Director of Public Prosecutions Regulations 2019

The instrument deploys a small set of structural concepts and cross‑references that determine its reach and legal effect. The principal definitional nodes are the shorthand Act reference and the definition of "State or Territory authority" (reg 5). The Act is the Director of Public Prosecutions Act 1983; that shorthand governs the interaction between these regulations and the parent statute. "State or Territory authority" is defined to mean an agency of a State or Territory government that either conducts investigations into offences against State or Territory laws, or is responsible for the conduct of prosecutions for breaches of those laws, or both (reg 5). That definition determines which external agencies may receive legal advice from the Director under reg 6(1)(f), and which agencies may fall within other cross-jurisdictional arrangements set out in the regulations.

"Other functions of the Director" is an enumerated concept that the regulations supply for the purposes of paragraph 6(2)(b) of the Act (reg 6(1)). The enumerated functions are specific and itemised. They include procedural acts (carrying on proceedings instituted by specified categories of persons or bodies), institutional substitutions (performing ACT DPP functions during a vacancy), statutory prosecutions (instituting or carrying on proceedings under particular statutory provisions named in the regulation), advisory roles (giving legal advice to Commonwealth or State/Territory authorities on law enforcement matters), and recovery functions (instituting, carrying on, coordinating or supervising recovery proceedings relating to certain superannuation orders).

The instrument also creates the concept of "prescribed bodies" for the purposes of paragraph 9(6C)(c) of the Act and provides an explicit list (reg 8). The three bodies named are: the New South Wales Crime Commission under the Crime Commission Act 2012 (NSW), the Independent Commission Against Corruption (NSW) under the Independent Commission Against Corruption Act 1988 (NSW), and the Crime and Corruption Commission under the Crime and Corruption Act 2001 (Qld). The regulations do not explain or replicate the effect of paragraph 9(6C)(c) itself; they supply the list that paragraph 9(6C)(c) requires.

Two other structural concepts arise from the form of the instrument. One is the temporal trigger for the Director’s exercise of ACT powers: it is the occurrence of a vacancy in the ACT Director of Public Prosecutions office (reg 6(1)(b), reg 7). The other is the preservation of existing statutory power: reg 6(2) states that nothing in reg 6(1)(e) affects the Director’s power under subsection 9(11) of the Act, thereby signalling that the regulatory provision is not intended to displace an identified statutory discretion.

The instrument is also a repeal instrument in Schedule 1, which removes the whole of the Director of Public Prosecutions Regulations 1984. That deletion may be an important conceptual transition for reference and administrative continuity, because any prescriptions, lists or procedures previously encoded in the 1984 regulations are no longer in force as of the commencement date noted in reg 2.

The instrument principally affects the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions, and a curated set of Commonwealth, Territory and State bodies that interact with the Director’s exercise of prosecutorial, advisory and recovery functions.

First, the Director of Public Prosecutions is the decision-maker whose list of permissible activities is extended, clarified and tied to specific cross‑jurisdictional interactions. Reg 6(1) enumerates the activities the Director may undertake; reg 7 grants a specific additional power during ACT DPP vacancy. Consequently, the Director’s office will be operationally affected because those are formal, statutory regulators of its scope.

Second, Commonwealth authorities and bodies that either instigate proceedings or seek legal advice are affected. Reg 6(1)(a) authorises the Director to carry on proceedings instituted by an officer of, or person employed by, the Commonwealth or a body established by an Act or Territory law; by a person holding an office under a Territory Act or law; by a person performing services for the Australian Crime Commission under subsection 58(1) of the Australian Crime Commission Act 2002; and by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (reg 6(1)(a)(i)-(iv). Those listed categories identify who may have their instituted proceedings carried on by the Commonwealth DPP.

Third, State and Territory agencies that investigate offences or that are responsible for prosecuting breaches of State or Territory laws are within the instrument’s scope because they meet the definition of "State or Territory authority" (reg 5). Reg 6(1)(f) permits the Director to give legal advice to such authorities in relation to investigation or prosecution of offences against Commonwealth laws, whether or not the advice relates to a particular investigation. That creates a formal channel for State/Territory authorities to receive Commonwealth DPP legal advice in relation to Commonwealth law matters.

Fourth, the specified State-level investigative bodies named as prescribed bodies in reg 8 are directly affected because the regulations list them for the purposes of paragraph 9(6C)(c) of the Act. Those bodies are the New South Wales Crime Commission, the Independent Commission Against Corruption (NSW), and the Crime and Corruption Commission (Qld). The listing confers a statutory relationship between those named bodies and whatever operative consequence paragraph 9(6C)(c) of the Act brings.

Fifth, persons or entities subject to proceedings under specified federal or state Acts are affected to the extent the Director may institute or carry on proceedings under those Acts. Reg 6(1)(c) authorises the Director to institute or carry on proceedings under section 112AH of the Family Law Act 1975, and reg 6(1)(d) authorises the Director to institute or carry on proceedings under the Confiscation of Proceeds of Crime Act 1989 (NSW). Reg 6(1)(g) authorises actions for recovery of amounts payable under superannuation orders made under the Crimes (Superannuation Benefits) Act 1989 and Part VA of the Australian Federal Police Act 1979. Those provisions alter the set of cases the Commonwealth DPP may initiate or pursue.

Finally, licence holders, regulated entities and other private parties who might be the subject of prosecutions, confiscations, or recovery actions under the named statutory provisions will be affected indirectly through the changed locus of prosecutorial activity. The instrument itself does not create new private obligations, but by conferring jurisdictional or prosecutorial authority upon the Commonwealth Director, it changes who may be the prosecuting or recovery agency in particular matters.

The instrument does not allocate funding, nor does it change court procedure rules in the regulations themselves. It does, however, alter decision-making lines and the potential institutional counter‑parties to investigations, prosecutions, legal advice and recovery proceedings, by specifying actors and circumstances where the Commonwealth Director may act.

The regulations do not purport to create freestanding statutory duties or rights for members of the public; rather, they expand and clarify the Director’s functions and powers as a decision-maker under the parent Act. The principal operative provisions that generate duties or confer operational rights are reg 6 and reg 7, and the prescription of bodies in reg 8 has an indirect effect on the allocation of functions under the parent Act.

Reg 6(1) enumerates the Director’s "other functions" for the purposes of paragraph 6(2)(b) of the Act. That list supplies a set of rights for the Director to act in certain ways, and thereby shapes duties in counterpart bodies or actors who interact with the Director. The Director’s rights under reg 6(1) include:

• A right to carry on proceedings instituted by certain categories of Commonwealth or Territory actors, including officers or employees of the Commonwealth or bodies established by Commonwealth or Territory law, persons holding office under a Territory law, persons performing services for the Australian Crime Commission under subsection 58(1) of the Australian Crime Commission Act 2002, and the Australian Securities and Investments Commission, in respect of either committal or summary proceedings for State offences (reg 6(1)(a)(i)-(vi)). The effect is that the Director may step into or continue proceedings that those actors have instituted.

• A right to perform, in respect of matters arising under laws made under or continued in force by the Australian Capital Territory (Self-Government) Act 1988, the functions conferred on the ACT Director of Public Prosecutions by the Director of Public Prosecutions Act 1990 (ACT) during any period when no person holds, or is acting in, the ACT office (reg 6(1)(b)). Reg 7 restates that power to emphasise that during such a vacancy the Commonwealth Director may exercise the ACT DPP’s powers under that ACT statute, in respect of matters referred to in reg 6(1)(b).

• A power to institute or carry on proceedings under section 112AH of the Family Law Act 1975 (reg 6(1)(c)).

• A power to institute or carry on proceedings under the Confiscation of Proceeds of Crime Act 1989 (NSW) (reg 6(1)(d)).

• A power to give legal advice to Commonwealth authorities on law enforcement matters, whether or not the advice relates to a particular investigation (reg 6(1)(e)). Reg 6(2) clarifies that nothing in reg 6(1)(e) affects the Director’s power under subsection 9(11) of the Act, preserving any separate statutory authority to represent or act for a Commonwealth authority under that subsection.

• A power to give legal advice to State or Territory authorities on investigation or prosecution of Commonwealth offences or matters relating to such investigations or prosecutions, again whether or not the advice is for the purposes of a particular investigation (reg 6(1)(f)). The definition of "State or Territory authority" in reg 5 determines the agencies that may receive such advice.

• A power to institute, carry on, coordinate, or supervise proceedings for recovery of amounts payable to the Commonwealth or a Commonwealth authority under particular kinds of superannuation orders: those made under the Crimes (Superannuation Benefits) Act 1989, and those under Part VA of the Australian Federal Police Act 1979 (reg 6(1)(g)(i)-(ii)). That supplies the Director with a right to pursue specified recovery actions on behalf of the Commonwealth.

These items are expressed as functions and powers of the Director. They do not, in the text of the regulations, generate duties that bind private parties directly; they do generate operational entitlements for the Director to act. The counterparty obligations , for example, to comply with court process in proceedings the Director institutes or continues , arise under the substantive criminal, civil or recovery statutes and the general law, not under the regulations themselves.

Reg 8 prescribes specific bodies for the purposes of paragraph 9(6C)(c) of the Act. The regulation therefore determines, for the operation of that paragraph, which institutional actors are included. The prescription is a statutory act that alters the roster of bodies that the parent Act treats as relevant to paragraph 9(6C)(c). The regulation does not itself state the practical consequences of being so prescribed; those consequences are contained in the parent Act provision that the reg cites.

Reg 6(2) explicitly preserves the Director’s power under subsection 9(11) of the Act from being affected by the advisory power in reg 6(1)(e). That is a textual confirmation that the advisory function supplied by the regulation is intended to coexist with statutory powers in the Act, rather than to replace or curtail them.

The instrument does not create or vary statutory rights of private litigants, nor does it set procedural rules, fee regimes, or funding arrangements for the exercise of the Director’s functions. It therefore primarily reallocates and clarifies the Director’s capacity to act in particular institutional circumstances, and prescribes a limited list of external bodies relevant to the application of a named paragraph of the Act.

The Director of Public Prosecutions Regulations 2019 do not create new offences, impose civil penalties, or specify administrative sanctions. The instrument is regulatory in the sense that it enumerates functions and prescribes certain bodies; it does not introduce standalone enforcement mechanisms within the text of the regulations.

Enforcement, in the practical sense, flows from the Director’s power to institute or continue proceedings under other statutory regimes. For example, reg 6(1)(c) and reg 6(1)(d) enable the Director to institute or carry on proceedings under section 112AH of the Family Law Act 1975 and under the Confiscation of Proceeds of Crime Act 1989 (NSW) respectively. Those statutes contain their own enforcement mechanisms, procedural rules and potential penalties; the regulations simply give the Director a power to act under them. Similarly, reg 6(1)(g) authorises the Director to institute or carry on proceedings related to recovery of amounts payable under superannuation orders made under certain Acts. The recovery powers and any remedies, penalties or enforcement options in those statutes are the operative enforcement instruments; the regulation supplies the locus of the prosecuting or recovery agency.

Because the regulations do not set or alter penalty schedules, they do not purport to change the substantive criminal or civil consequences that attach to conduct. The instrument’s enforcement effect is therefore indirect: it changes which prosecuting authority may initiate or continue proceedings, or which body may receive legal advice or coordinate prosecutions, and thereby affects the identity of the enforcement actor in particular matters.

The instrument does repeal the Director of Public Prosecutions Regulations 1984 in whole (Schedule 1). Any penalty, procedure, or prescription that previously relied on that 1984 instrument is no longer operative from the commencement date of this instrument. The regulations do not, however, specify transitional enforcement arrangements or savings provisions in the text provided; the single action is the repeal itself.

If an affected party seeks to challenge the Director’s exercise of the powers granted by these regulations, any legal remedy would be sought under the parent Act, general administrative law, or the substantive statutes under which proceedings are instituted, rather than under the regulations supplying new penalties.

The instrument is deliberately cross‑referential. It operates as a network of mechanical links between the Director of Public Prosecutions Act 1983 and several Commonwealth and State Acts that govern specific prosecutions, advice or recovery activities.

Primary statutory anchor

• The regulations are made under the Director of Public Prosecutions Act 1983 (reg 3). Several of the listed functions in reg 6 are expressly stated to be "for the purposes of paragraph 6(2)(b) of the Act", which situates the regulations as elaborations of that paragraph. The instrument does not reproduce paragraph 6(2)(b); it supplies a catalogue of actions the Director may take under the parent statute.

Cross‑jurisdictional interaction

• The regulations permit the Director to carry on proceedings instituted by persons performing services for the Australian Crime Commission under subsection 58(1) of the Australian Crime Commission Act 2002 (reg 6(1)(a)(iii)), and to carry on proceedings instituted by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (reg 6(1)(a)(iv)). Those cross‑references make the Commonwealth DPP an operable prosecuting or continuing actor for matters linked to Commonwealth investigative or regulatory agencies.

• Reg 6(1)(d) enables the Director to institute or carry on proceedings under the Confiscation of Proceeds of Crime Act 1989 (NSW). That is an explicit cross‑jurisdictional interaction with a New South Wales statute, by authorising the Commonwealth Director to act under that State law instrument.

• Reg 6(1)(c) enables institution or continuation of proceedings under section 112AH of the Family Law Act 1975, which is a Commonwealth statute. Reg 6(1)(g) enables recovery actions tied to the Crimes (Superannuation Benefits) Act 1989 and Part VA of the Australian Federal Police Act 1979.

ACT substitution

• Reg 6(1)(b) and reg 7 jointly provide that, during any period when no person holds office, or is acting, as Director of Public Prosecutions under the ACT Act, the Commonwealth Director may perform the functions conferred on the ACT DPP by the Director of Public Prosecutions Act 1990 (ACT), and exercise the powers conferred on the ACT DPP by that Act, in respect of the matters referred to in reg 6(1)(b). That effect is a statutory mechanism for substitution of prosecutorial capacity across jurisdictions in the event of an ACT office vacancy. The instrument does not define what constitutes the relevant period of vacancy beyond the plain words "any period when no person holds office, or is acting, as Director of Public Prosecutions under that Act".

Advisory relationships with State/Territory authorities

• Reg 6(1)(e) and 6(1)(f) give the Director the power to give legal advice to Commonwealth authorities on law enforcement matters, and to State or Territory authorities on the investigation or prosecution of Commonwealth offences or related matters. Reg 5’s definition of "State or Territory authority" determines which agencies may be recipients of that advice. Notably, the advisory power may be exercised whether or not the advice is for the purposes of a particular investigation, which means the DPP’s advisory role is not confined to live or single matters but can be used for broader policy, procedural or preparatory work within the scope of law enforcement.

Prescription under the parent Act

• Reg 8 prescribes three state bodies "for the purposes of paragraph 9(6C)(c) of the Act". The instrument does not set out paragraph 9(6C)(c) itself, but the mechanics are clear: the parent Act requires a list of prescribed bodies for the operation of that paragraph, and this regulation supplies that list, thereby shaping how the parent Act will operate where paragraph 9(6C)(c) applies.

Repeal of the 1984 regulations

• Schedule 1 repeals the Director of Public Prosecutions Regulations 1984 in whole. That repeal may change the network of cross-references and operating procedures that practitioners had previously relied upon. Any procedural or prescriptional content contained solely in the 1984 regulations is removed; the new regulations supply a narrower or different set of enumerated functions and prescribed bodies.

Limitations on the instrument’s reach

• The regulations do not purport to amend the substantive content or penalty regimes of the statutes they reference. Instead, they change who may act under those statutes in specified ways. For instance, the Director’s ability to bring or continue proceedings under the Confiscation of Proceeds of Crime Act 1989 (NSW) is supplied by the regulation, but the substantive grounds, remedies and processes under that NSW Act remain as written in that statute.

In sum, the instrument functions as a set of pointers that align the Commonwealth Director’s powers with specific Commonwealth and State statutory regimes, and with specified investigative and anti‑corruption bodies, while leaving the substantive law and procedural frameworks of those statutes intact.

The instrument contains its own commencement and repeal information, but no prior amendment trail within the text supplied. Key dates and actions in the instrument are:

• Date of making and registration: The instrument records that it was made by the Governor‑General, acting with the advice of the Federal Executive Council, and is dated 07 February 2019 (cover text). Reg 2 sets the commencement detail, stating that the whole instrument commences the day after registration, which is recorded as 16 February 2019 in the commencement table (reg 2(1)).

• Source authority: The instrument is made under the Director of Public Prosecutions Act 1983 (reg 3).

• Repeal: Schedule 1 repeals the Director of Public Prosecutions Regulations 1984 in whole (Schedule 1, item 1). The Schedule gives effect to the full repeal by direct instruction: "Repeal the instrument."

• Schedules: Reg 4 contains the general formulation that each instrument specified in a Schedule to this instrument is amended or repealed as set out in the applicable items, and any other item in a Schedule has effect according to its terms. In effect, Schedule 1 performs a complete replacement of the 1984 regulations with the 2019 regulations’ content.

The instrument contains a note that the commencement table "relates only to the provisions of this instrument as originally made" and that it will not be amended in the instrument text to deal with later amendments (reg 2, Note). The instrument does not include any subsequent amendment entries, transitional provisions, or savings clauses beyond the repeal and the commencement instruction.

No later amendments, legislative history such as exposure drafts, or parliamentary second reading speeches are included in the text provided. The instrument as presented is a standalone regulatory instrument that replaced the 1984 regulations on commencement. Any further amendment history after the commencement date is not contained in the instrument text supplied.

The text of the Director of Public Prosecutions Regulations 2019 contains no litigation history or references to particular judicial decisions. The instrument does not cite any cases, and it does not summarise or reproduce prior litigation that might have concerned the 1984 regulations it repeals. The regulations are declaratory and prescriptive in nature, setting out enumerated functions, powers and prescribed bodies, but they do not record any adjudicative history.

Because the instrument repeals the Director of Public Prosecutions Regulations 1984 in whole (Schedule 1), there is the practical possibility that previous litigation that turned on provisions of the 1984 regulations may no longer have the same legal footing post‑commencement. The instrument itself does not include transitional or savings provisions, and it does not indicate whether ongoing matters commenced under the 1984 regulations are to be preserved. The regulations do not state any interpretive or retrospective effect.

Practitioners seeking litigation history must therefore look beyond this instrument to relevant case law and to the parent statute. The instrument confines itself to statutory prescription of functions and named bodies; it is silent on any legal disputes, appeals, or judicial consideration of these specific regulatory formulations.

If a party wished to challenge an exercise of power by the Director that relies on these regulations, any litigation would engage the parent Act and the exercise of statutory power rather than the regulations alone. The regulation expressly preserves the Director’s power under subsection 9(11) of the Act in respect of giving advice (reg 6(2)), which suggests that statutory avenues under the Act remain the operative route for judicial review or challenge, but the instrument itself does not record any historical litigation on that point.

This short instrument contains several textual features and cross‑references that can produce practical surprises for practitioners if they are not read closely.

Narrow scope of prescribed bodies

• Reg 8 prescribes exactly three bodies for the purposes of paragraph 9(6C)(c) of the Act: two New South Wales bodies and the Queensland Crime and Corruption Commission. That list is explicit and narrow. If an actor assumes a broader list of state or territory anti‑corruption or crime bodies will be treated as prescribed for the purposes of the Act, the regulation shows otherwise. The practical implication is that paragraph 9(6C)(c) of the parent Act will operate with respect only to those named bodies, unless and until the regulations are amended.

Definition limits who is a "State or Territory authority"

• Reg 5 defines "State or Territory authority" as an agency of a State or Territory government that either conducts investigations into offences against State or Territory laws, or is responsible for the conduct of prosecutions for breaches of those laws. The definition is functional, not nominative. Agencies that do not carry out investigations and are not responsible for prosecution will fall outside the definition, and consequently may not be recipients of the Director’s advisory power under reg 6(1)(f). Practitioners should check whether a particular agency meets either of the two functional limbs before assuming reg 6(1)(f) applies.

