No check on OPI bugging
THE Victorian Ombudsman has admitted he is unable to determine whether the Office of Police Integrity was justified in bugging the phones of former police deputy commissioner Ken Jones, concluding that no agency has the power to properly scrutinise its use of telephone intercepts.
Ombudsman George Brouwer yesterday confirmed that the OPI investigated an allegation of serious misconduct against Sir Ken and placed him under surveillance.
Mr Brouwer, who was the inaugural director of the OPI before his appointment as Ombudsman, said all details of the surveillance, including use of any telephone intercepts, were “blacked out” from documents passed to his office by the OPI, and that he had to rely on media reports to conduct his investigation.
He said he was informed by the OPI that the heavy redaction of surveillance documents was required by federal law.
Media reports that the OPI had bugged the phones of Sir Ken and his wife precipitated a crisis of confidence in police chief commissioner Simon Overland and his eventual resignation less than three years into a five-year appointment.
In a report into the OPI’s conduct in the affair tabled to state parliament yesterday, Mr Brouwer expressed his concern at the lack of oversight of the OPI’s use of phone taps.
Mr Brouwer noted that across government he normally had the power to determine whether the actions of agencies broke the law, or were unreasonable, unjust, oppressive “or simply wrong”.
“The use of telecommunication interceptions in Victoria, whether by the OPI or the police, is not subject to such scrutiny,” he found.
“In my view this could lead to a situation where an opportunity for the improper use or overuse of interception powers could go undetected.”
Victoria’s Deputy Premier Peter Ryan yesterday agreed to investigate the limitations surrounding phone taps.
“We have expressed concerns about this previously,” he said.
“We do not have in Victoria anything at the front end which examines the basis upon which the warrants are issued in the first place.”
OPI director Michael Strong, in a letter to Mr Brouwer last month, made clear his view that his organisation’s use of phone taps was beyond the Ombudsman’s reach.
“Your incursion into this area is not justified,” Mr Strong said.
Mr Brouwer’s report reveals that the complaint against Sir Ken, which was lodged by a “Victoria police staff” member, alleged he was the likely source of a leak to the media about the state’s duty of care regarding the death in prison of crime boss Carl Williams.
Sir Ken also was investigated over alleged leaks about the Department of Justice’s placement of Williams at Barwon Prison and Victoria Police’s handling of murder investigations.
It confirms a report in The Australian in June that Mr Ryan’s former police adviser Tristan Weston also has been investigated by the OPI.
Despite the confirmation, Mr Ryan refused to discuss anything to do with Mr Weston, who is believed to be still on paid leave. But the government will consider changing the law in regard to ministerial advisers who are on leave from other positions, such as the police force.
The Brouwer report exposes a rift between the Ombudsman’s office and the OPI, with Mr Brouwer accusing the OPI of failing to take into account whistleblower legislation, which it was required to do, when investigating Sir Ken.
Mr Brouwer reveals that the OPI’s inquiries into Sir Ken were suspended while the oversight was dealt with. The OPI’s approach in handling the complaint was backed by the Solicitor-General.
Mr Strong yesterday released a statement critical of the Brouwer report.
He said Mr Brouwer had wrongly identified the number of complaints being investigated by the OPI, as well as the powers granted to both men.
Mr Brouwer did not find any OPI officers had acted inappropriately but said he was continuing investigations into the conduct of Victoria Police.
It was revealed in June that Mr Brouwer was investigating the OPI amid concerns that its inquiries into Sir Ken may be an abuse of its powers.
Mr Overland was named as a complainant behind the OPI investigation into Sir Ken.
Mr Strong later claimed his inquiry into Sir Ken was not based purely on concerns raised by Mr Overland, who quit the force earlier this year after a damning official report into the force’s handling of crime statistics in the run-up to last year’s election.
Victorian Police Association secretary Greg Davies said the report was predictable.
“It’s a joke, the report simply says the OPI has no scrutiny and they are not accountable,” he said.
Labor’s anti-corruption commission spokeswoman Jill Hennessy urged the government to detail in full the circumstances surrounding Mr Weston’s leave.
By on 18/10/2011