Is anything permissible in the pursuit of political corruption and does the end justify the means? The NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption’s (ICAC) investigation into former NSW premier Gladys Berejiklian’s conduct exposed questionable government processes and raised questions about transparency and accountability of political figures. Should she have disclosed her relationship with then-secret boyfriend MP Daryl Maguire, and did she breach the public trust though a conflict between her public duties and personal life? Unlike criminal courts, ICAC does not provide the protections offered those charged with a crime, nor the exoneration process that an acquittal or successful appeal offers. Guilt of corrupt behaviour by accusation is a real and constant danger, as history shows. Wrongful accusation delivers a grave injustice and in the case of a corruption ‘watchdog’ a public investigation amounts to a wrongful accusation, given that the investigation is not a finding. Andrew L. Urban has been writing about wrongful convictions in the criminal justice system and the role of the State in its fair and just administration of the law since 2013. In Gladys he provides the broader context in which this controversial ICAC investigation pilloried Gladys Berijiklian with questionable justification — and arguably not in the true spirit of exposing political corruption as the public understands it. It includes detailed excerpts from the ICAC Act and the investigation, Gladys’ resignation from politics, and how she stayed strong through it all and retained her fans and followers.
