21.10.2013/ AFP tries for another interview to set me up/ Nuckley Succar AFP
Today
Nuckley Succar from the Australian Federal Police sent 2 AFP Officers
to my work to ask me to participate in an interview so he could find out
my side of the story.
I find this extremely bizarre as Nuckley Succar is required to serve papers on me tomorrow and could have asked me this himself.
Clearly
I am now aware that it is the intention of Succar to protect both
corruption and systemic corrupt conduct in Government Departments. I
have on a number of occasions asked Succar to investigate my evidence.
Obviously
when the Succar and 6 other AFP officers came to my home on the 29th
May 2013and intimidated me in an attempt to protect systemic corrupt
conduct and corruption by senior Management at AFSA or ITSA and the
Commonwealth Ombudsman and the Australian Public Service Commission they
failed to take into account my extensive evidence.
On
the 3rd June 2013 they came to my work and took me to the loading dock
were a woman from the AFP with a big blob of skin hanging from her lip
tried to intimidate me once again and told me they could handcuff me an
throw me in the cells.
Everyone is aware
of the AFP failing to act in the Noteprinting Australia and the Reserve
Bank and also failing to act on the bribery scandal of Leightons
Holding effectively protecting corruption.
So
then why would I agree to an interview with a person who has told me
on a number of occasions that he intends to prosecute me for exposing
conduct conduct and corruption on the internet.
Succar
must be aware that it is in the public interest to expose this
contrary to his intention to prosecute me for exposing it.
I
would not wish to miss the opportunity were I am able to subpoena high
level public servants to court and make them accountable for their
behavior
Where politicians have failed to expose this and others have protected this conduct I intend to run this like a ROYAL Commission
. Any Public Servant who is aware that they have protected corruption
or are willingly part of the systemic corrupt conduct which is rife in
the Australian Public Service is welcome to bring along their
resignation to court and I will personally email it to the Prime
Minister on their behalf.
Sunday, 20 October 2013
Thursday, 17 October 2013
Complaint to Law Society/ Matthew Osborne( AFSA) giving corrupt Legal advice.
It is clear that the Principal Legal Officer Matthew Osborne is aware he is providing corrupt Legal advice to AFSA or ITSA.
As with any other solicitor in Australia corrupt Legal advice warrants investigation.
However, at AFSA or ITSA corrupt conduct is so entrenched in this Government department, that it is clear that all senior staff in this department would be aware Matthew Osborne 's legal advice is corrupt and clearly false.
As with any solicitor or barrister giving such false advice there is clearly consequences.
As Matthew Osborne has proven himself to be of questionable ethics and therefore unfit to hold a legal position he is to be referred to the Law Society for participating in systemic corrupt conduct.
It is clear that the Principal Legal Officer Matthew Osborne is aware he is providing corrupt Legal advice to AFSA or ITSA.
As with any other solicitor in Australia corrupt Legal advice warrants investigation.
However, at AFSA or ITSA corrupt conduct is so entrenched in this Government department, that it is clear that all senior staff in this department would be aware Matthew Osborne 's legal advice is corrupt and clearly false.
As with any solicitor or barrister giving such false advice there is clearly consequences.
As Matthew Osborne has proven himself to be of questionable ethics and therefore unfit to hold a legal position he is to be referred to the Law Society for participating in systemic corrupt conduct.
Monday, 14 October 2013
Email from Victorian Office Gaming and Liquor Regulation/ Re Corrupt Adam Toma
From: fionabrown01@hotmail.com
To: steven.loh@vcglr.vic.gov.au
Subject: RE: Adam Toma
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2013 13:52:45 +1100
From: fionabrown01@hotmail.com
To: steven.loh@vcglr.vic.gov.au
Subject: RE: Adam Toma
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2013 13:52:45 +1100
Hi Steven,
You are failing to understand this matter.
Adam Toma was protecting Fraud at ITSA or AFSA which is a Commonwealth Government Agency.
The matter with the Australian Federal Police is a separate matter were I exposed him on the internet because the ITSA or AFSA ( Veronique Ingram) was trying to protect this practice
.
You will be aware Adam Toma was on ITSA or AFSA's Audit Committee which is a requirement under the Financial Management and Accountability Act. Part of the responsibility of this committee is compliance.
