Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner (Consequential Amendments) Act 2006

The Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner (Consequential Amendments) Act 2006 (No. 86, 2006) serves as the legislative plumbing that integrates the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity (ACLEI) and the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner into the broader Commonwealth law enforcement, national security, and administrative law framework. The Act does not establish a standalone regulatory regime. Instead, it systematically modifies 18 separate Commonwealth statutes to grant the newly created Integrity Commissioner and ACLEI staff the coercive, covert, and investigative powers enjoyed by other federal law enforcement agencies, while simultaneously establishing information-sharing pathways and shielding the agency from conventional pathways of public administrative review.

Mechanically, the Act alters the statutory landscape in several key domains. First, it equips ACLEI with access to advanced covert investigative methods. By amending the Crimes Act 1914, the Surveillance Devices Act 2004, and the Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979, it inserts ACLEI and the Integrity Commissioner into the legislative frameworks governing controlled operations, surveillance device warrants, and telecommunications interception warrants. This permits the Integrity Commissioner and authorised Senior Executive Service (SES) officers within ACLEI to issue controlled operation certificates and apply for warrants in the same manner as the Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police (AFP) or the Chief Executive Officer of the Australian Crime Commission (ACC).

Second, the Act facilitates a complex, multilateral information-sharing network. It amends the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Act 1979, the , the , and the to allow these agencies to disclose highly sensitive intelligence, including financial transaction reports, intelligence assessments, and tax records, directly to the Integrity Commissioner.

meta-content-style-type: text/css meta-content-type: application/xhtml+xml; charset=utf-8

?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="no"?>

View image in the official source

Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner (Consequential Amendments) Act 2006

No. 86, 2006

An Act to amend laws in connection with the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006, and for related purposes

Contents

1 Short title

2 Commencement

3 Schedule(s)

Schedule 1—Consequential amendments

Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977

Archives Act 1983

Australian Crime Commission Act 2002

Australian Federal Police Act 1979

Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Act 1979

Crimes Act 1914

Criminal Code Act 1995

Financial Transaction Reports Act 1988

Ombudsman Act 1976

Privacy Act 1988

Proceeds of Crime Act 2002

Radiocommunications Act 1992

Royal Commissions Act 1902

Surveillance Devices Act 2004

Taxation Administration Act 1953

Telecommunications Act 1997

Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979

Witness Protection Act 1994

View image in the official source

Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner (Consequential Amendments) Act 2006

No. 86, 2006

An Act to amend laws in connection with the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006, and for related purposes

[Assented to 30 June 2006]

The Parliament of Australia enacts:

1 Short title

This Act may be cited as the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner (Consequential Amendments) Act 2006.

2 Commencement

(1) Each provision of this Act specified in column 1 of the table commences, or is taken to have commenced, in accordance with column 2 of the table. Any other statement in column 2 has effect according to its terms.

Commencement information
Column 1 Column 2 Column 3
Provision(s) Commencement Date/Details
1. Sections 1 to 3 and anything in this Act not elsewhere covered by this table The day on which this Act receives the Royal Assent. 30 June 2006
1. Schedule 1, items 1 to 85 At the same time as section 3 of the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006 commences. 30 December 2006
1. Schedule 1, item 86 At the same time as section 3 of the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006 commences.However, if the provision(s) do not commence before 1 July 2006, the provision(s) do not commence at all. Does not commence
1. Schedule 1, item 87 Immediately after the commencement of Schedule 4 to the Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006. 1 July 2006
1. Schedule 1, items 88 to 92 At the same time as section 3 of the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006 commences. 30 December 2006
1. Schedule 1, items 93 to 95 At the same time as section 3 of the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006 commences.However, if Schedule 5 to the Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006 commences before that time, the provision(s) do not commence at all. Do not commence
1. Schedule 1, item 96 Immediately after the commencement of Schedule 1 to the Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006. 13 June 2006
1. Schedule 1, item 97 At the same time as section 3 of the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006 commences. 30 December 2006

Note: This table relates only to the provisions of this Act as originally passed by the Parliament and assented to. It will not be expanded to deal with provisions inserted in this Act after assent.

(2) Column 3 of the table contains additional information that is not part of this Act. Information in this column may be added to or edited in any published version of this Act.

3 Schedule(s)

Each Act that is specified in a Schedule to this Act is amended or repealed as set out in the applicable items in the Schedule concerned, and any other item in a Schedule to this Act has effect according to its terms.

Schedule 1—Consequential amendments

Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977

1 After paragraph (e) of Schedule 2

Insert:

(eaa) decisions under the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006 being:

(i) decisions in connection with a corruption investigation (within the meaning of that Act); or

(ii) decisions in connection with a public inquiry (within the meaning of that Act);

Archives Act 1983

2 After paragraph 33(1A)(b)

Insert:

(ba) a person who is providing, or has provided, confidential information to:

(i) the Integrity Commissioner (within the meaning of the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006); or

(ii) a staff member of ACLEI (within the meaning of that Act); or

(iii) a special investigator for the purposes of Division 4 of Part 12 of that Act;

in relation to such a matter; or

Australian Crime Commission Act 2002

3 Subsection 51(4) (at the end of the definition of relevant Act)

Add:

; or (c) the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006 or regulations under that Act.

Australian Federal Police Act 1979

4 Subsection 60A(2)

Repeal the subsection, substitute:

(2) A person to whom this section applies must not, directly or indirectly:

(a) make a record of any prescribed information; or

(b) divulge or communicate any prescribed information to any other person;

except for:

(d) the purposes of the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006 or regulations under that Act; or

(e) the purposes of the Witness Protection Act 1994 or regulations under that Act; or

(f) the carrying out, performance or exercise of any of the person’s duties, functions or powers under Acts or regulations mentioned in paragraphs (c), (d) and (e).

5 Subsection 60A(3) (definition of prescribed information)

Repeal the definition (not including the note), substitute:

prescribed information means information obtained by a person to whom this section applies:

(a) in the course of carrying out, performing or exercising any of the person’s duties, functions or powers under:

(i) this Act or the regulations; or

(ii) the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006 or regulations under that Act; or

(iii) the Witness Protection Act 1994 or regulations under that Act; or

(b) otherwise in the course of the person’s service, employment or engagement under Acts or regulations mentioned in paragraph (a).

Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Act 1979

6 Paragraph 18(3)(a)

Repeal the paragraph, substitute:

(a) where the information relates, or appears to relate, to the commission, or intended commission, of an indictable offence against the law of the Commonwealth or of a State or Territory—the information may be communicated to:

(i) an officer of the Police Force of a State or Territory; or

(ii) a member or special member of the Australian Federal Police; or

(iii) the Integrity Commissioner, a staff member of ACLEI or a special investigator; or

(iv) the Chief Executive Officer of the Australian Crime Commission or a member of the staff of the ACC; or

7 After subparagraph 18(3)(b)(v)

Insert:

(via) the Integrity Commissioner, a staff member of ACLEI or a special investigator; or

8 Subsection 18(6)

Insert:

Integrity Commissioner has the same meaning as in the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006.

9 Subsection 18(6)

Insert:

special investigator has the same meaning as in the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006.

10 Subsection 18(6)

Insert:

staff member of ACLEI has the same meaning as in the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006.

