❓ Ljiljanna Ravlich asks about the outcomes and public reporting of Corruption and Crime Commission reviews into alleged misconduct. The Attorney General provides figures on upheld complaints and explains the reasons for not publicizing individual cases, citing privacy concerns and the discretion of the relevant authority.
AnsweredQoN 1981Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
Of the 1 938 ‘appropriate authority investigations’ into alleged misconduct reviewed by the Corruption and Crime Commission, -
(1) How many complaints were upheld?
(2) Was the reporting of any of these cases made public?
(3) If no to (2), why not?
(1) How many complaints were upheld?
(2) Was the reporting of any of these cases made public?
(3) If no to (2), why not?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
20 April 2010
Responded by
Parliamentary Secretary representing the Attorney General
Response time
47 days
(1) 557 complaints were upheld.
(2) The Corruption and Crime Commission did not make public any of these cases. However, in every case it ensured that the complainant and other key stakeholders were made aware of the outcomes of the investigation. This frequently involved the provision of a considerable amount of information.
(3) In the case of investigations where the allegations are sustained there are usually disciplinary, administrative and/or managerial consequences that are often subject to a right of privacy for those affected, for example in the case of the outcomes of disciplinary processes. It is a matter for the relevant appropriate authority to decide whether to publicise the details of a particular matter of not. There is no restriction on complainants making public the outcomes themselves, this happens from time to time.
Notice: This document is created or edited using unregistered or evaluation copy of rtLib valid for testing or development purposes only. To use it for productive or any other purposes please register it. You may purchase the license on
http://www.rtlib.com
(2) The Corruption and Crime Commission did not make public any of these cases. However, in every case it ensured that the complainant and other key stakeholders were made aware of the outcomes of the investigation. This frequently involved the provision of a considerable amount of information.
(3) In the case of investigations where the allegations are sustained there are usually disciplinary, administrative and/or managerial consequences that are often subject to a right of privacy for those affected, for example in the case of the outcomes of disciplinary processes. It is a matter for the relevant appropriate authority to decide whether to publicise the details of a particular matter of not. There is no restriction on complainants making public the outcomes themselves, this happens from time to time.
Notice: This document is created or edited using unregistered or evaluation copy of rtLib valid for testing or development purposes only. To use it for productive or any other purposes please register it. You may purchase the license on
http://www.rtlib.com
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.