PART of Adam Toma's responsibility was not to protect fraud.
However Adam Toma was not able to protect fraud alone. He was part of a network were the Principal Legal Officer Matthew Osborne was giving corrupt Legal Advice to Bankruptcy Regulation to coverup systemic corrupt conduct at ITSA or AFSA or by private trustees.
Adam Toma held a responsibility as part of this committee to ensure the Bankruptcy Act was complied with.
Clearly , the Victorian Government or the Victorian people should have no public confidence in Adam Toma.
You will be aware by matters already raised by the media in recent weeks of the failed actions of the Federal Police in matters of corruption.
From my conversation with Nuckhley Succar ) who also goes by a variety of names, Nuckles or Nick it also appears that it his intention to protect corruption also.
As you will be aware I will be compiling this email into my file which will clearly demonstrate that this Victorian Government Department has been made aware that Adam Toma is corrupt though has failed to act.
Thanking you
Fiona Brown
To: fionabrown01@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: Adam Toma
From: steven.loh@vcglr.vic.gov.au
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2013 18:05:56 +1100
Dear Ms Brown
Thank you for your email below.
I am aware that issues surrounding this matter are being dealt with by the Australian Federal Police (AFP) who, as required, will apprise the VCGLR of any developments.
Please contact the AFP's Federal Agent Nuckhley Succar (02) 9286 4274 if you have any questions.
Regards Steven Loh
Manager, Anti-Corruption and Integrity*
Victorian Commission for Gambling and Liquor Regulation
* Please note I do not work on Wednesdays
49 Elizabeth Street, Richmond, Victoria 3121
ph. 1300 1VCGLR (1300 182 457)
e. steven.loh@vcglr.vic.gov.au | www.vcglr.vic.gov.au
From: fiona brown <fionabrown01@hotmail.com>
To: "contact@vcglr.vic.gov.au" <contact@vcglr.vic.gov.au>
Date: 20/09/2013 06:51 PM
Subject: Adam Toma
To whom it may concern,
I understand you have recently employed Adam Toma to the Victorian Commission for Gambling and Liquor Regulation and he is now the director of Leasing and Approvals
From Adam Toma's application you will be aware that he was previously Enforcement Manager at ITSA or newly named AFSA. This Government Agency is responsible for administering the bankruptcy Act.
As National Enforcement Manager Adam Toma was involved in protecting fraud and serious corrupt conduct.
He claims he left ITSA or AFSA because I exposed his conduct on the internet. Clearly this is in the Public Interest.
Part of his responsibilities was to ensure Enforcement had an adequate Investigation policy . However Mr Toma failed to implement this.
Also part of his responsibilities was the Bankruptcy Regulation branch which had no investigation policy and had been given corrupt advice from Matthew Osborne Principal Legal Officer on how to protect fraud.
Therefore a large percentage of complaints sent to Bankruptcy Regulations were protected by a corrupt system which Adam Toma was clearly aware of.
He would have also been aware that statistics from Enforcement and Regulation that was compiled in ITSA or AFSA Annual Report clearly were false and did not reflect the state of decay in this Government department.
I understand that that the Victoria Commission for Gambling and Liquor Licenses undertakes compliance activities to prevent and detect breaches.
In light of the corrupt conduct of Adam Toma in his previous employment and the requirement that employees of your department he of the highest ethical standard Adam Toma should not have obtained employment in this sensitive area of the Law.
I recommend that you review Adam Toma's application and any references you may have received from Veronique Ingram or Matthew Osborne.
Thank You
Fiona Brown
The VCGLR is responsible for gambling and liquor licensing and undertakes compliance activities to prevent and detect breaches, while also informing and educating industry and the general public about regulatory practices and requirements. - See more at: http://www.vcglr.vic.gov.au/utility/about+us/about+the+vcglr/#sthash.csAeCWjS.dpuf
The VCGLR is responsible for gambling and liquor licensing and undertakes compliance activities to prevent and detect breaches, while also informing and educating industry and the general public about regulatory practices and requirements - See more at: http://www.vcglr.vic.gov.au/utility/about+us/about+the+vcglr/#sthash.csAeCWjS.dpuf
The VCGLR is responsible for gambling and liquor licensing and undertakes compliance activities to prevent and detect breaches, while also informing and educating industry and the general public about regulatory practices and requirements - See more at: http://www.vcglr.vic.gov.au/utility/about+us/about+the+vcglr/#sthash.csAeCWjS.dpuf
You are failing to understand this matter.
