ACT Integrity Commission
A short factsheet on the ACT Integrity Commission: its establishing Act, its corrupt-conduct jurisdiction, its status as an independent officer of the Legislative Assembly, and why it is not a prosecuting authority.
Learning outcomes
- State the ACT Integrity Commission's establishing Act and its core function investigating corrupt conduct in the ACT public sector.
- Explain the Commission's status as an independent officer of the Legislative Assembly, and how that differs from an executive-government agency.
- Explain why the Commission is not a prosecuting authority, and what it does instead when an investigation discloses a possible offence.
Act: Integrity Commission Act 2018 (ACT).1
Established: the Act was passed in 2018 and commenced 1 July 2019; the first Integrity Commissioner (former Federal Court judge Dennis Cowdroy) was appointed in May 2019, and the Commission became fully operational in December 2019.
Purpose: the Commission investigates, exposes and prevents corrupt conduct — conduct that could constitute a criminal offence, a serious disciplinary offence, or grounds for dismissal — affecting the integrity of ACT public administration. "Serious corrupt conduct" is defined separately as corrupt conduct likely to threaten public confidence in the integrity of government or public administration.
An independent officer of the Legislative Assembly, not an executive agency
Unlike most bodies in this overlay set, the Integrity Commissioner is expressly made an independent officer of the Legislative Assembly,1 alongside the Auditor-General, the Electoral Commissioner, the ACT Ombudsman and the Inspector of the Integrity Commission. This places the Commission outside the executive-government reporting structure that most of the bodies in this overlay set sit within — it reports to the Assembly, not to a Minister.
Powers conferred under the Act
The Commission can investigate complaints and reports of corrupt conduct, hold hearings, and publish findings. These are investigative and reporting powers, not powers to determine criminal guilt or impose punishment.
Is it a prosecuting authority?
No. Section 111 of the Act lets the Commission refer a matter to a prosecutorial body — such as the Director of Public Prosecutions — at any time, including while the Commission's own investigation continues.1 The Commission itself does not prosecute.
No specific leading case on the scope of "corrupt conduct" under the Act is cited here.
How this compares with NSW's and WA's integrity bodies
All three jurisdictions' integrity bodies investigate and refer rather than prosecute, but they are differently scoped and structured: WA's Corruption and Crime Commission and NSW's Independent Commission Against Corruption are both executive-government statutory authorities, while the ACT Commissioner is an officer of the Legislative Assembly itself. A student should not assume every jurisdiction's integrity body sits in the same place in the machinery of government just because all three investigate similar conduct.
Self-check
- Have I stated the Commission's function as investigation, exposure and prevention of corrupt conduct, not prosecution?
- Have I correctly identified the Commissioner as an independent officer of the Legislative Assembly, not an executive-government appointee?
- Have I distinguished the Commission's role from the separate Inspector of the Integrity Commission, which oversees the Commission itself?