The Australian Federal Police has far more power than any state police force, but is subject to far less scrutiny. The inevitable result is to create tremendous opportunities for corruption and the abuse of power. Similar considerations apply to federal politicians and public servants compared to their state counterparts. Likewise, the various state crime and corruption commissions across Australia are subjected to tougher outside scrutiny than the Australian Crime Commission, with the painful exception of its NSW counterpart.
Last week the NSW Crime Commission found itself in the highly unusual position of squirming in the public spotlight after its assistant director Mark Standen, a former AFP member, was charged with offences relating to the alleged help he gave an international drug ring trying to import chemicals for making $120 million worth of “ice”. Whether Standen is guilty is now a matter for the courts.
If Standen’s arrest prompts a wider investigation which ends up curtailing the Crime Commission’s powers, this will be long over due. The Commission exercises draconian powers in great secrecy, without the limited constraints that apply to the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation. Yet the Commission at one stage had around 100 investigators working on a terrorism reference on top of its original job of combating illicit drugs. The former NSW Labor premier, Bob Carr, even announced that the then head of ASIO, Dennis Richardson, would join the Crime Commission’s board. Carr hadn’t bothered to check with Richardson, who, quite rightly, refused.
For the NSW Labor Government, the Commission has the attraction of generating revenue from Proceeds of Crime laws which allow a person’s assets to be frozen before any charges are laid, then forfeited permanently despite an acquittal. Unlike the NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption, the Crime Commission is not subject to oversight by a parliamentary committee or any other body. People hauled before the commission's secret hearings can bring a lawyer but are forbidden by law from telling anyone what happened, no matter how outrageous.
However, the Sydney Morning Herald reported two instances which show how it operates. In one case, the Commission froze the assets of a NSW farmer after his former wife, whom he had divorced 17 years earlier, was convicted for growing 56 marijuana plants. In a reversal of the normal onus of proof, the farmer then had to demonstrate his innocence. Eventually, he did, only to find the Commission kept part of his money which it alleged had been falsely obtained in a dispute over his parents' estate — not something normally regarded as part of the Commission’s brief on drugs, organised crime and terrorism.
In another case, Justice Harold Sperlin said the law required him to order a woman to forfeit her assets, including a half share in a $1.4 million house, after she had shoplifted five jumpers worth less than $500. Sperling recommended that the law be amended because what had had happened to the woman was "wrong". Nothing has changed.
To its credit, the AFP arrested Standen although he is a former colleague of its Commissioner, Mick Keelty. But this hardly removes the need for a well resourced body to check on corruption and misconduct within the AFP’s own ranks. There is no reason to expect its members are any less susceptible to misconduct than other police forces, especially as it is heavily involved in drug operations which are notorious for fostering corruption.
The Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity (ACLEI) was established two years ago to scrutinise the Australian Crime Commission and the AFP. But its budget is pathetically inadequate. Despite Labor’s promise in opposition to give “teeth to this tiger”, the Rudd government gave it a meagre $2.8 million for 2008-09. This compares to the $20-30 million, or more, available to similar state bodies. Until the ACLEI is properly funded, there is no way it can conduct resource-hungry surveillance, telephone intercept and “sting” operations essential to containing corruption.
The AFP has also been given new powers, and many more staff, to gather security intelligence — a job previously the preserve of ASIO. But ASIO, unlike the AFP, is scrutinised by an Inspector General, as well a special parliamentary oversight committee.
The dangers of combining intelligence gathering and expanded police powers in the one body was underlined by the case of Mohamed Haneef. The AFP displayed a disturbing mix of incompetence, zealotry and disregard for the rights of an innocent man who was helping overcome the shortage of doctors in Australian hospitals. But the Rudd Government has dumped its pre-election promise to set up a proper judicial inquiry into the Haneef debacle in favour of the feeble investigation now underway.
The budget gave the AFP an extra 500 staff. The AFP’s addition funding should be reduced and the ACLEI given enough money to do its job. The NSW Crime Commission should be disbanded and replaced by more accountable body which respects basic legal rights. Meanwhile, there should be a serious outside investigation to discover how many corrupt officers have hidden behind its thick cloak of secrecy.
Ends
Email a friend