Adam Toma was protecting Fraud at ITSA or AFSA which is a Commonwealth Government Agency.
The matter with the Australian Federal Police is a separate matter were I exposed him on the internet because the ITSA or AFSA ( Veronique Ingram) was trying to protect this practice
.
You will be aware Adam Toma was on ITSA or AFSA's Audit Committee which is a requirement under the Financial Management and Accountability Act. Part of the responsibility of this committee is compliance.
PART of Adam Toma's responsibility was not to protect fraud.
However Adam Toma was not able to protect fraud alone. He was part of a network were the Principal Legal Officer Matthew Osborne was giving corrupt Legal Advice to Bankruptcy Regulation to coverup systemic corrupt conduct at ITSA or AFSA or by private trustees.
Adam Toma held a responsibility as part of this committee to ensure the Bankruptcy Act was complied with.
Clearly , the Victorian Government or the Victorian people should have no public confidence in Adam Toma.
You will be aware by matters already raised by the media in recent weeks of the failed actions of the Federal Police in matters of corruption.
From my conversation with Nuckhley Succar ) who also goes by a variety of names, Nuckles or Nick it also appears that it his intention to protect corruption also.
As you will be aware I will be compiling this email into my file which will clearly demonstrate that this Victorian Government Department has been made aware that Adam Toma is corrupt though has failed to act.
Thanking you
Fiona Brown
To: fionabrown01@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: Adam Toma
From: steven.loh@vcglr.vic.gov.au
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2013 18:05:56 +1100
Dear Ms Brown
Thank you for your email below.
I am aware that issues surrounding this matter are being dealt with by the Australian Federal Police (AFP) who, as required, will apprise the VCGLR of any developments.
Please contact the AFP's Federal Agent Nuckhley Succar (02) 9286 4274 if you have any questions.
Regards Steven Loh
Manager, Anti-Corruption and Integrity*
Victorian Commission for Gambling and Liquor Regulation
* Please note I do not work on Wednesdays
49 Elizabeth Street, Richmond, Victoria 3121
ph. 1300 1VCGLR (1300 182 457)
e. steven.loh@vcglr.vic.gov.au | www.vcglr.vic.gov.au
From: fiona brown <fionabrown01@hotmail.com>
To: "contact@vcglr.vic.gov.au" <contact@vcglr.vic.gov.au>
Date: 20/09/2013 06:51 PM
Subject: Adam Toma
To whom it may concern,
I understand you have recently employed Adam Toma to the Victorian Commission for Gambling and Liquor Regulation and he is now the director of Leasing and Approvals
From Adam Toma's application you will be aware that he was previously Enforcement Manager at ITSA or newly named AFSA. This Government Agency is responsible for administering the bankruptcy Act.
As National Enforcement Manager Adam Toma was involved in protecting fraud and serious corrupt conduct.
He claims he left ITSA or AFSA because I exposed his conduct on the internet. Clearly this is in the Public Interest.
Part of his responsibilities was to ensure Enforcement had an adequate Investigation policy . However Mr Toma failed to implement this.
Also part of his responsibilities was the Bankruptcy Regulation branch which had no investigation policy and had been given corrupt advice from Matthew Osborne Principal Legal Officer on how to protect fraud.
Therefore a large percentage of complaints sent to Bankruptcy Regulations were protected by a corrupt system which Adam Toma was clearly aware of.
He would have also been aware that statistics from Enforcement and Regulation that was compiled in ITSA or AFSA Annual Report clearly were false and did not reflect the state of decay in this Government department.
I understand that that the Victoria Commission for Gambling and Liquor Licenses undertakes compliance activities to prevent and detect breaches.
In light of the corrupt conduct of Adam Toma in his previous employment and the requirement that employees of your department he of the highest ethical standard Adam Toma should not have obtained employment in this sensitive area of the Law.
I recommend that you review Adam Toma's application and any references you may have received from Veronique Ingram or Matthew Osborne.
Thank You
Fiona Brown
The VCGLR is responsible for gambling and liquor licensing and undertakes compliance activities to prevent and detect breaches, while also informing and educating industry and the general public about regulatory practices and requirements. - See more at: http://www.vcglr.vic.gov.au/utility/about+us/about+the+vcglr/#sthash.csAeCWjS.dpuf
The VCGLR is responsible for gambling and liquor licensing and undertakes compliance activities to prevent and detect breaches, while also informing and educating industry and the general public about regulatory practices and requirements - See more at: http://www.vcglr.vic.gov.au/utility/about+us/about+the+vcglr/#sthash.csAeCWjS.dpuf
The VCGLR is responsible for gambling and liquor licensing and undertakes compliance activities to prevent and detect breaches, while also informing and educating industry and the general public about regulatory practices and requirements - See more at: http://www.vcglr.vic.gov.au/utility/about+us/about+the+vcglr/#sthash.csAeCWjS.dpuf
================================================
ATTENTION: This email communication and any attachments contain information which is confidential, the copyright of the Victorian Commission for Gambling and Liquor Regulation and intended only for the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication and any attachments, you may not use, disclose, disseminate or copy them or any part of them. If you receive this communication in error, please delete the material from all computers, destroy all copies and contact the Commission by phone on 1300 1 VCGLR (1300 182 457) or the sender at the sender's email address.
Any views expressed in this communication and any attachments are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of the Commission. This
communication and any attachments are believed to be free of viruses at the time they left the sender's computer. However, the sender and the Commission do not guarantee that the
communication and any attachments are free of computer viruses or other conditions which could damage or interfere with data, hardware or software with which they might be used.
ATTENTION: This email communication and any attachments contain information which is confidential, the copyright of the Victorian Commission for Gambling and Liquor Regulation and intended only for the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication and any attachments, you may not use, disclose, disseminate or copy them or any part of them. If you receive this communication in error, please delete the material from all computers, destroy all copies and contact the Commission by phone on 1300 1 VCGLR (1300 182 457) or the sender at the sender's email address.
Any views expressed in this communication and any attachments are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of the Commission. This
communication and any attachments are believed to be free of viruses at the time they left the sender's computer. However, the sender and the Commission do not guarantee that the
communication and any attachments are free of computer viruses or other conditions which could damage or interfere with data, hardware or software with which they might be used.
This communication and any attachments are supplied on the express
condition that the intended recipient and any other persons who receive them
assume all risk of use and absolve
the sender and the Commission entirely of all responsibility for consequences of their use.
================================================
the sender and the Commission entirely of all responsibility for consequences of their use.
================================================
Friday, 11 October 2013
CRIMES ACT 1900 - SECT 316
Concealing serious indictable offence316 Concealing serious indictable offence
(1) If a person has committed a serious indictable offence and another person who knows or believes that the offence has been committed and that he or she has information which might be of material assistance in securing the apprehension of the offender or the prosecution or conviction of the offender for it fails without reasonable excuse to bring that information to the attention of a member of the Police Force or other appropriate authority, that other person is liable to imprisonment for 2 years.
(2) A person who solicits, accepts or agrees to accept any benefit for himself or herself or any other person in consideration for doing anything that would be an offence under subsection (1) is liable to imprisonment for 5 years.
(3) It is not an offence against subsection (2) merely to solicit, accept or agree to accept the making good of loss or injury caused by an offence or the making of reasonable compensation for that loss or injury.
(4) A prosecution for an offence against subsection (1) is not to be commenced against a person without the approval of the Attorney General if the knowledge or belief that an offence has been committed was formed or the information referred to in the subsection was obtained by the person in the course of practising or following a profession, calling or vocation prescribed by the regulations for the purposes of this subsection.
(5) The regulations may prescribe a profession, calling or vocation as referred to in subsection (4).
AustLII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedbac
Adam Toma/ Victoria Liquor and Gaming Regulation
Following is the email received from the office of the Victorian Liquor and Gaming Regulation after it was notified that Adam Toma who was appointed as a director in this government department is corrupt and protected fraud in his previous position as National Manager Enforcement and Regulation at the now Australian Financial Security Authority ( AFSA) previously known as ITSA.
This is an example how corruption and systemic corrupt conduct is transferred from one Government department to another.
