AUSTRALIA Trends and Developments Contributed by: Dennis Miralis, Kartia Zappavigna, Dr Emma Collins and Henry Yu, Nyman Gibson Miralis
We are witnessing the early implementation of the sig - nificant reforms recently made in Australia’s anti-cor - ruption and integrity landscape, with mixed assess - ments regarding their effectiveness. The establishment of the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC), the creation of a new corporate offence for failure to prevent foreign bribery, and incre - mental reforms to whistle-blower protections signal a decisive step toward stronger accountability frame - works at the federal level. While they represent a significant step forward and bring Australia closer to compliance with its interna - tional obligations, questions remain about their practi - cal impact, enforcement consistency, and the adequa - cy of protections for those who expose wrongdoing. Australia’s International Obligations Australia’s international obligations arise from being party to numerous international anti-corruption con - ventions, including: • UN Convention against Corruption 2003 (UNCAC); • OECD Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions 1997, also known as the Anti-Foreign Bribery Convention; and • UN Convention Against Transnational Organised Crime 2000 (UNTOC). Australia also has obligations by virtue of its mem - bership in the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), an inter-governmental body that sets and monitors international standards on anti-money laundering, counter-terrorism financing, and countering prolifera - tion financing, thereby facilitating the detection and confiscation of the proceeds of corruption and dis - mantling the tools that enable it to flourish. Developments National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) The NACC has now been operational for over two years. Its establishment represented a significant development in Australia’s federal anti-corruption framework, tasked as it is with investigating and reporting upon serious or systemic corrupt conduct within the federal public sector. With its broad remit
and strong coercive powers, its objectives are to increase accountability, transparency and public con - fidence in government institutions. Despite the high number of referrals to the Commission indicating a high level of public optimism about its mission, its effectiveness and efficiency is the subject of debate. Also subject to discussion is the extent to which the Commission has fulfilled its educative and preventa - tive function, providing guidance to public officials and agencies on how to identify, mitigate and avoid corrupt conduct, with criticism being levelled at the NACC for its perceived lack of visibility and question - able decision-making. One of the most persistent criti - cisms is that the requirement for public hearings to occur only in exceptional circumstances sets the bar too high. In over two years of operations, the NACC has not held a single substantive public hearing. The NACC has received thousands of referrals since the commencement of operations, indicating a strong level of optimism amongst the public in the work of the Commission. As of July 2025, the NACC reported it had received more than 5,400 referrals, completed assessments of over 4,500, and commenced more than 55 preliminary investigations and more than 40 full corruption investigations. The Commission’s investigations also led to nine convictions, with a fur - ther five matters currently before the court. While the focus of the NACC is the federal public sector, the Commission’s work will inevitably impact on the private businesses and individuals that work with the government. The broad definition of a pub - lic official under the NACC Act includes the people who work for members and senators of the Australian Parliament, staff members of Commonwealth agen - cies, departments and companies, and contracted service providers (such as consultants, independent contractors and labour-hire contractors) under Com - monwealth contracts administered by Commonwealth agencies. In addition, any person can be investigated for conduct that adversely affects a public official’s honest or impartial exercise of their official duties. While the NACC has strong investigatory powers, including the ability to compel documents, require witness attendance and use covert techniques, crit - ics have questioned whether its operational model,
28 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook