Questions about the role played by the then-Deputy Premier were raised in parliament for several months last year, with former Independent Commissioner Against Corruption Bruce Lander confirming under privilege that Chapman was an informant in the matter that saw Hanlon, then chief executive of the urban renewal authority, and senior executive Georgina Vasilevski stood down, investigated and later charged.
InDaily has been unable to report any references to the matter – despite them being protected by parliamentary privilege – on legal advice because of the way the original ICAC legislation was framed.
But the amended laws that came into effect late last year have prompted fresh advice that “a person who has made a complaint or report under the Act” can be identified, if it is subject to parliamentary privilege.
The case against both executives collapsed last year in the Adelaide Magistrates Court, when prosecutor Peter Longson conceded the DPP’s office did not have sufficient evidence to prove their guilt.
But the DPP later filed an ‘ex officio’ action in the District Court, seeking to pursue charges against Hanlon alone, of abuse of public office and dishonestly dealing with documents, relating to a 2017 work trip to Berlin.
In a parliamentary committee last year, Lander was asked whether Chapman had made “a complaint to ICAC about Mr Hanlon and Ms Vasilevski on behalf of disgruntled whistleblowers” in 2018 – a claim previously aired in a speech by SA Best MLC Frank...
A wave of pro-whistleblower opinions from federal judges suggests the False Claims Act remains on solid ground despite pointed questions from leading conservative judicial voices. Whistleblowers, ...