Mr Toma was also on AFSA or ITSA's audit Committee which is responsible for not only financial audits but also COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS.
Following is the email received from the office of the Victorian Liquor and Gaming Regulation after it was notified that Adam Toma who was appointed as a director in this government department is corrupt and protected fraud in his previous position as National Manager Enforcement and Regulation at the now Australian Financial Security Authority ( AFSA) previously known as ITSA.
This is an example how corruption and systemic corrupt conduct is transferred from one Government department to another.
Mr Toma was also on AFSA or ITSA's audit Committee which is responsible for not only financial audits but also COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS.
Saturday, 5 October 2013
Adam Toma/Email from Victorian Premier/ Minister for Liquor and Gaming Regulation
Following is the Email received from Premier Dennis Napthines Parliamentary secretary.
I brought to the attention of the Victorian Premier that the Vicorian Liquor and Gaming Regulation had just appointed a corrupt Director.
Adam Toma previously was National Enforcement Manager at the"Insolvency and trustee Service Australia" or now renamed "Australian Financial Security Security Authority " were he corrupt and protected Fraud.
Currently he is being protected by the Australian Federal Police.
It will be interesting to see how the Minister for Liquor and Gaming Regulation will handle this matter.
Following is the Email received from Premier Dennis Napthines Parliamentary secretary.
I brought to the attention of the Victorian Premier that the Vicorian Liquor and Gaming Regulation had just appointed a corrupt Director.
Adam Toma previously was National Enforcement Manager at the"Insolvency and trustee Service Australia" or now renamed "Australian Financial Security Security Authority " were he corrupt and protected Fraud.
Currently he is being protected by the Australian Federal Police.
It will be interesting to see how the Minister for Liquor and Gaming Regulation will handle this matter.
Friday, 4 October 2013
AFP protects systemic corrupt Conduct/ Corruption/ Leighton Holdings
The corruption and bribery allegations at Leighton Holdings which is subject to an Australian Federal Police investigation is particularly amuzing.
Not because it involves bribery and corruption but because the investigation is being carried out by the AFP which is currently trying to protect corruption and systemic corrupt conduct in Government Departments.
So it is all particularly bizarre that the AFP Investigates corruption and also protects it.
Corruption and cover-ups in Leighton Holdings' international construction empire were rife and known to top company executives and directors, according to internal company files.
In revelations that will cause international embarrassment
for Australia and raise questions about the role of the nation's
corporate watchdog, the files expose plans to pay alleged
multimillion-dollar kickbacks in Iraq, Indonesia, Malaysia and
elsewhere, along with other serious corporate misconduct.
Mr King, one of Australia's most highly regarded chief executives and who has reportedly been approached by Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull about taking an NBN Co board seat, was chief executive of Leighton Holdings for 23 years and is a prominent Sydney business community figure.
Leighton is one of Australia's biggest construction companies, with a market value of nearly $7 billion. It has built the Victorian desalination plant, Sydney's ABC studios, and Queensland's Ross River dam.
Among the most explosive of the company files is a memo written on November 23, 2010, by then acting CEO David Stewart. It says Leighton International managing director David Savage had revealed he and Mr King knew of a $42 million kickback to a firm in Monaco nominated by Iraqi officials who gave Leighton a $750 million oil pipeline contract. "I asked did Wal K approve this? And he said yes," the memo says.
Around the same time, a private consulting firm, Concorde Corporation, advised Leighton it was exposed in Asia to allegations of ''conflict of interest, kickbacks, unethical staff appointments and so on''.
Concorde warned that the allegations ''indicate a serious breakdown of probity, governance and ethics within Leighton's Asian operations''.
The allegations coincide with a tumultuous time at Leighton after Mr King, who has been awarded an AO, left the company to be replaced by Mr Stewart, and an international takeover battle between Leighton's major shareholder, the German company Hochtief and a Spanish firm, ACS.
In his time at the top, Mr King transformed Leighton into a global construction powerhouse with $13 billion in revenue.
Confidential legal advice provided to Leighton in late 2010 also warned that executives might be linked to corruption or serious mismanagement and that the company was facing an ''extreme'' risk of damage to its reputation.
But Leighton withheld the Stewart memo, along with other files detailing corruption, from authorities for several months or failed to pass some of them on at all.
Another key factor impeding full exposure of the corporate scandal is the apparent failure of the corporate watchdog, the Australian Securities and Investments Commission, to conduct rigorous investigations in the two years since Leighton alerted federal police that it may have breached foreign bribery laws in Iraq.
ASIC has spoken to no witnesses or suspects, despite witnesses telling federal police they had grave concerns about corporate offences in the company.
Key Leighton witnesses and whistleblowers, including former top Leighton executive Stephen Sasse, told Fairfax Media on Wednesday that ASIC and the federal police appeared unable to adequately respond to the breadth of issues engulfing Leighton.
''I would be surprised if the federal police or ASIC have the expertise or technical knowledge to undertake investigations of this nature,'' Mr Sasse said. ''I suspect that the lack of urgency stems from resourcing issues rather than any lack of purpose.''
He declined to answer questions about his stint at Leighton in 2011.
Another source familiar with the Australian Federal Police investigation revealed that AFP agents privately complained about inadequate resources to conduct a proper probe.
ASIC - which failed to respond to inquiries from Fairfax Media - is already under pressure for failing to investigate alleged corporate law breaches linked to the Reserve Bank bribery scandal. ASIC referred questions about Leighton to the federal police, which stressed it was treating the Leighton case as a ''priority''.
''We are working to ensure that all alleged criminal activity is uncovered,'' Commander Ian McCartney said.
In a statement, Leighton Holdings said on Wednesday that it was co-operating with police, had strong anti-corruption policies and that its directors have ''at all times executed their duties with the appropriate care and diligence'' required by law.
Mr Stewart's note says Mr Savage had claimed that Monaco-based firm Unaoil had been paid kickbacks by Leighton via an inflated $87 million contract of which the value of ''real work'' was ''less than half''.
Unaoil is run by an Iranian family that boasts close ties to Iraq's oil minister and Prime Minister. Unaoil was recently named in the British High Court as a company with influence among Middle Eastern and African officials and that was once wired a commission ''disguised as payment for office equipment''.
Mr Savage was given a $2 million bonus when he left the company on March 31, 2011, despite internal concerns about his knowledge of corruption.
Mr Stewart's memo of November 23, 2010, says Mr Savage allegedly suggested an extra $23 million illicit payment to win a further $500 million worth of work in Iraq.
''It is exactly what got the AWB into trouble with their trucking contract at two to three times market rates,'' Mr Stewart recorded himself telling Mr Savage, in reference to the Iraq bribery scandal involving AWB Limited in 2006.
''Wal King is still CEO and if he is OK with it, go for it,'' Mr Stewart's memo says.
The memo was not passed to police until November 2011, a year after Mr Stewart wrote it and only after lawyers working for Leighton accidentally stumbled over it.
When Fairfax Media tried to question Mr Stewart about the bribery allegations this week, he responded: ''I don't know anything about it at all.''
Mr King declined to speak to Fairfax Media. A company source still close to Mr King cast doubt on Mr Savage's claim - as recorded by Mr Stewart - that he had discussed inflating the Iraqi contract with the former chief executive.
But the confidential Leighton files also reveal that Mr King and other top executives were emailed in 2009 by a whistleblower about a ''payoff'' made to a corrupt Leighton employee in connection to a barge-building project in Asia.
They also reveal the whistleblower's corruption concerns were subject to bungled internal investigations, despite spanning ''several countries'', including Indonesia and India, and exposing ''criminal'' conduct, including a ''systemic fraud''.
''It is not difficult to understand the frustration expressed by [the whistleblower] ... that there has been an attempt to cover up these issues,'' a company memo says.
The whistleblower allegations exposed another company middleman, Malaysian-based businessman Pakianathan Sri Kumar, who was allegedly involved in corruption.
Mr Sri Kumar has worked with Leighton in Iraq, Indonesia, India and Tanzania and the whistleblower said he had heard that the businessman received ''a 10 per cent kickback'' on certain projects, ''some of which is passed to Leighton executives''.
Leighton's Indian projects alleged to be tainted by corruption were multimillion-dollar offshore works in the Indian town of Cochin and the district of Jamnagar.
In confidential legal advice provided to Leighton in late 2010, Sydney lawyer Malcolm Davis warned that Leighton executives may be tainted by corruption or serious mismanagement.