Crimes Act 1914

11 Subsection 3(1)

Insert:

ACLEI authorising officer has the meaning given in subsection 15J(3A).

12 Subsection 3(1) (after paragraph (a) of the definition of appropriate authorising officer)

Insert:

(aa) if the certificate is given by an ACLEI authorising officer—any ACLEI authorising officer; or

13 Subsection 3(1)

Insert:

Integrity Commissioner has the same meaning as in the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006.

14 Subsection 3(1) (after paragraph (b) of the definition of law enforcement officer)

Insert:

(ba) a staff member of ACLEI;

15 Subsection 3(1)

Insert:

staff member of ACLEI has the same meaning as in the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006.

16 Subparagraph 15G(1)(b)(i)

After “the Commissioner”, insert “, the Integrity Commissioner”.

17 After paragraph 15J(2)(b)

Insert:

(ba) if the operation relates to the investigation of a corruption issue (within the meaning of the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006) concerning conduct that involves a serious Commonwealth offence or possible conduct that would involve a serious Commonwealth offence—any ACLEI authorising officer;

18 After subsection 15J(3)

Insert:

(3A) The following are ACLEI authorising officers:

(a) the Integrity Commissioner;

(b) an Assistant Integrity Commissioner;

(c) a staff member of ACLEI who is an SES employee and who is authorised in writing by the Integrity Commissioner for the purposes of this paragraph.

19 After paragraph 15N(2A)(a)

Insert:

(aa) the Integrity Commissioner; or

20 After subsection 15OA(1)

Insert:

(1A) Any ACLEI authorising officer may terminate a certificate given under section 15M by that or any other ACLEI authorising officer.

21 Subsection 15OA(4)

After “AFP authorising officer”, insert “, ACLEI authorising officer”.

22 Paragraph 15OA(5)(b)

After “AFP authorising officer”, insert “, ACLEI authorising officer”.

23 Paragraph 15Q(1)(a)

After “an AFP authorising officer”, insert “, an ACLEI authorising officer”.

24 After subsection 15R(1)

Insert:

(1A) The Integrity Commissioner must, within 2 weeks after the end of each quarter, give to the Minister a report informing the Minister of the following that occurred during the quarter:

(a) each decision by an ACLEI authorising officer to grant or refuse an application for a controlled operation;

(b) each variation of a certificate under section 15NA by such a person;

(c) each review of a certificate under subsection 15OB(3) that had initially been given by such a person under section 15M;

(d) each occasion on which a certificate, given by such a person, is surrendered under section 15O or terminated under section 15OA;

(e) each certificate, given by such a person, that is still in force at the end of the quarter.

25 Subsection 15T(4)

After “the Commissioner”, insert “, the Integrity Commissioner”.

26 Subsection 15U(2)

After “the Commissioner”, insert “, the Integrity Commissioner”.

27 After paragraph 15UA(1)(a)

Insert:

(aa) the Integrity Commissioner; and

28 Subsection 15UA(2)

After “the Commissioner”, insert “, the Integrity Commissioner”.

29 Subsection 15UB(1)

After “the Australian Federal Police” (wherever occurring), insert “, the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity”.

30 Subsection 15XA(1) (after paragraph (b) of the definition of Commonwealth participating agency)

Insert:

(ba) the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity;

31 Section 85ZL (after paragraph (ba) of the definition of law enforcement agency)

Insert:

(bb) the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity;

Criminal Code Act 1995

32 Section 146.1 of the Criminal Code (after paragraph (a) of the definition of Commonwealth law enforcement officer)

Insert:

(aa) the Integrity Commissioner (within the meaning of the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006); or

(ab) a staff member of ACLEI (within the meaning of the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006); or

Financial Transaction Reports Act 1988

33 Subsection 3(1)

Insert:

Integrity Commissioner has the same meaning as in the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006.

34 Subsection 3(1)

Insert:

staff member of ACLEI has the same meaning as in the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006.

35 Subsection 16(6) (definition of investigating officer)

Repeal the definition, substitute:

investigating officer means:

(a) a taxation officer; or

(b) an AFP member; or

(d) a staff member of ACLEI; or

(e) an examiner or member of the staff of the ACC.

36 Subsection 16(6) (after paragraph (a) of the definition of relevant authority)

Insert:

(aa) the Integrity Commissioner; or

37 After paragraph 26(1)(b)

Insert:

(ba) where the officer is a staff member of ACLEI—the Integrity Commissioner; or

38 After subsection 27(5)

Insert:

(5A) Subject to subsections (7), (9) and (10), if the Integrity Commissioner or a staff member of ACLEI obtains FTR information:

(a) the Integrity Commissioner may, in a manner that does not identify, and is not reasonably capable of being used to identify, a person to whom the information relates, communicate the information to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity under section 216 of the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006; and

(b) the Integrity Commissioner may communicate the information to a staff member of ACLEI who is conducting a hearing under Division 2 of Part 9 of that Act; and

(c) a staff member of ACLEI who is conducting a hearing under Division 2 of Part 9 of that Act may divulge the information in the course of the hearing; and

(d) a staff member of ACLEI may communicate the information to a law enforcement officer for the purposes of, or in connection with, the performance of the officer’s duties; and

(e) subject to paragraphs (a), (b), (c) and (d), a staff member of ACLEI must not divulge or communicate the information; and

(f) a person (not being a law enforcement officer) to whom information has been communicated in accordance with paragraph (c) must not make a record of the information, or divulge or communicate the information, in any circumstances.

39 After paragraph 27(14)(b)

Insert:

(ba) the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity; and

40 After paragraph 27(15)(g)

Insert:

(ga) a staff member of ACLEI;

Ombudsman Act 1976

41 After subsection 5(3A)

Insert:

(3B) Paragraph (2)(b) does not prevent the Ombudsman from investigating action taken by the Integrity Commissioner, or an Assistant Integrity Commissioner, who happens to be a Justice or Judge of a court created by the Parliament.

42 At the end of section 6

Add:

(16) If the Ombudsman forms the opinion:

(a) that a complaint involves an allegation, or information, that raises a corruption issue (other than a significant corruption issue); and

(b) that the allegation or information could have been referred to the Integrity Commissioner under Part 4 of the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006 and could be more conveniently or effectively dealt with by the Integrity Commissioner;

the Ombudsman may decide not to investigate the complaint, or not to investigate the complaint further, as the case may be, and to refer the allegation or information to the Integrity Commissioner.

(17) If the Ombudsman forms the opinion:

(a) that a complaint involves an allegation, or information, that raises a significant corruption issue; and

the Ombudsman must not investigate the complaint, or must not investigate the complaint further, as the case may be, and must refer the allegation or information to the Integrity Commissioner.

(18) If:

(a) the Ombudsman makes a decision under subsection (16); or

(b) subsection (17) applies;

the Ombudsman must:

(c) refer the allegation, or information, that raises the corruption issue or significant corruption issue to the Integrity Commissioner as soon as is reasonably practicable; and

(d) give the Integrity Commissioner any information or documents relating to the complaint that are in the possession, or under the control, of the Ombudsman; and

(e) as soon as is reasonably practicable, give the complainant written notice that the complaint has been transferred to the Integrity Commissioner.

(19) In subsections (16) to (18):

corruption issue has the same meaning as in the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006.

