome of the NACC to NFA the referrals which was totally contrary to the RRC, yet the NACC had no problem in differing from the RRC in that respect.
Great work KCA
Good article KCA!
While not my decision, IMHO, the likes of Brereton must be removed and brought down to street level!
The People’s National Anti-Corruption Commission deserves far better.
As discussions about the effectiveness and integrity of the NACC grow, there is a clear demand for reform and accountability within the organisation. Many Australians argue that its current leadership, including figures like Paul Brereton, has not met the expectations of transparency and ethical governance that the public rightfully seek, expect and deserve.
The NACC must be revisited – guidelines MUST BE CHANGED!
Although I accepted your reports on this issue I was still surprised at how Brereton had his hands all over it. And that the inspector exposed him.
Paul Brereton is quoted in The Guardian (15 Nov) as saying that “errors of judgement” (on facts and law) should not be a reason for him to resign. This excuse is garbage and is being used as a cover for corrupt conduct. Judges are trained and expected to get facts and law right, especially on the basics. They are not there to be aimlessly “sincere” free from any restrictions on their conduct. This guy should be sacked.