Federal Corruption Commision

ICAC is not a court.
they can refer people and corruption to the appropriate Authority.
ICAC NSW has on several occasions over stepped the mark and tarnished people's reputations.

I agree with Merritt or he agrees with me.

We have a presumption of innocence. That should remain and the Commission should act in camera for many reasons... Once the people are referred and charged the media rabble can go feral or rabid all they like.

Amalgamate them all into one and ensure that single body has powers to act on crime and malfeasance.

While an investigation is under way, there is a need for secrecy, but when there are 'hearings' they need to be made public, and the public, as well as those under investigation, need to be aware that there are actions afoot.... that way some may be able to save themselves by falling on their sword.... or offering to make early restitution and also leave their public position ... and I don't mean just to the back benches....

Many such minor matters could be cleared up by the person under investigation 'entering an early plea' and then making restitution, for which their punishment could be discounted, except in severe cases, which must - in keeping with the Californian law that says anyone accused of murder must plead 'Not Guilty' - go to trial on facts.

Above a certain level of criminality - a trial MUST go forward, to protect the interests of the public and of the accused.

Quote :

There’s merit in this least damaging ICAC model
CHRIS MERRITT
December 13, 2018

The federal ICAC the Morrison government has announced is probably the least damaging of the options that confronted it.

The nation already has 27 federal integrity agencies and the Morrison government has just decided we need a 28th.

The good news is that the flawed NSW model had very little influence on this plan.

There will be no public hearings, no public findings of corruption and it appears the goal is to ensure the new agency becomes an orthodox part of the criminal justice system.

This structure avoids the possibility of NSW-style show trials and the confusion caused by the NSW commission’s ability to make findings frequently found to be at odds with those of the courts; the federal structure seems designed to work hand-in-glove with existing law enforcement agencies.

While that should improve their efficiency, it seems quite wasteful of public money to create a new bureaucracy that will inevitably cover much of the jurisdiction of the existing 27 integrity agencies.

It is hard to avoid the conclusion that this initiative is all about politics — eliminating the possibility that the push for a federal ICAC could become a distraction during next year’s election campaign.

That said, Morrison and Attorney-General Christian Porter have opted for a structure that will preserve the presumption of innocence and the right to a fair trial, which have been eroded in NSW by that state’s decision to establish the NSW commission as what amounts to a parallel system of rough justice.

Those who pick holes in the Morrison-Porter models are really hankering for a NSW-style system where the protections for the individual that have grown up over the centuries do not apply.

The absence of public hearings eliminates the possibility this new institution could be tempted to use publicity to bolster its own community standing in the same way as the NSW commission.

Looks good to me. I like it. Very interesting!