Integrity Commissioner has the same meaning as in the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006.

significant corruption issue has the same meaning as in the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006.

43 After section 6A

Insert:

6B Transfer of complaints about Integrity Commissioner

(1) If:

(a) the Ombudsman forms the opinion that:

(i) a complaint in respect of action taken by the Integrity Commissioner could have been made to another authority established under a law of the Commonwealth, a State or a Territory; and

(ii) the complaint could be more conveniently or effectively dealt with by the other authority; and

(b) the other authority can deal with the complaint if the Ombudsman transfers the complaint to the other authority;

the Ombudsman may decide not to investigate the complaint, or not to investigate the complaint further, as the case may be, and to transfer the complaint to the other authority.

(2) If the Ombudsman decides to transfer the complaint, the Ombudsman must:

(a) do so as soon as is reasonably practicable; and

(b) subject to section 35C, give the other authority any information or documents relating to the complaint that are in the possession, or under the control, of the Ombudsman; and

(c) as soon as is reasonably practicable, give the complainant written notice that the complaint has been transferred to the other authority.

44 After section 8B

Insert:

8C Investigations by other authorities of ACLEI actions

(1) If an authority established under a law of the Commonwealth, or of a State or Territory, has power to investigate action taken by the Integrity Commissioner or a staff member of ACLEI, the Ombudsman may arrange with the head of the authority for the authority to investigate the action.

(2) If the Ombudsman enters into such an arrangement, the authority may investigate the action to the full extent of its powers under any laws of the Commonwealth or of a State or Territory.

(3) The Integrity Commissioner may arrange with the head of the authority for the variation or revocation of the arrangement.

(4) The arrangement, or the variation or revocation of the arrangement, must be in writing.

(5) The regulations may make provision for and in relation to the participation by the Ombudsman in the carrying out of an investigation in accordance with an arrangement under this section.

(6) Nothing in this section affects the powers and duties of the Ombudsman under any other provision of this Act.

(7) In this section:

Integrity Commissioner has the same meaning as in the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006.

staff member of ACLEI has the same meaning as in the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006.

45 After paragraph 9(3)(e)

Insert:

or (f) if the information, documents or records are, or were, in the possession or under the control of the Integrity Commissioner (within the meaning of the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006)—by reason that it would:

(i) endanger the life of a person; or

(ii) create a risk of serious injury to a person;

46 At the end of subsection 35(6A)

Add “or paragraph 6(18)(d)”.

46A After section 35

Insert:

35AA Disclosure of information and documents to Integrity Commissioner

(1) This section applies if:

(a) the Ombudsman, of his or her own motion, investigates any action as mentioned in paragraph 5(1)(b); and

(b) in the course of the investigation, the Ombudsman obtains information or a document that is, or may be, relevant to a corruption issue.

(2) Subject to section 35B, nothing in this Act precludes the Ombudsman from:

(a) disclosing the information; or

(b) making a statement; or

to the Integrity Commissioner.

(3) In this section:

corruption issue has the same meaning as in the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006.

Integrity Commissioner has the same meaning as in the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006.

46B Subsection 35A(1)

Omit “section 35B”, substitute “sections 35B and 35C”.

47 After section 35B

Insert:

35C Disclosure of ACLEI information

(1) If the Attorney‑General gives the Ombudsman a certificate certifying that the disclosure of certain ACLEI information by one or more listed disclosure methods specified in the certificate would be contrary to the public interest by reason that it would prejudice:

(a) the safety of a person; or

(b) the fair trial of a person who has been, or may be, charged with an offence; or

(d) the operations of a law enforcement agency;

the Ombudsman must not so disclose the ACLEI information.

(2) In this section:

ACLEI information means information or the contents of a document that is, or was, in the possession or under the control of the Integrity Commissioner.

listed disclosure method, in relation to information, a document or a record, means:

(a) including the information or the contents of the document or record in any report under Division 2 of Part 2; or

(b) giving the information, document or record to another person or authority under section 6 or 6A; or

(d) giving the information, document or record to an authority with which the Ombudsman has made an arrangement under section 8B; or

(e) disclosing, or making a statement that discloses, the information or the contents of the document or record under subsection 35A(1); or

(f) disclosing information or the contents of a document or record by any other specified method.

Privacy Act 1988

48 Subsection 6(1) (after paragraph (a) of the definition of enforcement body)

Insert:

(aa) the Integrity Commissioner; or

49 Subsection 6(1)

Insert:

Integrity Commissioner has the same meaning as in the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006.

50 After subparagraph 7(1)(a)(iii)

Insert:

(iiia) the Integrity Commissioner; or

51 After paragraph 7(1)(g)

Insert:

(ga) the Integrity Commissioner or a staff member of ACLEI (within the meaning of the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006); or

52 Subsection 18K(5) (note)

After “2002”, insert “and section 91 of the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006”.

53 After paragraph 70(2)(b)

Insert:

or (c) by reason that it would prejudice the proper performance of the functions of the Integrity Commissioner;

Proceeds of Crime Act 2002

54 After paragraph 213(3)(c)

Insert:

(ca) the Integrity Commissioner (within the meaning of the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006); or

55 Section 338 (after paragraph (a) of the definition of authorised officer)

Insert:

(aa) any of the following:

(i) the Integrity Commissioner (within the meaning of the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006);

(ii) an Assistant Integrity Commissioner (within the meaning of that Act);

(iii) a staff member of ACLEI (within the meaning of that Act) who is authorised in writing by the Integrity Commissioner for the purposes of this paragraph; or

Radiocommunications Act 1992

56 After paragraph 27(1)(b)

Insert:

(baa) the performance of the functions of the Integrity Commissioner (within the meaning of the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006); or

Royal Commissions Act 1902

57 Subsection 6F(2)

Omit “or (2A)”, substitute “, (2A) or (2B)”.

58 After subsection 6P(2A)

Insert:

(2B) If, in the course of inquiry into a matter, a Commission:

(a) obtains information; or

(b) takes evidence; or

that, in the opinion of the Commission, relates or may relate to the performance of the functions of the Integrity Commissioner (within the meaning of the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006), the Commission may, if in its opinion it is appropriate so to do, communicate the information or furnish the evidence, document or thing, as the case may be, to the Integrity Commissioner.

59 Subsection 6P(3)

Omit “or (2A)”, substitute “, (2A) or (2B)”.

Surveillance Devices Act 2004

60 Subsection 6(1) (after paragraph (a) of the definition of appropriate authorising officer)

Insert:

(aa) if the law enforcement officer is a law enforcement officer belonging to or seconded to the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity:

(i) the Integrity Commissioner (within the meaning of the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006); or

(ii) an Assistant Integrity Commissioner (within the meaning of that Act); or

(iii) a staff member of ACLEI (within the meaning of that Act) who is an SES employee and who is authorised in writing by the Integrity Commissioner for the purposes of this paragraph; and

61 Subsection 6(1)

Insert:

Assistant Integrity Commissioner has the same meaning as in the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006.

62 Subsection 6(1) (after paragraph (a) of the definition of chief officer)

Insert:

(aa) in relation to the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity—the Integrity Commissioner (within the meaning of the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006); and

63 Subsection 6(1)

Insert:

Integrity Commissioner has the same meaning as in the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006.

64 Subsection 6(1) (after paragraph (a) of the definition of law enforcement agency)

Insert:

(aa) the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity;

65 Subsection 6(1) (after paragraph (a) of the definition of law enforcement officer)

Insert:

(aa) in relation to the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity:

(i) the Integrity Commissioner; or

(ii) an Assistant Integrity Commissioner; or

(iii) a staff member of ACLEI who is authorised in writing by the Integrity Commissioner for the purposes of this paragraph; or

66 Subsection 6(1)

Insert:

staff member of ACLEI has the same meaning as in the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006.

67 At the end of subsection 6(4)

Add:

; and (c) a reference to a person who belongs or is seconded to a law enforcement agency, in the case of the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity, is a reference to a person who is covered by the definition of staff member of ACLEI in section 11 of the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006; and

(d) a reference to a person who belongs or is seconded to the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity is to be similarly construed.

68 After paragraph 37(1)(a)

Insert:

(aa) if the officer belongs or is seconded to the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity—that is within the functions of the Integrity Commissioner set out in section 15 of the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006; or

69 After paragraph 38(1)(a)

Insert:

70 Paragraph 64(a)

Repeal the paragraph, substitute:

(a) a person suffers loss or injury as a result of the use of a surveillance device by any of the following:

(i) the Australian Federal Police;

(ii) the Integrity Commissioner or a staff member of ACLEI;

(iii) the Australian Crime Commission; and

Taxation Administration Act 1953

71 Subsection 2(1) (after paragraph (c) of the definition of head)

Insert:

(ca) in the case of the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity—the Integrity Commissioner (within the meaning of the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006);

72 Subsection 2(1) (after paragraph (c) of the definition of law enforcement agency)

Insert:

(ca) the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity; or

Telecommunications Act 1997

73 Section 7 (after paragraph (b) of the definition of agency)

Insert:

(ba) the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity; or

74 After subsection 280(1)

Insert:

(1A) In applying paragraph (1)(a) to the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity, the reference in that paragraph to the operation of an enforcement agency is taken to be a reference to the performance of the functions of the Integrity Commissioner (within the meaning of the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006).

75 Subsection 282(10) (after paragraph (b) of the definition of criminal law‑enforcement agency)

Insert:

(ba) the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity; or

Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979

76 Subsection 5(1)

Insert:

Assistant Integrity Commissioner has the same meaning as in the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006.

77 Subsection 5(1) (after paragraph (a) of the definition of certifying officer)

Insert:

(aa) in the case of the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity:

(i) the Integrity Commissioner; or

(ii) an Assistant Integrity Commissioner; or

(iii) a staff member of ACLEI who is an SES employee and who is authorised in writing by the Integrity Commissioner for the purposes of this paragraph; or

78 Subsection 5(1) (after paragraph (a) of the definition of chief officer)

Insert:

(aa) in the case of the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity—the Integrity Commissioner; or

79 Subsection 5(1) (after paragraph (a) of the definition of Commonwealth agency)

Insert:

(aa) the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity; or

80 Subsection 5(1)

Insert:

Integrity Commissioner has the same meaning as in the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006.

81 Subsection 5(1) (after paragraph (a) of the definition of officer)

Insert:

(aa) in the case of the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity—the Integrity Commissioner or a staff member of ACLEI; or

82 Subsection 5(1) (after paragraph (b) of the definition of permitted purpose)

Insert:

(baa) in the case of the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity:

(i) a corruption investigation (within the meaning of the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006); or

(ii) a report on such an investigation; or

83 Subsection 5(1) (before paragraph (a) of the definition of prescribed investigation)

Insert:

(aa) in the case of the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity—means a corruption investigation (within the meaning of the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006); or

84 Subsection 5(1) (after paragraph (a) of the definition of relevant offence)

Insert:

(aa) in the case of the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity—a prescribed investigation concerning conduct that involves a prescribed offence or possible conduct that would involve a prescribed offence; or

85 Subsection 5(1)

Insert:

staff member of ACLEI has the same meaning as in the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006.

86 At the end of section 5D

Add:

(7) An offence is also a class 2 offence if it is an offence against any of the following provisions:

(a) section 131.1, 135.1, 142.1 or 142.2, subsection 148.2(3), or section 268.112 of the Criminal Code;

(b) section 35, 36, 36A, 37, 39, 41, 42, 43, 46 or 47 of the Crimes Act 1914.

87 At the end of section 5D

Add:

(8) An offence is also a serious offence if it is an offence against any of the following provisions:

(a) section 131.1, 135.1, 142.1 or 142.2, subsection 148.2(3), or section 268.112 of the Criminal Code;

(b) section 35, 36, 36A, 37, 39, 41, 42, 43, 46 or 47 of the Crimes Act 1914.

88 Before subparagraph 6A(1)(c)(i)

Insert:

(ia) the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity;

89 Paragraph 6L(2)(a)

After “in the case of”, insert “the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity or”.

90 After paragraph 39(2)(a)

Insert:

(aa) in the case of the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity:

(i) the Integrity Commissioner; or

(ii) an Assistant Integrity Commissioner; or

(iii) a staff member of ACLEI who is authorised in writing by the Integrity Commissioner for the purposes of this paragraph; or

91 After paragraph 68(da)

Insert:

(db) if the information relates, or appears to relate, to a corruption issue or an ACLEI corruption issue (within the meaning of the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006)—to the Integrity Commissioner; and

92 After paragraph 71(2)(c)

Insert:

(ca) the Integrity Commissioner; or

93 After subsection 80(1)

Insert:

(1A) The Integrity Commissioner must cause to be kept in the records of the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity (in this subsection called the agency):

(a) each warrant issued to the agency; and

(b) a copy of each notification under paragraph 53(1)(b) of the issue of such a warrant, being a notification given to the Commissioner of Police; and

(d) a copy of each certificate issued under subsection 61(4) by a certifying officer of the agency; and

(e) each authorisation by the Integrity Commissioner under subsection 66(2).

94 After subsection 81(1)

Insert:

(1A) The Integrity Commissioner must cause:

(a) particulars of each telephone application for a Part VI warrant made by the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity (in this subsection called the agency); and

(b) in relation to each application by the agency for a Part VI warrant, a statement as to whether:

(i) the application was withdrawn or refused; or

(ii) a warrant was issued on the application; and

(i) the warrant; and

(ii) the day on which, and the time at which, each interception under the warrant began; and

(iii) the duration of each interception; and

(iv) the name of the person who carried out each interception; and

(v) in relation to a named person warrant—each service to or from which communications have been intercepted under the warrant; and

(d) in relation to each restricted record that has at any time been in the possession of the agency, particulars of:

(i) if the restricted record is a record obtained by an interception under a warrant issued to the agency—that warrant; and

(ii) each occasion when the restricted record came (whether by its making or otherwise) to be in the possession of the agency; and

(iii) each occasion (if any) when the restricted record ceased (whether by its destruction or otherwise) to be in the possession of the agency; and

(iv) each agency or other body (if any) from or to which, or other person (if any) from or to whom, the agency received or supplied the restricted record; and

(e) particulars of each use made by the agency of lawfully obtained information; and

(f) particulars of each communication of lawfully obtained information by an officer of the agency to a person or body other than such an officer; and

(g) particulars of each occasion when, to the knowledge of an officer of the agency, lawfully obtained information was given in evidence in a relevant proceeding in relation to the agency;

to be recorded in writing or by means of a computer as soon as practicable after the happening of the events to which the particulars relate or the statement relates, as the case may be.

95 Subsection 81(2A)

After “(1)(c)(ii)”, insert “, (1A)(c)(ii)”.

96 Subsection 140(1)

After “Commissioner of Police”, insert “, the Integrity Commissioner”.

Witness Protection Act 1994

97 Section 3 (after paragraph (a) of the definition of approved authority)

Insert:

(aa) the Integrity Commissioner (within the meaning of the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006); or

[Minister’s second reading speech made in—

House of Representatives on 29 March 2006

Senate on 22 June 2006]

(31/06)

meta-content-style-type: text/css meta-content-type: application/xhtml+xml; charset=utf-8

?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="no"?>

Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner (Consequential Amendments) Act 2006

No. 86, 2006

An Act to amend laws in connection with the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006, and for related purposes

Contents

1 Short title

2 Commencement

3 Schedule(s)

Schedule 1—Consequential amendments

Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977

Archives Act 1983

Australian Crime Commission Act 2002

Australian Federal Police Act 1979

Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Act 1979

Crimes Act 1914

Criminal Code Act 1995

Financial Transaction Reports Act 1988

Ombudsman Act 1976

Privacy Act 1988

Proceeds of Crime Act 2002

Radiocommunications Act 1992

Royal Commissions Act 1902

Surveillance Devices Act 2004

Taxation Administration Act 1953

Telecommunications Act 1997

Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979

Witness Protection Act 1994

Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner (Consequential Amendments) Act 2006

No. 86, 2006

An Act to amend laws in connection with the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006, and for related purposes

[Assented to 30 June 2006]

The Parliament of Australia enacts:

1 Short title

This Act may be cited as the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner (Consequential Amendments) Act 2006.

2 Commencement

Understanding the operation of this Act requires isolating several key statutory concepts that are inserted into the amended legislation.

ACLEI Authorising Officer

Inserted into section 3(1) and section 15J(3A) of the Crimes Act 1914, an "ACLEI authorising officer" is defined as the Integrity Commissioner, an Assistant Integrity Commissioner, or an SES employee of ACLEI who has been authorised in writing by the Integrity Commissioner. The creation of this class of officer is significant because it decentralises the power to authorise controlled operations. Under these amendments, an ACLEI authorising officer can personally issue, vary, terminate, or review controlled operation certificates under Part IAB of the Crimes Act 1914 where the operation relates to a "corruption issue" involving a serious Commonwealth offence.

Corruption Issue and Significant Corruption Issue

These terms, imported from the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006, serve as jurisdictional tripwires in the Ombudsman Act 1976. Under the newly inserted sections 6(16) and 6(17), a distinction is drawn between a standard "corruption issue" and a "significant corruption issue". A standard corruption issue allows the Ombudsman discretionary power to cease an investigation and refer the matter to the Integrity Commissioner if they believe it can be more conveniently or effectively dealt with by the Commissioner. A "significant corruption issue" strips the Ombudsman of all investigative discretion. Once the Ombudsman forms the opinion that a complaint raises a significant corruption issue, the Ombudsman must immediately cease its investigation and transfer the complaint, along with all associated documents, to the Integrity Commissioner.

Prescribed Information

Under the amended section 60A of the Australian Federal Police Act 1979, the definition of "prescribed information" is expanded to cover information obtained by AFP members, staff, or service providers in the course of carrying out duties under the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006 or the Witness Protection Act 1994. The Act establishes a strict prohibition on recording or communicating this information, subject to narrow exceptions that allow bilateral disclosure for the purposes of those specific Acts or the performance of official duties.

ACLEI Information and Listed Disclosure Methods

Introduced under section 35C of the Ombudsman Act 1976, "ACLEI information" refers to any information or document contents that are, or were, in the possession or under the control of the Integrity Commissioner. The Act couples this definition with "listed disclosure methods", which encompass publishing information in reports, transferring documents to other authorities, or disclosing information to State Ombudsmen. This concept is critical because it underpins the Attorney-General's power to issue public interest certificates that legally prevent the Ombudsman from disclosing ACLEI-related information.

Permitted Purpose and Prescribed Investigation

In the context of the Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979, the Act inserts ACLEI-specific definitions of "permitted purpose" and "prescribed investigation". A "permitted purpose" for ACLEI is restricted to a corruption investigation or a report on such an investigation. A "prescribed investigation" means an investigation into a corruption issue. These tight definitions constrain how ACLEI can use lawfully intercepted telecommunications data, ensuring that information obtained under covert warrants is legally tethered to its anti-corruption mandate.

The Act has a direct operational and compliance impact on several distinct groups across the public and private sectors.

ACLEI and the Integrity Commissioner

The Integrity Commissioner, Assistant Integrity Commissioners, and ACLEI staff members are the primary beneficiaries of the expanded powers. They are transformed from administrative oversight officers into high-tier law enforcement personnel. They gain the statutory authority to apply for and execute surveillance device warrants, seek telecommunications interception warrants, and authorise controlled operations. However, they are also subjected to strict reporting obligations, such as the requirement under section 15R(1A) of the Crimes Act 1914 to deliver quarterly reports to the Minister detailing all controlled operation decisions.

Federal Law Enforcement and Intelligence Agencies

The AFP and the ACC (now the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission, or ACIC) are profoundly affected. Their staff members are now subject to ACLEI's jurisdiction. The Act amends the Australian Federal Police Act 1979 and the Australian Crime Commission Act 2002 to alter secrecy provisions, permitting their officers to record and communicate previously restricted information if it is for the purposes of the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006. ASIO officers also gain explicit statutory protection under section 18 of the ASIO Act 1979 to communicate intelligence relating to indictable offences directly to the Integrity Commissioner or ACLEI staff.

The Commonwealth Ombudsman and State Ombudsmen

The Commonwealth Ombudsman faces a significant curtailment of its independent investigative jurisdiction. It must establish operational protocols to identify "significant corruption issues" within incoming complaints to ensure it complies with the mandatory transfer provisions. Additionally, the Ombudsman's office must comply with non-disclosure certificates issued by the Attorney-General regarding ACLEI information. State Ombudsmen are affected because the transfer of information from the Commonwealth Ombudsman to them is restricted if the information relates to ACLEI's operations and is covered by an Attorney-General's certificate.

Financial Institutions and AUSTRAC Reporting Entities

While financial institutions do not deal with ACLEI directly under this Act, the amendments to the Financial Transaction Reports Act 1988 directly alter the downstream flow of financial intelligence. Cash dealers and financial institutions that report suspicious transactions to AUSTRAC are affected because the Act elevates ACLEI staff to the status of "investigating officers" under section 16(6). This allows ACLEI staff to obtain, analyze, and disseminate Financial Transaction Reports (FTR) information.

