Corruption and Integrity Update – June 2025

In this edition of the Queensland Corruption and Integrity Update we consider various updates related to the CCC, the Supreme Court’s decision in Sica v CCC, and various updates from the Office of the Information Commissioner. We also consider recent updates from the Office of the Independent Assessor and the public hearing for the Office of the Queensland Integrity Commissioner.

Crime and Corruption Commission updates

CCC advice for mayors, councillors, CEO’s and government employees

On 30 May 2025, the Queensland State Archives and the CCC published advice for mayors, councillors, CEO’s and council employees in relation to the management of council records. The advice outlines the importance of good recordkeeping and refers to the five local government principles that are set out in section 4 of the Local Government Act 2009 (LG Act).

The local government principles, which are designed to ensure that local government is accountable, efficient, effective, and sustainable, are:

• transparent and effective processes, and decision-making in the public interest;
• sustainable development and management of assets and infrastructure, and delivery of effective service;
• democratic representation, social inclusion and meaningful community engagement;
• good governance of, and by, local government; and
• ethical and legal behaviour of councillors and local government employees.

Council records are public records where the content of the record concerns the administration of council business, is for the council’s use, or made for a purpose of the council. For example, records about decisions or actions made by council employees, the mayor and councillors under the LG Act or the City of Brisbane Act 2010. The advice details the specific legislation for the making, keeping and management of public records (e.g. Public Records Act 2023 (PR Act)), as well as other legislation that creates specific requirements for the management of public records.

The advice highlights the following as being essential to good record keeping:

• the CEO and council employees are aware of and fulfil their recordkeeping obligations under the PR Act, including that appropriate policies and procedures are in place;
• the CEO and council employees must make complete and reliable public records, highlighting specific recordkeeping responsibilities for council employees as well as mayors and councillors, as well as the management of records of electronic communication, such as text or app-based communications; and
• public records must be retained for as long as they are lawfully required to be kept, including that materials be disposed of in accordance with the requirements of the PR Act.

Sica v Crime and Corruption Commission [2025] QSC 118

On 28 May 2025, the Supreme Court of Queensland delivered its decision in Sica v Crime and Corruption Commission [2025] QSC 118.

Background

Mr Sica made a complaint to the CCC concerning police conduct of during the investigation of the case in which he was convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. Mr Sica unsuccessfully appealed the convictions and has always maintained his innocence. On 28 March 2023, Mr Sica made a verbal complaint to the CCC that “the police officers investigating the murders planted evidence, investigated selectively rather than exhaustively, and were in possession of exculpatory evidence which they did not disclose.”

On 9 February 2024, the CCC advised Mr Sica of its decision to take no further action on his complaint and:

• said that the allegations, if true, would establish “corrupt conduct” as defined by section 15 of the Crime and Corruption Act 2001; but
• considered after a review of the material supplied there was “insufficient evidence to raise a reasonable suspicion that corrupt conduct has occurred”; and
• gave reasons for that conclusion.

Mr Sica sought judicial review of the CCC’s decision but later discontinued the application, leaving on the issue of costs to be determined.

The court ordered:

1. Mr Sica’s application for orders under section 49 of the Judicial Review Act 1991 be dismissed;
2. Mr Sica pay the CCC costs of the proceedings including the applicant’s application for orders under section 49 of the Judicial Review Act 1991 on the standard basis.

Office of the Information Commission Queensland

OIC audit report on responding to access requests for government-held information

On 10 June 2025, the Information Commissioner’s report entitled ‘Audit on responding to access requests for government-held information’ was tabled.

The OIC’s report was prepared pursuant to section 131 of the Right to Information Act 2009 (Qld) (the RTI Act) and focused on three government agencies that reported higher than average rates of delay in responding to requests: Brisbane City Council, Cairns and Hinterland Hospital and Health Service, and Queensland Police Service.

Under the schemes set out in the RTI Act and Information Privacy Act 2009 (Qld) (IP Act), government agencies must release information as a matter of course, with agencies being provided with 25 business days to make a decision or otherwise handle an application. A failure to do this, or to secure the appropriate extension, is a ‘deemed decision’ to refuse access, with the proportion of deemed decisions in the Queensland public sector increasing from 1% in 2017-2018 to 3% in 2022-2023. This has led to an increase in requests for external review by the OIC, from 7% in 2017-2018 to 24% in 2022-2023.

The audit, which was conducted between May 2022 and June 2024, made the following observations regarding factors that lead to efficient handling of information requests:

• Leadership, culture, and resources and the commitment of senior leadership to a culture of openness and transparency correlates to providing timely access to information;
• People, primarily that there be sufficient staff with the requisite skills and experience to manage access requests;
• Customer focused service delivery, including the implementation of strategies to support timely and efficient access to information; and
• Systems, particularly that there be appropriate policies and procedures, as well as ensuring that technology be fit-for-purpose.

Key observations of the audit included that the agencies involved in the audit had implemented a range of strategies leading to significant improvements in the reported timeframes and efficiency of request handling processes.

The audit report makes ten general recommendations as to how Queensland public sector agencies can improve service delivery in responding to access requests for government held information, including that agencies:

• design, manage, and monitor an approach to information management that promotes a culture of openness, and complies with the requirements of the legislation;
• maximise proactive disclosure, with processes to direct requests to the most appropriate pathways;
• require right to information business units to contact applicants as soon as practicable following the receipt of a request, and assign experienced officers to assess applications;
• conduct systematic reviews of information management and technology to determine if it remains appropriate and fit-for-purpose;
• ensure materials, including policies and procedures, are up-to-date; and
• ensure staff are appropriately trained and supported to meet their obligations.

