Fed: Royal Commissions - Justice or just an easy way out
By Mike Hedge
MELBOURNE, AAP - They are integral parts of the world's finest system of justice, agleaming example of political and legal transparency.
They are also useful for burying issues, placating political opponents and using largeamounts of time and money in a less than effective way.
The recently concluded inquiry into HIH might yet turn out to be a bit of everythinga royal commission can be.
Within hours of Justice Neville Owen handing down his report on the HIH debacle, questionswere raised over how severe the consequences might ultimately be for the architects ofAustralia's biggest corporate collapse.
An abundance of evidence was presented about alleged corporate wastage that made theaverage person reel in horror, but Justice Owen found no fraud had been committed -- RayWilliams and his cronies were merely bad managers.
Although Justice Owen could do no more than consider the evidence before him, the HIHroyal commission is already looking a bit like so many of its predecessors.
As much as they promise to get to the bottom of all manner of crimes and social evils,royal commissions have a tradition of failing to deliver.
Perhaps one of the best qualified opinions on royal commissions is that of former WestAustralian premier and federal Labor MP Carmen Lawrence.
Dr Lawrence, who is in the rare position of having called a royal commission and ofalso being the subject of one, says they can vary between "props of political theatre"
and useful institutions.
"While they can involve the community towards solutions to problems, they can alsobe used to provide the illusion of action, to justify government decisions and when governmentsdon't know what to do about opposition promises," Dr Lawrence says.
The HIH inquiry was the 126th royal commission to be established by Australian federalgovernments since federation.
Almost double that number have been instigated by state governments over the same periodwith the total cost estimated at more than $8 billion.
For what?
Justice Owen may have dealt with a specific problem, but he is hardly likely to havecleaned up big business in Australia.
Whatever its consequences, though, the HIH royal commission won't be the most useless ever held.
One of the best examples of that was the inquiry into the collapse of the State Bankof South Australia.
The bank lost more than $3 billion, but the only person who came close to hearing acell door slam shut was a journalist who declined to reveal his sources.
Dr Lawrence's Royal Commission into the Commercial Activities of Government and OtherMatters - also known as WA Inc - at least resulted in two former state premiers goingto jail.
But after 18 months of investigations and hearings and more than $25 million, it wouldn'thave been out of the question to expect more.
Lawyer and chairman of the Victorian Law Institute, Bill O'Shea, believes the outcomeof royal commissions can depend largely on those who run them.
"In a great many cases they are a function of the royal commissioner," Mr O'Shea said.
"Tony Fitzgerald, for instance, was commissioned to clean up the (former Premier SirJoh) Bjelke-Petersen era in Queensland politics.
"In the end he cleaned up Bjelke-Petersen as well."
Mr O'Shea isn't so convinced that the HIH investigation will have anything like the same result.
"You'd have to say there was a lack of a cutting edge about the Owen report," he said.
The Fitzgerald royal commission and that of James Wood into the NSW police serviceare two of the most effective of modern times, both resulting in revelations of deep-seatedand high-level corruption.
They also led to the establishment of permanent anti-corruption bodies.
Others in the past 30 years generally regarded to have been worth the time and moneyinclude Victoria's painters and dockers royal commission, the Beech royal commission intothe illegal abortion in Victoria and Donald Stewarts' inquiry into drug trafficking.
"All of those were conducted by dogged commissioners who had a determination to overcomea perceived evil in society," Mr O'Shea said.
Perhaps the most necessary, well-intentioned and lengthy inquiries conducted in Australiawas the royal commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody begun by Justice James Muirheadin 1987.
It ran until 1991 and came up with 339 recommendations, but failed to solve a problemthat is still a national disgrace.
While the Deaths in Custody royal commission may well have been one of the most worthyever conducted, there have been many that appeared to be of questionable worth from thestart.
Like Gough Whitlam's 1970 royal commission into human relationships; or the royal commissionon television which preceded the introduction of TV in Australia in 1956; or the inquirythree years ago into the Victorian ambulance service.
The ambulance service inquiry was typical of the politically motivated royal commissionswhich generally lack both the need or the will to succeed.
Some would say the recently concluded Cole royal commission into the building industryfits into that category, as did the Hindmarsh Bridge "secret women's business" royal commissionin South Australia and the one that WA Liberal Premier Richard Court called to investigateCarmen Lawrence in relation to a well publicised suicide.
It was concluded she had no case to answer.
Royal commissions though, are an entrenched part of Australia's legal life.
Their strength can be in the extraordinary power they have to compel anyone to appearand in the lack of normal, courtroom constraints under which they operate.
On the other hand, they can be manipulated and hamstrung by limited terms of referenceand unreasonable time-lines.
Their results can be ignored by the government that instigated them and the veracityof their members, their findings and their processes can be attacked.
They have the potential to be used as strategies for confusion, for burying issuesand for purely symbolic value.
But so far, no-one has come up with a better plan.
AAP mh/mo/br
KEYWORD: COMMISSIONS AAP NEWSFEATURE
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий