Director of Public Prosecutions Act 1991

Independent prosecutorial office: The Act establishes the office of Director and Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions (s 4). The office is constitutionally and administratively distinct from the public service (s 4(2)), although staff to support the Director are to be appointed or made available under the Public Sector Management Act 1994 (s 30). The Director’s functions are explicitly performed on behalf of the State and may be exercised in the name of the office (s 10(1)(a)), except for specified High Risk Serious Offenders proceedings that must be in the name of the State (s 15A(2)).

Scope of prosecutorial functions: The Director has the statutory function to commence and conduct prosecutions of any offence, whether indictable or not (s 11(1)(a)), and to take over prosecutions started by others (s 11(1)(b)). The Director’s authority may be exercised despite any other written law that requires the consent or prescribes who may commence a prosecution (s 11(2)). The Director’s functions extend to appeals relating to prosecutions (s 13), extraditions (s 14), participation or assistance in coronial proceedings (s 15), and administration and proceedings connected with confiscation of proceeds of crime (s 16).

Operational powers and tools: The Act gives the Director broad powers to do “all things necessary or convenient” (s 20(1)). The Director may exercise powers normally vested in the Attorney General (s 20(2)(a)), provide consents required by other statutes (s 20(2)(b)), grant indemnities from prosecution (s 20(2)(c)), and give undertakings about non‑use of answers or statements (s 20(2)(d)). The Director can request information and assistance from officials, including police, and those officials must comply so far as practicable and notwithstanding other written law (s 22(1)-(3)). The Director may direct those officials not to bring prosecutions and to refer matters to the Director (s 23(1)), and can recommend that proceedings be instituted (s 23(3)).

Relationship with Attorney General: Part 4 creates a structured but qualified separation from the Attorney General. The Director is generally not subject to direction by the Attorney General (s 25), but must consult if requested by the Attorney General and vice versa (s 26). The Attorney General may issue written directions as to general policy after consultation (s 27(1)); such directions cannot relate to a particular case (s 27(2)). The Director must comply with any direction under s 27 (s 27(4)). The Director must report directions in the annual report (s 27(6)). Where the Attorney General has performed a function vested in both, the Director must not act inconsistently with that action without the Attorney General’s consent (s 28).

Administration and accountability: The Act prescribes appointments by the Governor (s 5) and allows acting appointments (s 8). Tenure, salary, leave, superannuation and removal from office are regulated in Schedule 1 (Sch. 1). The Director must prepare an annual report by 30 September each year for the preceding financial year ending 30 June (s 32(1)), and the Attorney General must lay that report before each House of Parliament (s 32(2)). The Director may issue prosecutorial guidelines, publish them in the Gazette, and may amend or revoke them; failure to comply with such guidelines is not a ground to invalidate acts (s 24(1)-(3)).

Limits, protections and delegation: The Director may delegate functions to officers assigned under s 30, subject to direction and control (s 31). Delegation cannot include the power to further delegate (s 31). Acting appointments are protected from challenge on a range of procedural grounds (s 8(6)). The Director, Deputy Director and other persons acting under the Act are insulated from personal civil liability for acts or omissions done in good faith and are entitled to indemnity by the State (s 33).

Interjurisdictional and statutory interactions: The Act requires the Director to have regard to national cooperative schemes or intergovernmental arrangements when relevant (s 10(2)). It also explicitly ties the Director into the Criminal Property Confiscation Act 2000 in respect of confiscation administration and related proceedings (s 16(2)-(3)), and authorises assistance to and prosecution under other jurisdictions’ laws with the Attorney General’s consent (s 16A).

State actors and public officials: The Act affects the Attorney General (Part 4), the Governor (appointment and removal powers under s 5 and Sch. 1 cl. 6), police and prosecution officers (who must comply with requests and directions made by the Director under ss 22-23), coroners (who may receive assistance from the Director with concurrence where relevant to the Director’s functions, s 15), and public servants who staff the Director’s office (s 30). Officials who are the subject of written requests by the Director for documents or assistance must comply so far as practicable notwithstanding any other written law (s 22(3)), which directly affects the operational duties of investigative authorities.

Legal profession and practitioners: Eligibility rules limit appointment to lawyers with specified experience (s 5(2)-(3)); Schedule 1 forbids the Director from practising as a legal practitioner or engaging in other paid employment except with Governor approval (Sch. 1 cl. 5). The Director may personally appear or be represented by a legal practitioner in proceedings (s 21). Where proceedings are in the Magistrates or Children’s Court, a police officer may appear for the Director (s 21(b)), which affects the choice of representation and potentially the workload of local legal practitioners and police prosecutors.

Defendants and accused persons: The Act reassigns the initiation, conduct and takeover of prosecutions to the Director (s 11). Individuals facing prosecution or appeal should expect that the Director may commence, take over, discontinue or conduct proceedings and appeals (ss 11, 13, 19). The Director’s power to grant indemnities (s 20(2)(c)) and give undertakings as to non‑use of compelled answers (s 20(2)(d)) affects the bargaining position of accused persons and witnesses.

Other jurisdictions and international partners: The Director’s functions explicitly include taking steps to secure extradition to Western Australia (s 14), prosecuting offences of other jurisdictions subject to Attorney General consent (s 16A), and providing assistance to corresponding public officers in other jurisdictions (s 17). These clauses impose obligations on the Director and create interfaces with Commonwealth, interstate and foreign criminal justice agencies.

Ministers and Parliament: The Attorney General is affected by reporting and consultation obligations. The Director must provide the Attorney General with information “so far as the interests of justice allow” for public business and parliamentary accountability (s 29). The Attorney General’s ability to issue general policy directions to the Director after consultation (s 27(1)) and the requirement that those directions be tabled in the Director’s annual report (s 27(6)) create a governance channel between the office and executive government.

Private sector and businesses: Indirectly affected where prosecutions, confiscation proceedings, or freezing notices touch commercial entities. The Director administers schemes to recover proceeds of crime and to enforce freezing notices and confiscation orders under the Criminal Property Confiscation Act 2000 (s 16(2)-(3)), so businesses may face Director‑initiated proceedings, asset recovery actions, or Crown indemnities granted in settlements.

Victims and the public: The transfer of prosecutorial responsibility to an independent statutory office alters the institutional path for victims seeking prosecution. The Act gives the Director discretion to commence and prosecute matters (s 11) and to take over prosecutions (s 19), and requires the DPP to have regard to national cooperative schemes (s 10(2)), which can influence which matters proceed and how resources are applied.

Who pays and who decides: The State funds the Director and staff under public sector arrangements (s 30; Sch. 1 cl. 2 on salary and entitlements). The Governor appoints and may remove the Director (s 5; Sch. 1 cl. 6). The Director decides whether to commence, take over or discontinue prosecutions (ss 11, 19) and may direct officials not to prosecute (s 23). The Attorney General decides whether to exercise the limited statutory power to issue written general policy directions (s 27) and may consent to certain external prosecutorial appointments or prosecutions in other jurisdictions (s 16A).

Director’s core duties: The statutory core is to commence and conduct prosecutions and to take over prosecutions initiated by others (s 11(1)). This includes both indictable and non‑indictable offences and extends to appeals and further appeals relating to such prosecutions (s 13). Additional duties cover extradition steps (s 14), participation in coronial proceedings when relevant (s 15), administration of confiscation recovery schemes and related proceedings (s 16), and making applications under the High Risk Serious Offenders Act 2020 as specified (s 15A). The Director must have regard to national cooperative schemes or intergovernmental arrangements in the performance of functions (s 10(2)).

Powers to shape or constrain others’ conduct: The Director may make written requests to officials for information, documents or assistance in relation to offences or suspected offences, and officials must comply so far as practicable notwithstanding other written law (s 22(1)-(3)). The Director may give written directions that specified offences or classes of offences shall not be prosecuted by an official and that all such matters be referred to the Director (s 23(1)). Those directions are binding on the recipient official, may be amended or revoked by the Director (s 23(2)), and the Director may recommend prosecutions to officials (s 23(3)). The Director may exercise powers generally necessary for performance of functions (s 20(1)) and, without limiting that power, may exercise powers vested in the Attorney General, give consent required by other statutes, grant indemnities, and give non‑use undertakings (s 20(2)).

Accountability and reporting duties: The Director must prepare an annual report on the performance of functions for the year ended 30 June and deliver it to the Attorney General by 30 September (s 32(1)). The Attorney General must cause the report to be laid before each House of Parliament within 14 sitting days after receipt (s 32(2)). The Director must include in the annual report any directions issued under s 27 (s 27(6)), and must report to the Attorney General on any matter relating to the operation of the Act at any time (s 32(3)). Where the Attorney General has performed a function vested in both, and the Director is precluded from acting inconsistently, the Director must refer that occurrence in the annual report (s 28(2)).

Rights to act and delegate: The Director may personally appear in proceedings or be represented by a legal practitioner, and in Magistrates or Children’s Court may be represented by a police officer (s 21). The Director may delegate functions to officers referred to in s 30, subject to direction and control, but not including the power of delegation itself (s 31).

Limitations and constraints: The Attorney General may issue directions as to general policy only, not in relation to a particular case (s 27(1)-(2)). The Director must comply with any direction under s 27 (s 27(4)). The Director’s delegation power cannot be sub‑delegated (s 31). Statements of prosecutorial guidelines by the Director must be published in the Gazette (s 24(2)), but failure to comply with those statements does not invalidate Director acts or omissions (s 24(3)).

Conflicts, removals and disclosure duties: The Director must not practise law or engage in other paid employment save as permitted (Sch. 1 cl. 5). The Director must give written notice to the Attorney General of all direct or indirect pecuniary interests in businesses (Sch. 1 cl. 5(b)). The Governor may remove the Director for misbehaviour or incompetence or for physical or mental incapacity, and misconduct includes conduct that renders the Director unfit to hold office and failure to comply with clause 5 (Sch. 1 cl. 6(1)-(2)).

Protections and immunities: Persons acting under the Act, including the Director and Deputy Director, are not personally liable for acts or omissions done in good faith and are entitled to be indemnified by the State for liabilities incurred in proceedings related to carrying out the Act (s 33).

Statutory penalties: The Act itself does not create criminal penalties for non‑compliance by private individuals with prosecutorial decisions or directions. It does not prescribe monetary fines for failure to comply with the Director’s requests or directions. Enforcement is predominantly administrative, relying on mandatory compliance clauses and executive mechanisms rather than criminal sanctions.

Compulsion of officials to comply: Officials who receive requests from the Director for information, documents or assistance must comply “so far as it is practicable to do so, and notwithstanding any other written law” (s 22(3)). That is a statutory compulsion on officials, overriding conflicts with other written laws to the extent practicable. There is no express separate penalty in the Act for officials who fail to comply; compliance is enforced by internal public service accountability mechanisms, the chain of command, and potential judicial remedies if statutory duties are asserted in proceedings.

Directions binding on officials: Directions the Director gives under s 23(1) (that a specified offence or class of offences shall not be brought by that official and that matters be referred to the Director) are binding on the recipient official, who “shall comply with the direction” (s 23(1)). Again, the Act does not prescribe criminal sanctions for failure to comply; enforcement is by administrative processes and, if necessary, judicial review to enforce statutory duties.

Governor’s removal power: The principal tangible enforcement mechanism against the Director is removal by the Governor on specified grounds (Sch. 1 cl. 6). The Governor may remove for misbehaviour or incompetence, or for physical or mental incapacity impairing performance, and also for bankruptcy or insolvency status (Sch. 1 cl. 6(1)). Misbehaviour explicitly includes conduct rendering the Director unfit to hold office and failure to comply with the disclosure requirement in Sch. 1 cl. 5 (Sch. 1 cl. 6(2)). This provides an ultimate executive sanction within the Act.

Administrative and parliamentary accountability: The Act requires the Director to prepare an annual report (s 32). The Attorney General must lay that report before Parliament (s 32(2)). The statutory requirement that directions issued by the Attorney General be included in the Director’s annual report (s 27(6)) establishes a transparency and parliamentary accountability channel that can generate political and parliamentary enforcement even where the Act contains no criminal penalties.

Immunity and indemnity: Section 33 immunises the Director, Deputy Director and others acting under the Act from personal liability for actions or omissions made in good faith, and entitles them to State indemnity. That reduces the risk of personal civil liability for those executing functions, and shifts any litigation exposure to the State.

Judicial notice and immunity from procedural challenge: Courts must take judicial notice of the fact of a person’s appointment and official signature (s 9). Acting appointments are protected from being questioned on grounds of defect, non‑occurrence of occasion, or cessation (s 8(6)), limiting certain procedural challenges to acts by persons purporting to act under the Act.

Limits on judicial invalidation: The Director’s published statements of guidelines are not legal preconditions for validity, and failure to comply with guidelines is not a ground to call an act or omission into question or to invalidate it (s 24(3)). That reduces the scope for litigants to seek relief on procedural or policy grounds tied solely to non‑compliance with internal guidelines.

Potential for judicial review: While the Act contains administrative accountability mechanisms and protections for official acts, it does not remove access to judicial review generally. The Act’s provisions that protect acting appointments, insulate acts from invalidation due to guideline non‑compliance, and immunise officers for acts done in good faith constrain but do not categorically extinguish judicial remedies where statutory powers have been misapplied. The Act itself does not specify judicial review procedures.

Overrides and primacy in prosecutions: The Director’s power to commence and conduct prosecutions is to be exercised “despite any other written law” that requires consent, prescribes who can commence a prosecution, or prescribes the manner of commencement (s 11(2)). That gives the Director statutory primacy over conflicting prosecutorial requirements in other statutes to the extent described.

Interplay with national schemes: Where investigation and prosecution are subject to a national cooperative scheme or inter‑government arrangement, the Director must have regard to and seek to give effect to that scheme, its objectives and policies (s 10(2)). This imposes a statutory duty to coordinate in multi‑jurisdictional or national settings, rather than permitting unilateral departure where cooperative frameworks exist.

Attorney General powers and shared functions: The Act recognises that certain functions may be vested in both the Attorney General and the Director. If the Attorney General performs such a function, the Director must not act inconsistently without the Attorney General’s consent (s 28). The Attorney General may issue written general policy directions after consultation (s 27), and such directions must be recorded in the Director’s annual report (s 27(6)). The Attorney General cannot issue directions in respect of a particular case (s 27(2)), but the Director may request directions on a particular case and the Attorney General may comply (s 27(3)(b)); this creates an interface where statutory limits and pragmatic cooperation are combined.

Criminal Property Confiscation Act 2000: The Director is given functions to administer schemes directed to recovery or forfeiture of proceeds of crime and, without limiting the scope of those functions, is explicitly the officer principally assisting the Minister in administering the Criminal Property Confiscation Act 2000 (s 16(2)). The Director’s functions extend to freezing notices, confiscation orders and Part 10 of the Confiscation Act (s 16(3)). The compilation notes additional transitional arrangements and prior Act interactions (Notes and compilation table).

High Risk Serious Offenders Act 2020: The Director must make specified applications and proceedings under the High Risk Serious Offenders Act 2020 s 11(2) (s 15A(1)) and, unlike most DPP action, must bring those applications in the name of the State (s 15A(2)). That is an explicit statutory modification of usual naming practice under s 10(1)(a).

Public Sector Management Act 1994: Staff necessary for the performance of the Director’s functions are to be appointed or made available under Part 3 of the Public Sector Management Act 1994 (s 30). Although the Director’s offices are not public service offices (s 4(2)), the staff are sourced under the public sector employment framework.

Superannuation and remuneration statutes: Schedule 1 cross‑references superannuation statute and the Salaries and Allowances Tribunal for determination of salary and entitlements (Sch. 1 cl. 2-3). Amendments and transitional provisions in other Acts are reflected in the compilation table and Notes.

Evidence and procedural law: The Act allows the Director to give undertakings that answers, statements or disclosures will not be used in evidence against a person (s 20(2)(d)), which engages evidence law and privilege considerations. The Director’s capacity to grant indemnities (s 20(2)(c)) may interact with statutory liabilities, including obstruction or related offences.

Attorney General’s other statutory responsibilities: The Act expressly states that none of its provisions derogates from any function of the Attorney General (s 20(3)). That means statutory roles assigned to the Attorney General outside this Act remain intact; the Act reallocates certain prosecutorial functions but does not abolish or replace unrelated Attorney General functions.

Regulatory instruments and regulations: The Governor may make regulations not inconsistent with the Act for matters necessary or convenient to give effect to the Act (s 34). The Director’s power to do anything prescribed (s 18(1)) ties the office to any delegated legislation made under s 34.

Transitional and saving provisions: The Act applies to offences and proceedings commenced before its commencement (s 35(1)) and allows the Director to continue functions previously performed by the Attorney General with statutory deeming of acts and documents to be as if done by the Director (s 35(2)). A reference to Crown Prosecutor in other laws is deemed to be a reference to the Director and Deputy Director (s 35(3)), ensuring cross‑statute continuity.

The compilation table and notes in the source record a sequence of amendments and insertions that materially affected functions, definitions, and administrative details of the Act.

Early amendments and commencement: The Act commenced in stages in 1991-1992 (compilation table). Acts Amendment (Public Sector Management) Act 1994 amended definitions and commencement arrangements (No. 32 of 1994). Superannuation and employment entitlements were addressed in the Government Employees Superannuation Amendment Act (No. 2) 1995 (No. 60 of 1995), affecting Schedule 1 cl. 3 and related provisions.

Coroners and participation: The Coroners Act 1996 introduced a specific reference to the Director’s role in Coroners Court proceedings; s 15 was amended by No. 2 of 1996 s 61 to authorise participation and assistance with the coroner’s concurrence.

Confiscation and proceeds of crime: The Criminal Property Confiscation (Consequential Provisions) Act 2000 (No. 69 of 2000) and associated amendments incorporated explicit DPP responsibilities for confiscation and recovery proceedings, culminating in s 16 and expanded functions in relation to freezing notices and enforcing confiscation orders (s 16(2)-(3)). The compilation notes transitional arrangements whereby earlier provisions continued to apply to certain acts.

Structural and procedural reform in the 2000s: Repeats and amendments in the early 2000s (Criminal Law (Procedure) Amendment Act 2002; Acts Amendment and Repeal (Courts and Legal Practice) Act 2003; Director of Public Prosecutions Amendment Act 2004; Courts Legislation Amendment and Repeal Act 2004; Criminal Procedure and Appeals (Consequential and Other Provisions) Act 2004) introduced or reworked key operational provisions. Notably, s 11 was inserted by the Director of Public Prosecutions Amendment Act 2004 (No. 21 of 2004 s 3), explicitly giving the Director a function to commence and conduct prosecutions and to take over prosecutions, and s 13 was amended by the same Act (s 5). Section 19 was amended to clarify how the Director takes over matters (No. 21 of 2004 s 6).

Representation and courts: Amendments in 2004 and 2005 changed representation rights in certain courts; s 21 was amended by the Courts Legislation Amendment and Repeal Act 2004 (No. 59 of 2004 s 141) to permit a police officer to represent the Director in Magistrates and Children’s Courts in addition to a legal practitioner.

Interjurisdictional prosecution and appeals: The Criminal Procedure and Appeals Act amendments in 2004 (No. 84 of 2004) inserted s 16A enabling prosecution for other jurisdictions’ offences with Attorney General consent (s 16A inserted: No. 84 of 2004 s 30) and made related changes to appeals and procedural matters.

Legal profession and definitions: The Legal Profession Act 2008 (No. 21 of 2008) amended definitions relevant to eligibility and other cross‑references (s 659). Bankruptcy and insolvency interaction was addressed by the Acts Amendment (Bankruptcy) Act 2009 (No. 18 of 2009 s 31), which affected removal grounds in Schedule 1 cl. 6 on bankruptcy.

Contemporary additions: The High Risk Serious Offenders Act 2020 (No. 29 of 2020 s 118) inserted s 15A, mandating that the Director make applications and take proceedings under the High Risk Serious Offenders Act in the name of the State (s 15A(2)). The Legal Profession Uniform Law Application Act 2022 (No. 9 of 2022 s 424) made consequential amendments to definitions appearing in s 3.

Transitional notes and omitted provisions: The compilation table records that certain amendments were subject to repeal or non‑commencement (Notes and Uncommenced provisions table). Several reprints (2001, 2005, 2011) consolidated amendments into successive reprints.

Where the source supplies section‑level amendment references, they are noted in the margins of the printed Act (for example, the insertion of s 11 is explicitly credited to No. 21 of 2004 s 3; s 15A to No. 29 of 2020 s 118(2); s 16A to No. 84 of 2004 s 30). The Schedule and compiled notes cross‑reference superannuation law repeals and transitional persistence of earlier superannuation provisions (Notes to Sch. 1 and compilation table).

The source does not include reported litigation or case citations involving the Act. The annotated text supplies amendments, notes and reprint references but does not list judicial decisions construing the Act. As a result, there is no litigation history recorded in the statute compilation itself.

Relevant loci for potential litigation are discernible from the Act’s structure. The statutory interface with other written laws and the broad powers conferred on the Director create possible points of dispute that might come before courts. Examples apparent from the text include:

• The Director’s power to take over prosecutions by written notice (s 19) could give rise to judicial review or interlocutory proceedings if a person alleges procedural unfairness or jurisdictional error in the taking over or in the exercise of discontinuance powers (s 19(3) preserves Director discretion to discontinue). The Act protects notice validity from irregularity (s 19(2)), which may limit procedural challenges.

• The Director’s power to give directions to officials that a prosecution shall not be brought and that matters be referred to the Director (s 23(1)) may create disputes over the lawfulness or scope of such directions. The Act requires officials to comply (s 23(1)), which may prompt legal challenges where officials refuse or where a third party seeks to challenge the lawfulness of a direction.

• Obligations on officials to comply with requests for information and assistance to the extent practicable notwithstanding other written law (s 22(3)) could lead to disputes when statutory secrecy or privilege regimes are thought to conflict. The statutory wording gives primacy to compliance “so far as it is practicable,” which is a fact‑sensitive standard.

• The relation between the Attorney General’s general policy directions and the DPP’s independence may give rise to litigation about the scope of “general policy” versus “particular case” directions (s 27(1)-(3)). The statutory bar on Attorney General directions in particular cases (s 27(2)) includes the caveat that the Director may request such directions (s 27(3)(b)), which is a factual and procedural matter that could be the subject of judicial interpretation.

• Removal from office by the Governor on grounds of misbehaviour or incompetence or incapacity (Sch. 1 cl. 6) creates an avenue for administrative law review and potentially constitutional argument where the statutory process is contested. Misbehaviour is defined inclusively (Sch. 1 cl. 6(2)), including failure to comply with the disclosure duty (Sch. 1 cl. 5).

Statutory protections may constrain certain litigation avenues. Acting appointments are protected from challenge on grounds of irregularity, non‑occurrence or cessation of appointment (s 8(6)). The Act immunises officers from personal liability for good faith acts and provides State indemnity (s 33). The Director’s statements of guidelines are not grounds to invalidate acts or omissions for failure to comply (s 24(3)). These provisions narrow some bases for civil litigation seeking to impugn prosecutorial acts.

Given that the compilation text contains no reported decisions, users seeking case law must consult judicial databases and law reports for decisions construing s 11 (taking over prosecutions), s 22 (requests for information), s 23 (directions to officials), s 27-28 (relationship with Attorney General), s 19 (taking over procedure) and Schedule 1 removal procedures. The Act’s internal protections and procedural requirements will likely be central to any litigation that arises.

Office‑not‑public‑service nuance: The Act states the offices of Director and Deputy Director are not offices in the public service (s 4(2)), yet staff necessary for the Director’s functions are appointed or made available under the Public Sector Management Act 1994 (s 30). Practically, this bifurcation means the Director operates as an independent statutory officeholder, but relies on public‑service personnel frameworks for staffing. Employers and human resources teams must navigate the intersection of non‑public‑service office status and public service employment rules.

Scope of override over other statutes: The Director’s prosecutorial function may be performed “despite any other written law” that requires consent or prescribes who may commence a prosecution (s 11(2)). That is a powerful clause; however, it does not abolish other statutory provisions altogether. It displaces procedural obstacles to the Director acting, but practitioners should check the specific wording of the conflicting statute for residual obligations, non‑prosecutorial consequences, or enforcement mechanisms outside prosecutorial commencement.

Attorney General directions , general policy vs particular cases: The Attorney General may issue directions as to general policy after consultation (s 27(1)) and may not issue directions in respect of a particular case (s 27(2)). However, the Director may request the Attorney General to issue directions in respect of a particular case (s 27(3)(b)) and the Attorney General may comply. This two‑way mechanism means that although the Attorney General cannot unilaterally direct the Director in a particular case, such a direction can be authorised if the Director seeks it. That procedural arrangement is a nuanced cross‑check; parties should examine whether a direction arose from a Director request or unilateral AG action.

Binding nature of DPP directions and requests: Officials must comply with a Director’s request for documents or assistance “so far as it is practicable to do so, and notwithstanding any other written law” (s 22(3)). Similarly, the Director can direct an official that a prosecution shall not be brought and that matters be referred to the Director (s 23(1)). These are mandatory, not advisory. From an operational perspective, police and prosecuting authorities must build procedures to escalate and respond to s 22 and s 23 instruments promptly.

Non‑use of guidelines as a defence: The Director may issue guidelines and publish them in the Gazette (s 24(1)-(2)), but failure to follow those guidelines is not a ground to call an act or omission into question or to invalidate it (s 24(3)). Litigants cannot rely on regulatory non‑compliance with DPP guidance to overturn decisions, which narrows procedural attack vectors.

Acting appointment protections: Actions of persons purporting to act under s 8 are insulated from challenge on specified grounds (s 8(6)). Parties seeking to contest the legal validity of acts by acting Directors face statutory bars on questioning those appointments’ procedural defects.

Representation in lower courts by police officers: In Magistrates and Children’s Courts the Director may be represented by a police officer (s 21(b)). This means police prosecutors may lawfully appear in those courts on behalf of the Director, which can cause confusion where local practice normally expects legal practitioners to conduct prosecutions.

Disclosure and removal intersection: The Director must disclose direct or indirect pecuniary interests to the Attorney General (Sch. 1 cl. 5(b)). Failure to comply is actionable as misbehaviour for removal purposes (Sch. 1 cl. 6(2)(b)). This creates a strict linkage between disclosure obligations and job security.

Conflicting duties on intergovernmental matters: The Director must have regard to national cooperative schemes (s 10(2)). Where the Director’s assessment of a matter conflicts with the scheme’s objectives or policies, there is a statutory duty to “seek to give effect” to the scheme, which limits unilateral deviation. Practically, DPP policy and national frameworks must be harmonised.

Exercise of Attorney General powers by Director: The Director may exercise powers, authority or discretion relating to investigation and prosecution that are vested in the Attorney General (s 20(2)(a)) and may give consents normally required from the Attorney General (s 20(2)(b)). Lawyers and administrators must track whether particular statutory consents have been administered by the Attorney General historically or are now exercised by the Director, and document the provenance of those consents.

Immunity and indemnity limits: The Act provides personal immunity for persons acting in good faith and a right to State indemnity (s 33). That does not, however, remove the possibility of State liability or litigation against the State arising from prosecutorial conduct. Also, the “good faith” standard is a legal standard that may be litigated.

Naming and State representation: Most Director functions are exercised on behalf of the State but may be performed in the name of the office of the Director (s 10(1)(a)). An exception requires certain High Risk Serious Offenders Act proceedings to be brought in the name of the State (s 15A(2)). Practitioners must ensure procedural correctness as to which name is used in filings.

Delegation caveat: Delegation to officers is permitted (s 31) but does not include the power to sub‑delegate and is subject to direction and control by the Director. Delegation instruments should be carefully drafted to stay within the Act’s limits.

For the Director’s office

• Establish documented procedures for exercising core statutory functions. The Director must be ready to commence, take over and conduct prosecutions and appeals (ss 11, 13). Create formal templates and a register for written notices when taking over matters to meet s 19(1) formalities (notice to the former prosecutor and the court clerk/registrar), noting s 19(2) preserves validity despite irregularity but good practice is to be precise.

• Maintain statutory reporting and publication cycle. Prepare the annual report for the year ending 30 June and deliver to the Attorney General by 30 September (s 32(1)). Include any directions given by the Attorney General under s 27 in the annual report (s 27(6)). Publish any prosecutorial guidelines in the Gazette (s 24(2)) and keep an up‑to‑date register of issued statements.

• Ensure staffing and delegation comply with statutory rules. Staff should be appointed under the Public Sector Management Act arrangements (s 30). Any delegation instrument under s 31 should be in writing, clearly describe the functions delegated, confirm subordination to Director direction and control, and ensure it does not purport to delegate the power of delegation.

• Protect statutory immunities and indemnities. Keep records demonstrating the good faith and statutory basis for decisions to support s 33 immunities and claims for State indemnity if litigation arises.

• Manage conflicts and disclosures. The Director must not practise as a legal practitioner or take other paid work without Governor approval and must disclose direct/indirect pecuniary interests to the Attorney General (Sch. 1 cl. 5). Keep a register of disclosures and obtain Governor approvals where necessary.

• Coordinate with national schemes. For matters within national cooperative schemes, document consideration of scheme objectives and policies as required by s 10(2).

For police and prosecuting authorities

• Build compliance workflows for DPP requests and directions. Under s 22, officials must comply with written requests for information and assistance “so far as it is practicable to do so, and notwithstanding any other written law.” Agencies should create escalation paths and record reasons if compliance is impracticable. Under s 23, agencies must comply with written directions that specific offences shall not be brought and matters be referred to the Director.

• Maintain records for transfer of conduct. When a prosecution is taken over, the Director becomes the prosecutor on written notice (s 19(1)). Preserve and transfer investigation files, evidence logs, disclosure records and any exculpatory material according to prosecutorial disclosure obligations and internal protocols.

For the Attorney General and Ministers

• Use the written direction mechanism judiciously. The Attorney General’s power to issue directions is limited to general policy (s 27(1)) and cannot be used for particular cases unless requested by the Director (s 27(2)-(3)). Ensure any direction complies with the statutory boundary and is issued only after consultation (s 27(1)). Prepare to include any direction’s text in the DPP annual report (s 27(6)).

• Manage consent for interjurisdictional appointments. The Director or staff may prosecute offences of other jurisdictions only with the Attorney General’s consent (s 16A). Ensure any consent instrument is recorded and its terms specified.

For courts and registrars

• Accept judicial notice. Courts must take judicial notice of the fact of appointment and official signatures (s 9). Registrars should be ready to receive and record DPP notices of takeover (s 19) and other official documents.

For interested private parties and businesses

• Track conflicting statutory regimes. Where the Director is administering confiscation or freezing orders (s 16), private parties should map the interaction between the Confiscation Act orders and the DPP’s statutory authority and seek timely legal advice when affected by freezing notices or forfeiture actions.

• Use procedural channels for challenge where necessary. Procedural protections in the Act constrain certain appeals on guideline non‑compliance and acting appointment defects (ss 24(3), 8(6)), but ordinary judicial remedies remain. Parties contemplating challenge should review the Act’s immunities and protective clauses first.

Cross‑office governance and records

• Implement robust recordkeeping. Given the Act’s emphasis on written notices, requests, directions and reporting (ss 19, 22, 23, 27, 32), ensure secure systems for drafting, signing and archiving documents, and clear protocols for disclosing information to the Attorney General in a manner consistent with the requirement in s 29 (“so far as the interests of justice allow”).

• Train staff on statutory limits and powers. Provide regular training to prosecutors, investigators and administrative staff on the Director’s authorities under ss 11, 19, 20, 22 and 23, and on the constraints and duties arising from Part 4 with the Attorney General.

• Prepare contingency plans for acting appointments. The Governor may make acting appointments and, where none are made, the Deputy Director acts (s 8(1)-(2)). Departments should ensure continuity plans and clear delegations of responsibility are in place and that instruments of acting appointment are properly documented (s 8(3)-(5)).

By following the Act’s written prescription for notices, obligations on officials, reporting, and public documentation, the Director’s office, prosecuting bodies, the Attorney General, courts and private stakeholders can align procedures to the statutory framework and reduce discretionary and procedural risk.