In a bombshell finding, the NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption (Icac) has ruled former premier Gladys Berejiklian and her former lover Daryl Maguire engaged in serious corrupt conduct while in office.
The findings were made as a result of Icac’s Operation Keppel investigation, which was set up to examine the conduct of Maguire, the former Wagga Wagga MP, between 2012 and 2018. It was widened to include Berejiklian after she revealed she was in a “close personal relationship” with Maguire.
Here’s a summary of the report’s findings.
What did Icac’s report find about Berejiklian?
The commission found Berejiklian “engaged in serious corrupt conduct” by not declaring a conflict of interest between her personal life and her public duties.
Is she likely to face charges?
No. Icac did not recommend parliament seek advice from the director of public prosecutions (DPP) about charging Berejiklian (see below for its reasons).
It did, however, recommend the DPP should be consulted about the possible prosecution of Maguire and two others.
What conduct of Berejiklian’s was found to be corrupt?
Icac found the former premier breached public trust in the awarding of funding to two projects Maguire had lobbied for in his electorate.
One of these was a $5.5m grant to the Australian Clay Target Association. It found she breached public trust while premier and treasurer through her support for a grant to the association, which Maguire had lobbied for. Berejiklian did not disclose her relationship to Maguire at any point while supporting the grant.
It said Berejiklian “engaged in serious corrupt conduct by breaching public trust in 2016 and 2017” over the grants.
It said she was “in a position of a conflict of interest between her public duty and her private interest, which could objectively have the potential to influence the performance of her public duty”.
Icac also found against Berejiklian for her handling of a proposal to build a recital hall for the Riverina Conservatorium of Music, which Maguire had also lobbied for. No disclosure of their relationship was made. Icac found she had partially exercised her official functions while “influenced by the existence of her close personal relationship with Mr Maguire, or by a desire on her part to maintain or advance that relationship”.
Icac also found Berejiklian engaged in “serious corrupt conduct” by failing to notify Icac of her suspicion that Maguire had “engaged in activities which concerned, or might have concerned, corrupt conduct”.
“At the time Ms Berejiklian failed to report her suspicions to the commission, she was the premier of the state. The report notes that Ms Berejiklian must have known that she was not entitled to refuse to exercise her official functions for her own private benefit, or for the benefit of Mr Maguire.
“To do so to conceal conduct she suspected concerned, or might have concerned, corrupt conduct on the part of Mr Maguire, another member of Parliament, both to protect herself and him from the Commission exercising its investigative powers was grave misconduct. It undermined the high standards of probity that are sought to be achieved by the ministerial code which, as premier, Ms Berejiklian substantially administered.”
What about Daryl Maguire?
The premier’s former lover was also found to have engaged in serious corrupt conduct, with Icac recommending advice be sought from the DPP about charging Maguire.
He was found to have improperly used his office as an MP to benefit G8way International Pty Ltd, a company of which he was in substance a director, and whose profits he had an arrangement to share with others.
He also was found to have misused his role as an MP to advance his own financial interests in connection with an immigration scheme that he promoted to his constituents and others connected with his electoral district.
Why will Berejiklian not face charges?
Under the laws governing Icac, it is possible for behaviour to be serious enough to warrant a corrupt conduct finding, but not so serious as to constitute the offence of misconduct in public office.
In its report, counsel assisting submitted that as Berejiklian gave her evidence to the Icac under objection, it would not be admissible against her in any criminal proceedings.
They suggested it would be “difficult absent Ms Berejiklian’s evidence for the prosecutor to exclude the hypothesis that Ms Berejiklian would have engaged in the conduct for the purposes of electoral advantage (a purpose that she evidently regarded as legitimate)”, as opposed to advancing her relationship with Maguire.
They would also have to explore Berejiklian’s mental state in supporting the grants, to prove any misconduct by her was “wilful”.
On balance, counsel assisting submitted that the obstacles to a prosecution were “so formidable as to make it reasonably clear that any advice from the DPP with respect to the matter would be to the effect that no prosecution may be commenced”.