Advisory power is broad in subject and not limited to live matters

• Reg 6(1)(e) and reg 6(1)(f) permit the Director to give legal advice "whether or not the advice is for the purposes of a particular investigation". That language is broad: the Director may provide law enforcement advice in non‑investigation contexts, such as policy, systemic reviews or pre-investigation planning. The absence of procedural detail or limitation creates operational discretion as to when and how advice is provided.

ACT power is contingent on a vacancy

• The Commonwealth Director’s power to perform ACT DPP functions under reg 6(1)(b) and reg 7 is expressly limited to periods when no person holds office or is acting as ACT Director. The regulations therefore do not create a standing, concurrent jurisdiction in the ACT; they create a contingency arrangement that arises only during a vacancy. Practitioners must check the vacancy status of the ACT DPP before assuming the Commonwealth DPP can exercise ACT statutory powers.

Preservation of subsection 9(11) power

• Reg 6(2) states that nothing in reg 6(1)(e) affects the Director’s power under subsection 9(11) of the Act. That preservation could mean the Director retains the capacity under the Act to represent or act for Commonwealth authorities in ways broader than reg 6(1)(e) expressly provides. Users should not assume reg 6(1)(e) is the sole source of advisory or representation authority.

No procedural detail or funding provisions

• The regulations supply powers, not procedural rules. There is no express procedure for referrals, no statement of the basis or terms on which the Director will accept carriage of a proceeding instituted by another actor, and no mention of costs recovery, funding, or intergovernmental arrangements. This may create operational uncertainty: the instrument permits action but does not say how that action will be initiated administratively.

Repeal of the 1984 regulations

• By repealing the 1984 regulations entirely, Schedule 1 eliminates any prescriptions that previously existed in those regulations. If practitioners relied on provisions that were in the 1984 instrument, they need to verify whether equivalent rules now exist elsewhere, or whether practice will be governed by the parent Act and administrative arrangements, rather than by regulation.

Cross‑jurisdictional complexity

• The instrument authorises the Director to act under NSW law (Confiscation of Proceeds of Crime Act 1989 (NSW)) and to carry on committal or summary proceedings for State offences in certain circumstances (reg 6(1)(a)(v)-(vi)). The practical consequence is increased cross‑jurisdictional overlap between Commonwealth prosecutorial capacity and State statutory regimes. That overlap can raise questions about forum, applicable procedural rules, and intergovernmental handling of evidentiary and disclosure obligations. The regulations do not resolve those procedural questions.

Limited list of Commonwealth bodies that can have proceedings carried on by the Director

• Reg 6(1)(a) lists particular categories of Commonwealth or Territory actors whose instituted proceedings the Director may carry on. The list is not open‑ended. Practitioners should not assume the Director will carry on proceedings instituted by other, unnamed Commonwealth agencies unless covered by a listed category or otherwise consistent with the parent Act.

No express transitional arrangements for ongoing matters

• The instrument does not state whether matters commenced under the 1984 regulations continue to be governed by the old rules or fall immediately under the new regulatory environment. That absence could create a timing pitfall for matters in flight around the commencement date.

In short, the regulations materially reallocate certain functions and grant specified powers, but they leave substantial work to administrative practice and the parent statute for procedural implementation. Practitioners should not assume procedural detail, funding, or an expanded prescribed list beyond the narrow set the regulations explicitly provide.

Compliance under this instrument is primarily an administrative and institutional task for the Director’s office, Commonwealth bodies, State and Territory authorities, and the prescribed state bodies. The regulations do not impose direct statutory obligations on private parties, but they change who may appear as prosecuting or advising agencies in particular statutory contexts. The following practical steps are grounded in the text of the regulations.

For the Director’s office

• Maintain an internal register of the specific functions enumerated in reg 6(1)(a)-(g), and adopt administrative policies that record when the Director will exercise the power to carry on proceedings instituted by the listed categories of persons or bodies. Because the regulation names the categories precisely, decisions to act should reference the applicable subparagraph (for example reg 6(1)(a)(iii) for persons performing services for the Australian Crime Commission under s 58(1) of the ACC Act).

• Record the circumstances in which the Director will exercise the ACT substitution power in reg 6(1)(b) and reg 7: specifically, verify and document whether the ACT DPP office is vacant or has an acting office-holder before exercising ACT powers. Maintain a formal trigger and notification process tied to the status of the ACT DPP office.