Telecommunications Carriers and Carriage Service Providers

Under the Telecommunications Act 1997 and the Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979, telecommunications carriers are legally obliged to assist ACLEI in executing interception warrants and accessing telecommunications data. This places an administrative and compliance burden on carriers, who must treat ACLEI as a designated "criminal law-enforcement agency" and develop operational pipelines to execute ACLEI-requested intercepts, ensure security of the data, and verify the credentials of ACLEI "certifying officers".

Private Citizens and Targeted Individuals

Individuals who are the subject of ACLEI investigations lose significant procedural rights. If an individual is targeted in an ACLEI corruption investigation or public inquiry, they are barred by the ADJR Act amendments from seeking a statement of reasons or launching a rapid, low-cost judicial review of administrative decisions made during that investigation. They are also subject to covert surveillance operations (surveillance devices and telecommunications interception) authorised under the relaxed internal regimes established by the Act.

The Act constructs a complex matrix of statutory duties and modified rights, balancing enhanced state coercive power against targeted reporting mandates.

The Ombudsman’s Duty to Refer and Cease Investigation

Under sections 6(17) and 6(18) of the Ombudsman Act 1976, the Ombudsman has an absolute statutory duty to transfer any complaint raising a "significant corruption issue" to the Integrity Commissioner as soon as is reasonably practicable. This is accompanied by a duty to transfer all physical or electronic information and documents in its possession or control relating to the complaint. Concurrently, the Ombudsman must provide written notice to the complainant stating that their complaint has been transferred.

The Integrity Commissioner's Controlled Operations Reporting Duty

Under section 15R(1A) of the Crimes Act 1914, the Integrity Commissioner is under a strict statutory duty to compile and deliver a report to the Minister within two weeks after the end of each quarter. This report must detail:

Every decision by an ACLEI authorising officer to grant or refuse an application for a controlled operation;
Every variation of a controlled operation certificate;
Every internal review of a certificate initially given under section 15M;
Each occasion where a certificate was surrendered or terminated; and
Each certificate that remains in force at the end of the quarter.

Strict Non-Disclosure Duties on the Ombudsman

Section 35C of the Ombudsman Act 1976 imposes a non-disclosure duty on the Ombudsman if the Attorney-General issues a certificate certifying that the disclosure of "ACLEI information" would be contrary to the public interest. The Ombudsman is legally barred from disclosing this information through any "listed disclosure method" if the Attorney-General determines it would prejudice:

The physical safety of any person;
The fair trial of a person who has been or may be charged;
The proper performance of the Integrity Commissioner's functions; or
The ongoing operations of any law enforcement agency.

The Suppression of ADJR Review Rights

The Act strips individuals of the right to seek judicial review under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 for any decision made under the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006 in connection with a corruption investigation or a public inquiry. This is achieved by inserting paragraph (eaa) into Schedule 2 of the ADJR Act. This eliminates the right of an affected person to demand a written statement of reasons under section 13 of the ADJR Act, substantially increasing the difficulty and cost of challenging ACLEI's administrative overreach.

Rights to Share and Disseminate Financial Intelligence

Under section 27(5A) of the Financial Transaction Reports Act 1988, the Integrity Commissioner and ACLEI staff are granted specific statutory rights to handle FTR information. The Integrity Commissioner is authorised to communicate FTR information to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity under section 216 of the LEIC Act, provided the information is de-identified. ACLEI staff conducting formal hearings are granted the right to divulge FTR information in the course of those hearings, and to communicate it to other law enforcement officers for the performance of their duties.

The Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner (Consequential Amendments) Act 2006 does not establish a standalone schedule of criminal penalties. Instead, it systematically inserts ACLEI personnel and operations into pre-existing, severe Commonwealth enforcement and penalty regimes.

Inclusion in the Criminal Code Protection Framework

By amending section 146.1 of the Criminal Code Act 1995, the Act inserts the Integrity Commissioner and ACLEI staff members into the definition of "Commonwealth law enforcement officer". This mechanical change immediately triggers the application of Part 7.8 of the Criminal Code. Consequently, any person who threatens, harms, obstructs, or influences an ACLEI officer in the course of their duties faces severe criminal penalties under the Criminal Code, including maximum prison sentences ranging from 5 to 10 years for offences such as obstructing a Commonwealth public official or causing harm to a Commonwealth law enforcement officer.

AFP Secrecy Offence Integration

The amendments to section 60A of the Australian Federal Police Act 1979 establish a strict liability enforcement mechanism. A person covered by the section (including AFP officers or individuals engaged under the Act) must not, directly or indirectly, make a record of or divulge "prescribed information" unless it falls within the narrow statutory exceptions (such as complying with the LEIC Act or Witness Protection Act). Under the broader Australian Federal Police Act 1979 framework, a breach of this secrecy provision is an indictable offence carrying a maximum penalty of 2 years imprisonment.

Secrecy and Misuse of FTR Information

Section 27(5A)(e) of the Financial Transaction Reports Act 1988 imposes a strict prohibition on ACLEI staff members, stating they must not divulge or communicate FTR information except for authorized purposes (such as hearings or sharing with other law enforcement officers). Crucially, section 27(5A)(f) extends this prohibition to private citizens. If a person who is not a law enforcement officer receives FTR information during an ACLEI hearing, they are strictly prohibited from making a record of that information, or disclosing it under any circumstances. Under the Financial Transaction Reports Act 1988, unauthorised disclosure of FTR information is a serious criminal offence, attracting heavy fines and custodial sentences.

Surveillance Device Liability and Compensation

The Act amends section 64(a) of the Surveillance Devices Act 2004 to ensure that if a person suffers loss or injury as a direct result of the use of a surveillance device by the Integrity Commissioner or an ACLEI staff member, the Commonwealth is liable to pay compensation to that person. This serves as a civil enforcement mechanism, allowing affected individuals to sue the Commonwealth for damages if ACLEI exceeds its statutory authority under a surveillance device warrant.

The entire substance of this Act is interactive. It is designed to integrate ACLEI into an intricate, pre-existing web of Commonwealth legislation. The primary interactions can be categorized into four functional domains:

┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│              Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner                     │
│                (Consequential Amendments) Act 2006                      │
└────────────────────────────────────┬────────────────────────────────────┘
                                     │
         ┌───────────────────────────┼───────────────────────────┐
         ▼                           ▼                           ▼
┌──────────────────┐       ┌──────────────────┐        ┌──────────────────┐
│   SURVEILLANCE   │       │   INTELLIGENCE   │        │    OVERSIGHT     │
│   & COVERT OPS   │       │   & INFO FLOWS   │        │  & ADMIN REVIEW  │
├──────────────────┤       ├──────────────────┤        ├──────────────────┤
│• Crimes Act 1914 │       │• ASIO Act 1979   │        │• Ombudsman Act   │
│• Surveillance    │       │• FTRA 1988       │        │  1976            │
│  Devices Act     │       │• Royal Comm. Act │        │• ADJR Act 1977   │
│• Telecomms       │       │• Taxation Admin  │        │• Privacy Act     │
│  (Interception)  │       │  Act 1953        │        │  1988            │
└──────────────────┘       └──────────────────┘        └──────────────────┘

Surveillance and Covert Operations Laws

The Act directly interfaces with the Crimes Act 1914, the Surveillance Devices Act 2004, and the Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979. By inserting ACLEI into the definitions of "law enforcement agency" and adding ACLEI officers as "appropriate authorising officers" or "certifying officers", the Act allows ACLEI to bypass standard warrant application processes. For example, under the Surveillance Devices Act 2004, ACLEI can use its own internal SES officers to authorize emergency or short-term surveillance programs without immediate judicial oversight. Similarly, under the Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979, ACLEI is designated a "Commonwealth agency", granting it the power to apply for and execute telecommunications interception warrants.

Intelligence and Financial Information Flow

The Act establishes statutory gateways that override general secrecy provisions in other laws. It amends:

The ASIO Act 1979 (s 18): To allow the Director-General of Security or authorised ASIO officers to share intelligence regarding indictable offences directly with ACLEI, bypassing normal national security confidentiality rules;
The Financial Transaction Reports Act 1988 (s 27): To grant ACLEI access to the AUSTRAC database, treating ACLEI as an eligible agency for receiving highly sensitive financial intelligence;
The Royal Commissions Act 1902 (s 6P): To allow a Royal Commission to share any evidence, documents, or information it obtains directly with ACLEI if it is relevant to the Integrity Commissioner's functions; and
The Taxation Administration Act 1953 (s 2): To insert ACLEI and the Integrity Commissioner into the definition of "law enforcement agency" and "head" of an agency, thereby permitting the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) to disclose taxpayer information to ACLEI for corruption investigations.

Oversight and Administrative Review Laws

The Act deliberately manages the intersection between ACLEI, the Commonwealth Ombudsman, and the courts. The amendments to the Ombudsman Act 1976 create a hierarchical relationship where ACLEI's jurisdiction over law enforcement corruption completely supersedes the Ombudsman's jurisdiction. The insertion of paragraph (eaa) into Schedule 2 of the ADJR Act isolates ACLEI's corruption investigations and public inquiries from judicial review under that Act. This is a highly significant interaction, as it forces aggrieved parties to seek constitutional writs under section 75(v) of the Constitution, which is a far more complex and restrictive legal path than the statutory grounds of review under the ADJR Act.

Privacy and Archival Restrictions

The Act modifies the Privacy Act 1988 by adding the Integrity Commissioner to the definition of an "enforcement body" in section 6(1) and exempting both the Commissioner and ACLEI staff from various provisions of the Act under section 7(1). This permits ACLEI to collect, use, and disclose personal information without complying with the Information Privacy Principles (now Australian Privacy Principles) that apply to standard Commonwealth departments. Additionally, the Archives Act 1983 is amended to prevent the public release of archives that would identify persons who have provided confidential information to the Integrity Commissioner, ACLEI staff, or special investigators.

As a consequential amending Act, the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner (Consequential Amendments) Act 2006 (No. 86, 2006) is a transitional, structural statute designed to execute amendments to other Acts rather than to be frequently amended itself. It was introduced into the House of Representatives on 29 March 2006 and passed the Senate on 22 June 2006, receiving Royal Assent on 30 June 2006.

The commencement table in section 2 of the Act outlines a highly complex, staged, and conditional commencement schedule. This schedule demonstrates how the integration of ACLEI was contingent upon the passage and commencement of other major national security bills:

Sections 1 to 3: Commenced on the day of Royal Assent (30 June 2006).
Schedule 1, items 1 to 85: Commenced on 30 December 2006, simultaneously with the commencement of section 3 of the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006. This block contained the vast majority of the core amendments, including those to the ADJR Act, Archives Act, Crimes Act, Financial Transaction Reports Act, Ombudsman Act, Privacy Act, and Surveillance Devices Act.
Schedule 1, item 86: This item was subject to a conditional clause. It was designed to commence at the same time as section 3 of the LEIC Act 2006, but contained a sunset clause stating that if section 3 of the LEIC Act did not commence before 1 July 2006, the provision would not commence at all. Because section 3 of the LEIC Act commenced on 30 December 2006, item 86 did not commence at all. This was noted in the official commencement tables.
Schedule 1, item 87: Commenced on 1 July 2006, immediately after the commencement of Schedule 4 to the Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006.
Schedule 1, items 88 to 92: Commenced on 30 December 2006, in line with the main LEIC Act commencement.
Schedule 1, items 93 to 95: These items contained a negative conditional commencement. They were scheduled to commence with section 3 of the LEIC Act 2006, unless Schedule 5 to the Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006 commenced before that time, in which case they would not commence at all. Because Schedule 5 to the Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act commenced prior to 30 December 2006, items 93 to 95 did not commence.
Schedule 1, item 96: Commenced on 13 June 2006, immediately after the commencement of Schedule 1 to the Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Act 2006.
Schedule 1, item 97: Commenced on 30 December 2006, aligning with the main LEIC Act commencement.

The failure of items 86 and 93 to 95 to commence represents an important historical detail. These items were designed to insert specific record-keeping and data logging provisions (sections 80(1A) and 81(1A)) into the Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979. Because of the rapid passage of parallel telecommunications interception reforms in 2006, these provisions were superseded or rendered redundant by other legislative vehicles before they could take effect, illustrating the high degree of legislative coordination required to stand up the ACLEI framework.

Because the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner (Consequential Amendments) Act 2006 is a machinery-of-government amending statute, it does not contain substantive civil or criminal causes of action that are litigated under its own name. The Act does not appear as the primary subject of reported case law, and the source text contains no references to specific judicial decisions, reflecting its character as a procedural drafting tool.

Instead, the litigation history of these provisions plays out indirectly when parties challenge the administrative actions, warrants, or information transfers executed by ACLEI. The legal validity of these consequential amendments is tested through several indirect channels.

Challenges to Surveillance Warrants and Controlled Operations

When ACLEI or its partner agencies (such as the AFP) execute surveillance device warrants or controlled operations, the legal validity of those operations rests on the amendments made by this Act to the Crimes Act 1914 and the Surveillance Devices Act 2004. Criminal defendants targeting the admissibility of evidence obtained via covert means will challenge whether the "ACLEI authorising officer" was properly authorised in writing under section 15J(3A) of the Crimes Act, or whether the surveillance device was used within the strict statutory definitions of the "functions of the Integrity Commissioner" as modified by items 68 and 69 of Schedule 1.

Jurisdictional Disputes and Constitutional Writs

Because the Act inserted paragraph (eaa) into Schedule 2 of the ADJR Act, it successfully suppressed standard administrative law challenges to ACLEI's investigative steps. Consequently, litigation concerning ACLEI's decisions has historically been forced into the High Court of Australia under its original jurisdiction (section 75(v) of the Constitution) or the Federal Court of Australia under section 39B of the Judiciary Act 1903. Litigants seeking to challenge ACLEI's summonses, hearings, or natural justice procedures must argue that ACLEI committed a jurisdictional error, as they cannot access the simpler statutory grounds of review under the ADJR Act.

Information-Sharing Disputes

The legal gateways established by the Act (such as ASIO sharing intelligence under section 18 of the ASIO Act, or the transfer of documents from the Ombudsman under section 6 of the Ombudsman Act) operate as shields against claims of breach of confidence or statutory secrecy. If a party attempts to sue a Commonwealth agency or official for unauthorized disclosure of information to ACLEI, the defense rests entirely on the consequential amendments made by this Act. The absence of successful litigation challenging these transfers demonstrates that these statutory gateways have successfully insulated Commonwealth agencies from civil liability.

The Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner (Consequential Amendments) Act 2006 contains several critical operational "gotchas" that can easily trap unwary practitioners, compliance professionals, and government agencies.

The ADJR Act Judicial Review Exclusion

A major trap for administrative lawyers is the scope of the ADJR Act exclusion. By inserting paragraph (eaa) into Schedule 2, the Act excludes decisions under the LEIC Act that are "in connection with a corruption investigation" or "in connection with a public inquiry". The phrase "in connection with" is interpreted very broadly by Australian courts. Practitioners who attempt to file an ADJR Act application to challenge an ACLEI summons, a search warrant, or a decision to hold a public hearing will have their application summarily dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The challenge must be brought via the far more complex and expensive path of common law judicial review under section 39B of the Judiciary Act 1903, where there is no statutory right to obtain a statement of reasons.

The Ombudsman’s Jurisdictional Trap

Under sections 6(16) and 6(17) of the Ombudsman Act 1976, the Ombudsman must cease investigating if a complaint raises a "significant corruption issue", and may cease investigating if it raises a standard "corruption issue". The "gotcha" lies in the lack of a clear, bright-line definition separating a standard corruption issue from a significant one within the text of the Ombudsman Act itself. If the Ombudsman incorrectly categorizes a complaint as a standard "corruption issue" and exercises its discretion to keep investigating, any findings it makes may be subject to a jurisdictional challenge on the basis that it had a mandatory statutory duty under section 6(17) to transfer the matter and cease its investigation immediately.

The Non-Commencement of Telecommunications Interception Record-Keeping Items

As detailed in the commencement table, items 93 to 95 of Schedule 1 did not commence. These items were intended to insert strict record-keeping duties (sections 80(1A) and 81(1A)) directly into the Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979 regarding warrants issued to ACLEI, telephone warrant applications, and the destruction of restricted records. Because of the conditional commencement clause, these specific amendments never took effect. A lawyer or compliance officer who relies on a standard printed version of the 2006 Consequential Amendments Act without cross-referencing the historical commencement table will form an incorrect view of ACLEI's historical record-keeping and data-logging duties under that specific statutory instrument.

The Attorney-General’s Disclosure Veto

Under section 35C of the Ombudsman Act 1976, the Attorney-General can issue a public interest certificate that completely bars the Ombudsman from disclosing ACLEI information via any "listed disclosure method". This veto is exceptionally broad, covering disclosures to State Ombudsmen or inclusion of information in public reports. A complainant or journalist who relies on the Ombudsman to expose maladministration within ACLEI faces a major structural barrier: the Ombudsman can be silently and legally gagged by a certificate issued under section 35C, with no statutory merits review pathway to challenge the Attorney-General’s certificate.

Secrecy Overlaps for AFP Officers

An AFP officer or staff member who discloses information to ACLEI must ensure that the disclosure strictly aligns with the updated definition of "prescribed information" under section 60A of the AFP Act 1979. If an officer discloses sensitive information that falls outside the precise statutory purpose of the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006, they cannot rely on the protective disclosure gateways created by this Act and may find themselves liable for a criminal prosecution under the secrecy provisions of the AFP Act 1979.

Compliance with the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner (Consequential Amendments) Act 2006 is primarily an operational issue for federal agency officers, compliance managers within telecommunications carriers, and legal practitioners dealing with anti-corruption investigations.

For Commonwealth Ombudsman Officers

Ombudsman staff must establish strict screening protocols to identify whether incoming complaints touch upon law enforcement corruption.

Step 1: Assess if the complaint involves the AFP or the ACC (now ACIC).
Step 2: If yes, determine if the conduct constitutes a "corruption issue" under the LEIC Act framework.
Step 3: If it is a "significant corruption issue", the investigation must be halted immediately. Ombudsman officers must not take further investigative steps, such as interviewing witnesses or requesting files.
Step 4: Prepare a transfer package containing all physical and electronic documents relating to the complaint.
Step 5: Transfer the package to the Integrity Commissioner as soon as is reasonably practicable.
Step 6: Issue a formal written notice to the complainant under section 6(18)(e) stating that their complaint has been transferred.

For ACLEI Authorising Officers (Controlled Operations)

When authorising controlled operations under Part IAB of the Crimes Act 1914, authorised SES officers within ACLEI must ensure strict procedural compliance to avoid invalidating subsequent criminal prosecutions.

Step 1: Confirm that the applicant for the controlled operation is a staff member of ACLEI.
Step 2: Verify that the operation relates to the investigation of a "corruption issue" concerning conduct that involves a serious Commonwealth offence.
Step 3: Draft the controlled operation certificate, ensuring it is signed by an "ACLEI authorising officer" who holds a valid written authorization from the Integrity Commissioner under section 15J(3A)(c).
Step 4: Establish an internal calendar to ensure that within two weeks after the end of each quarter, a comprehensive report detailing all controlled operation decisions, variations, surrenders, and active certificates is compiled and delivered to the Minister in accordance with section 15R(1A).

For Telecommunications Carriers and Carriage Service Providers

Compliance officers at telecommunications companies must update their law enforcement disclosure manuals to recognize ACLEI's status.

Step 1: Add ACLEI to the list of authorized "criminal law-enforcement agencies" under the Telecommunications Act 1997 and the Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979.
Step 2: Ensure that any interception warrant or telecommunications data request received from ACLEI is signed by an authorized ACLEI "certifying officer" (the Integrity Commissioner, an Assistant Integrity Commissioner, or an authorized SES employee).
Step 3: Establish secure, isolated data transfer channels to provide intercepted communications to ACLEI, ensuring that this data is not co-mingled with standard AFP or state police data.
Step 4: Maintain strict confidentiality. Do not disclose the existence of an ACLEI warrant or data request to any third party, including the customer targeted by the warrant, as unauthorized disclosure of interception warrants is a severe offence under the Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979.

For Financial Institutions and Cash Dealers

Compliance teams handling AUSTRAC data must recognize ACLEI staff as authorized "investigating officers".

Step 1: Ensure that internal database access controls are updated to permit ACLEI officers access to FTR information where they demonstrate they are conducting a corruption investigation.
Step 2: If an ACLEI officer requests transaction details or suspicious matter reports, verify their credentials to confirm they are a "staff member of ACLEI" within the meaning of the LEIC Act.
Step 3: Document all disclosures of FTR information to ACLEI to comply with AUSTRAC reporting and auditing standards, ensuring that no FTR information is disclosed to non-authorized personnel.

For Legal Practitioners Challenging ACLEI Decisions

If representing an individual targeted by an ACLEI investigation:

Step 1: Do not waste resources filing an ADJR Act application. The Federal Court will reject it based on Schedule 2, paragraph (eaa).
Step 2: Instead, draft an application for judicial review seeking constitutional writs (mandamus, prohibition, or certiorari) under section 39B of the Judiciary Act 1903.
Step 3: Focus the grounds of review on narrow jurisdictional error, bad faith, or a denial of procedural fairness (to the extent it is not excluded by the primary LEIC Act).
Step 4: Be aware that you cannot compel a statement of reasons under the ADJR Act, meaning you must build your case using pre-litigation discovery, freedom of information requests (where not exempted), or subpoena processes.

Deep Dive

What it does

Current sections