Tuesday, November 27, 2018

Outgunned: Federal corruption agencies not up to the task

The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently
~Friedrich Nietzsche

“Power does not corrupt. Fear corrupts... perhaps the fear of a loss of power.”
― John Steinbeck




On October 19, 2012, a long-serving Australian Border Force official called Mohamed Deeb took a break from annual leave to stop by his office in Sydney. It was 6.40pm and he was checking on an incoming consignment of clothes.

Deeb made seven checks of the Customs database that Friday evening. Twenty hours later, on Saturday evening, he was back at it, checking the clothes import 16 more times. On Monday, the veteran ABF official checked again. 

Deeb kept monitoring the clothes consignment while on leave up until the import was searched by officials. It was then that officers discovered six kilograms of methamphetamine hidden amongst the clothing. Three hours after the drugs were discovered, Deeb was at it again, performing a final search of the database. It confirmed the consignment had been intercepted or, in the jargon of the criminal underworld, was “hot”.

What happened next raises serious questions about Australia’s national anti-corruption regime. At a time when independent MP Cathy McGowan has tabled a private member's bill to establish a federal anti-corruption commission similar to ICAC in NSW or IBAC in Victoria – and the Morrison government argues the existing agencies are up to the task – the case of Mohamed Deeb suggests the national approach is in need of reform.


Thousands of public servants say they've seen corruption as calls for federal ICAC grows
More than 4300 federal public servants believe they witnessed corrupt behaviour in one year, as Prime Minister Scott Morrison faces mounting pressure to establish an integrity ...



Organised crime in the UK is bigger than ever before. Can the police ...








CONTROL ISSUES: The Washington Post's Maggie Sullivan on the White House sullying the good name of the follow-up question: "What is clear is that — despite the talk about maintaining decorum — the rules are set up to help the president avoid meaningful challenges."