• For advisory functions under reg 6(1)(e)-(f), establish clear client‑engagement procedures that state which types of Commonwealth and State/Territory authorities the Director will advise, noting the definition of "State or Territory authority" in reg 5. Because the advisory power extends to advice "whether or not" for a particular investigation, policies should specify the scope, confidentiality and conflicts processes that will govern such advice.

• For recovery functions under reg 6(1)(g), set internal procedures for initiating or supervising proceedings to recover amounts payable under superannuation orders made under the Crimes (Superannuation Benefits) Act 1989 and Part VA of the Australian Federal Police Act 1979. Ensure coordination with relevant Commonwealth authorities that are the recipients of recovered funds, and with the offices that administer those statutory regimes.

For Commonwealth agencies and bodies listed in reg 6(1)(a)

• If a Commonwealth officer, or a person employed by a Commonwealth body, anticipates instituting proceedings that may fall within reg 6(1)(a)(v)-(vi) (commitment for trial in respect of indictable State offences or summary conviction for State offences), document whether and how the institution of proceedings is intended to be continued by the Director. Consider early liaison with the Director’s office to secure carriage and to agree timetables for evidence, disclosure and assignment of counsel.

• If the Australian Securities and Investments Commission or persons performing services for the Australian Crime Commission may wish the Director to carry on proceedings, engage the Director’s office early, and ensure records demonstrate the statutory basis for seeking carriage under the specific subparagraph cited in reg 6(1)(a).

For State and Territory authorities

• Be aware that under reg 6(1)(f) the Director may give legal advice on the investigation or prosecution of a Commonwealth offence, whether or not for a particular investigation. If a State or Territory authority seeks advice from the Commonwealth DPP, confirm the authority meets the functional test in reg 5 (investigations into State/Territory law offences, or responsibility for prosecution). Establish protocols for requesting advice, including scope, confidentiality, record-keeping and limitations, because the regulations provide the authority to give advice but do not prescribe procedural steps.

For the prescribed bodies in reg 8

• The New South Wales Crime Commission, the Independent Commission Against Corruption (NSW), and the Crime and Corruption Commission (Qld) are specifically named as prescribed bodies for the purposes of paragraph 9(6C)(c) of the Act. Those bodies should review paragraph 9(6C)(c) of the parent Act together with these regulations to identify operational consequences, and incorporate the regulatory prescription into their interagency and legal governance arrangements.

General administrative compliance

• Because the regulations repeal the 1984 instrument in whole, agencies should determine whether any administrative practices relied upon that were grounded in the 1984 regulations require replacement. If so, document transitional arrangements internally even though the regulation does not provide statutory transitional provisions.

• Do not rely on the regulations to provide procedural, fee or funding arrangements. The instrument does not specify fee or funding mechanisms; any costs, resourcing, or intergovernmental charging arrangements should be documented in separate administrative agreements or memoranda between participating agencies.

• If an agency or private party expects the Director to act under a particular statutory provision listed in reg 6, ensure that the underlying statutory conditions for that provision are met; the regulation supplies the locus of who may act, but not the substantive legal threshold for action under those other Acts.

Record-keeping and audit

• Keep contemporaneous records of referrals, advice requests, decisions to institute or continue proceedings, and the statutory basis for those choices, citing the exact regulatory subparagraph relied on. These records will be relevant if any question arises about jurisdiction, authority to act, or whether the relevant functional definition (for example "State or Territory authority") applies.

Legal review

• Because the regulations interact with multiple statutes, agencies should obtain a short legal opinion identifying how the specific cross‑references in reg 6(1) operate in practice, and whether any separate procedural rules apply when the Director acts under the listed statutory provisions. The regulation does not resolve procedural detail, and a legal review will identify any gaps that administrative agreements need to fill.

In sum, compliance under this instrument is largely a matter of aligning administrative practice with the enumerated functions and powers in reg 6 and with the limited list of prescribed bodies in reg 8, and ensuring that internal processes document when the Director is asked, or elects, to exercise any of the specific powers the regulations confer.