Launch of OIC Agency Portal

On 11 June, OIC announced the launch the OIC Agency Portal on 1 July, designed to assist agencies covered by the Information Privacy and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2023 to satisfy their reporting obligations under the new Mandatory Notification of Data Breach scheme.

Key features of the OIC Agency Portal include:

• guidance for agencies about necessary information to provide during a data breach;
• provisions that allow authorised agency users to independently assess and report on voluntary and mandatory data breach obligations, as well as access privacy complaints submitted by the public concerning their agency;
• tools that provide authorised users with access to information with appropriate handling of sensitive information;
• a reduction in reliance on manual processes to lower the risk of inadvertent disclosure of information; and
• the ability for agencies to monitor the state of data breach cases privacy complaints.

The OIC intends to provide guidance and support ahead of the launch.

New Privacy Commissioner appointed

On 16 June 2025, the Attorney-General and Minister for Justice and Minister for Integrity, the Honourable Deb Frecklington announced the appointment of Mr Alexander White as the new Privacy Commissioner for Queensland, set to commence his appointment in October.

The role of the privacy commissioner is to oversee the way in which agencies collect, store, use and disclose personal information, including the transfer of information outside of Australia, and the way in which Government contractors handle personal information.

Office of the Independent Assessor

Complaint data and trends

As part of the June OIA Insights, the OIA has provided an update on the trends and data associated with its complaints and investigations.

From 1 July 2024 to May 2025, the OIA:

• received 931 complaints;
• completed 84 investigations;
• issued two councils and 64 councillors with recommendations for training, guidance, or intervention; and
• issued 22 referrals to local government as suspected conduct breaches.

In the 2024-2025 financial year, the OIA took an average of 2.56 working days to assess complaints, and 39 working days to complete complaint investigations.

The OIA highlighted the significant number of complaints received relating to conflicts of interest and register of interest issues. In a number of cases, statutory recommendations and notifications have been issued, with the OIA specifically highlighting that many councillors have promptly updated registers upon prompting from the OIA.

The OIA also highlighted an increase in complaints relating to conduct during council meetings. The OIA noted that many of these complaints have been dismissed, falling under unsuitable meeting conduct provisions of the Code of Conduct for Councillors, and are most appropriately addressed during the respective council meetings. Various recommendations have been issued following complaints about council meeting conduct where councillors have failed to follow standing orders or adhere to the requirements of confidentiality.

Complaint Assessment case study

The OIA has published a case study relating to a recent OIA complaint assessment into inappropriate interaction with council staff. The OIA specifically noted that they had received multiple complaints that related to conduct of an experienced councillor in a small remote community as it related to their interactions with council staff.

The specific incident took place on Good Friday, during which time the councillor made a number of phone calls to a junior staff member. Following these calls, the councillor attended the staff member’s private residence unannounced and requested that she attend the council office to obtain keys to unlock the community hall for a community event that was unscheduled.

The staff member declined on the basis that she did not have appropriate permission. It is alleged that the councillor then became abusive, shouted, and threatened to cut the locks and break down the doors of the community hall if she failed to assist.

The OIA considered various factors in assessing the complaint, including:

• the small community;
• the event was of a sensitive nature; and
• there was a genuine desire of the councillor to help his community and ensure the event proceeded.

Notwithstanding the above factors, the OIA determined that the conduct of the councillor was inappropriate and did not meet the high standards of behaviour expected of elected community leaders. The OIA issued the councillor with a statutory recommendation to seek guidance from the CEO in relation to council protocols.

Reminder to councillors

In its June Spotlight, the OIA has reminded counsellors to be fair and respectful in their dealings with council employees. The OIA notes that while most interactions between counsellors and council employees are respectful and professional, there have been a number of serious complaints made about councillors for inappropriate interactions. Example conduct that has been subject of complaints received by the OIA include councillors:

• contacting a staff member after hours to make unreasonable demands;
• making crude jokes and inappropriate comments to an employee;
• unfairly blaming a specific council employee or work group in a public forum; and
• sending inappropriate material to council employees over email.

Justice, Integrity and Community Safety Committee oversight of the Integrity Commissioner

On 21 May 2025, the Justice, Integrity and Community Safety Committee held a public hearing for the oversight of the Office of the Queensland Integrity Commissioner.

The Integrity Commissioner, Ms Linda Waugh, highlighted the work undertaken by the Office of the Queensland Integrity Commissioner in the 2023-2024 financial year, emphasising the increase in the statutory work and increases in requests for advice, stakeholder engagement, and advisory publications and guidance, in addition to the increased workload associated with the lobbying register management and implementation of changes to the Integrity Act.

Ms Waugh highlighted the role of the Integrity Commissioner with respect to registered lobbyists, including the maintenance of the register, and regulatory action where non-compliance is reported, as well as the newly mandated annual training for registered lobbyists. Ms Waugh noted that in 2023-2024, there were 66 instances of non-compliance by registered lobbyists, noting that non-compliance will typically relate to failing to enter lobbying activity onto the public register, and differentiating where something may be a professional or technical service as opposed to lobbying activities. In one instance of non-compliance in the 2023-2024, Ms Waugh issued a warning.

Ms Waugh also highlighted that much of the work that has been undertaken by the Office of the Queensland Integrity Commissioner since her commencement in the role has been focused on the implementation of legislative changes, with her focus now shifting to strategic priorities, such as working with in-house ethics and integrity advisers.

If you found this insight article useful and you would like to subscribe to Gadens’ updates, click here.

Authored by: 
Daniel Maroske, Partner
Anna Fanelli, Senior Associate
Caitlin Holmes, Lawyer
Jacinta Beecher, Lawyer
Jonathan Kumar, Legal Assistant