Civil Liberties Australia invites you to read these factual reports which illustrate some of the Australian Crime Commission’s track record, and shine a light on how competent, or otherwise, the Australian Crime Commission is. You be the judge.
The reports comprise:
- a recent Australian National Audit Office report, issued in 2012:
- a critique of the ACC’s performance and criticism that it does not do what it was set up to do (evidence in 2008 and 2009 by noted commentator and police/crime expert consultant, Bob Bottom, given to parliamentary committees), and
- a report in the Australian Financial Review which indicated that ACC’s flawed practices, severely criticised by a court, cost the Australian Government many tens (perhaps hundreds) of millions of dollars in the Wickenby tax cases. As this report of a court case is dated August 2012, it is highly likely that the ACC was engaged in similar flawed practices when undertaking the secret Project Aperion inquiry into drugs. If so, information collected under the drugs inquiry may be tainted in the same way as the Wickenby inquiry information was. If so, ACC’s Drugs in Sport information would probably be similarly useless to the Australian Anti-Doping Sports Authority (ASADA) in mounting court cases.