Home / Before the Courts / ICAC Prosecution Briefs with DPP in relation to Operation Acacia

ICAC Prosecution Briefs with DPP in relation to Operation Acacia

The Commission is of the opinion that consideration should be given to obtaining the advice of the DPP with respect to the prosecution of Ian Macdonald, John Maitland, Craig Ransley and Andrew Poole for various offences as follows

– Ian Macdonald, for the common law offence of misconduct in public office in relation to his conduct in granting Doyles Creek Mining Pty Ltd (DCM) consent to apply for an exploration licence (EL) and granting the EL to DCM, both grants being substantially to benefit Mr Maitland.

– John Maitland, for offences under section 178BB of the Crimes Act 1900 in relation to his making and publishing to the Department of Primary Industries (DPI) false or misleading statements, and for offences under section 112(2) and section 87(1 )(a) of the Independent Commission Against Corruption Act 1988 in relation to his conduct in discussing the evidence he gave at a compulsory examination with Archibald Tudehope and testifying at the public inquiry that he sought to comply with the obligation imposed on him to keep secret the evidence he gave at the compulsory examination.

– Craig Ransley, for offences under section 178BB of the Crimes Act in relation to his agreeing to Mr Maitland publishing to the DPI certain false or misleading statements.

– Andrew Poole, for offences under section 178BB of the Crimes Act in relation to his agreeing to Mr Maitland publishing to the DPI certain false or misleading statements.

Briefs have been provided to the DPP.

The Commission will also furnish to the Commonwealth DPP evidence that may be admissible in the prosecution of Mr Maitland, Mr Ransley and Mr Poole for offences under section 184(1) of the Corporations Act 2001 in relation to their relevant conduct with respect to the false or misleading statements.

Status/outcome

John Maitland – section 87 ICAC Act offence – On 2 September 2014, the DPP advised the Commission that there is sufficient evidence to prosecute Mr Maitland for an offence of giving false or misleading evidence under section 87 of the ICAC Act.

This charge is listed for mention on 16 June 2015 at the Downing Centre Local Court.

Messrs Macdonald and Maitland – misconduct in public office offences – On 5 November 2014, the DPP advised the Commission that there is sufficient evidence to prosecute Mr Macdonald for two offences of misconduct in public office and Mr Maitland for two offences of accessory before the fact to misconduct in public office.

After the proceedings were commenced, the DPP decided to proceed with the charges against Messrs Macdonald and Maitland in the absence of committal proceedings. Such proceedings are preliminary to any trial and are normally conducted before the Local Court. In order to dispense with the need for committal proceedings, the DPP found an ex officio indictment in relation to the charges (that is, a bill of indictment found for offences in respect of which there has been no committal for trial).

The DPP then sought and gained the permission of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court to have the charges tried before the Supreme Court.

The matters have been listed for trial on 14 March 2016 at the Sydney Supreme Court, and listed for mention on 6 July 2015.

The Commission is awaiting the DPP’s decision on whether proceedings will be taken with respect to the remaining individuals.

Check Also

The Hon Dr Peter Phelps – Speech in Parliament (15/05/2018)

OPERATION ACACIA The Hon. Dr PETER PHELPS ( 17:54 ): I once again raise my concerns about Operation Acacia, ...