''It is perhaps trite to say that 'reputational' risk to LHL [Leighton Holdings] and the greater LH Group is extreme were it ever to become known that LIL [Leighton International] ... engaged in conduct of the kind referred to in the allegations of impropriety.''
Mr Davis said it ''beggars belief'' that a Leighton senior project manager who had engaged in clearly ''criminal conduct'' with Mr Sri Kumar in Indonesia was not sacked.
The manager, Gavin Hodge, allegedly stole $500,000 worth of steel from Leighton to build a barge for Indian company Adani in a black-market racket. Rather than being sacked, Mr Hodge was given a bonus and thanked for his work by a Leighton executive who knew of his alleged corruption, Russell Waugh.
Mr Waugh, who could not be reached, is now a top executive at engineering and property services company UGL.
After Mr Davis' scathing advice, Leighton finally fired Mr Hodge and initiated private legal proceedings against him to recover $500,000 he allegedly stole.
The corruption and bribery allegations at Leighton Holdings which is subject to an Australian Federal Police investigation is particularly amuzing.
Not because it involves bribery and corruption but because the investigation is being carried out by the AFP which is currently trying to protect corruption and systemic corrupt conduct in Government Departments.
So it is all particularly bizarre that the AFP Investigates corruption and also protects it.
Corruption and cover-ups in Leighton Holdings' international construction empire were rife and known to top company executives and directors, according to internal company files.
It is exactly what got the AWB into trouble with their trucking contract at two to three times market rates.Those in the know included the Australian construction giant's chief executive at the time, Wal King, and his short-term successor David Stewart.
Advertisement
Hundreds of confidential company documents, obtained during a
six-month Fairfax Media investigation, also reveal a culture of
rewarding corruption or incompetence, and abysmal corporate governance
in what looms as the worst recent case of corporate corruption
involving a major Australian firm.Mr King, one of Australia's most highly regarded chief executives and who has reportedly been approached by Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull about taking an NBN Co board seat, was chief executive of Leighton Holdings for 23 years and is a prominent Sydney business community figure.
Leighton is one of Australia's biggest construction companies, with a market value of nearly $7 billion. It has built the Victorian desalination plant, Sydney's ABC studios, and Queensland's Ross River dam.
Among the most explosive of the company files is a memo written on November 23, 2010, by then acting CEO David Stewart. It says Leighton International managing director David Savage had revealed he and Mr King knew of a $42 million kickback to a firm in Monaco nominated by Iraqi officials who gave Leighton a $750 million oil pipeline contract. "I asked did Wal K approve this? And he said yes," the memo says.
Around the same time, a private consulting firm, Concorde Corporation, advised Leighton it was exposed in Asia to allegations of ''conflict of interest, kickbacks, unethical staff appointments and so on''.
Concorde warned that the allegations ''indicate a serious breakdown of probity, governance and ethics within Leighton's Asian operations''.
The allegations coincide with a tumultuous time at Leighton after Mr King, who has been awarded an AO, left the company to be replaced by Mr Stewart, and an international takeover battle between Leighton's major shareholder, the German company Hochtief and a Spanish firm, ACS.
In his time at the top, Mr King transformed Leighton into a global construction powerhouse with $13 billion in revenue.
Confidential legal advice provided to Leighton in late 2010 also warned that executives might be linked to corruption or serious mismanagement and that the company was facing an ''extreme'' risk of damage to its reputation.
But Leighton withheld the Stewart memo, along with other files detailing corruption, from authorities for several months or failed to pass some of them on at all.
Another key factor impeding full exposure of the corporate scandal is the apparent failure of the corporate watchdog, the Australian Securities and Investments Commission, to conduct rigorous investigations in the two years since Leighton alerted federal police that it may have breached foreign bribery laws in Iraq.
ASIC has spoken to no witnesses or suspects, despite witnesses telling federal police they had grave concerns about corporate offences in the company.
Key Leighton witnesses and whistleblowers, including former top Leighton executive Stephen Sasse, told Fairfax Media on Wednesday that ASIC and the federal police appeared unable to adequately respond to the breadth of issues engulfing Leighton.
''I would be surprised if the federal police or ASIC have the expertise or technical knowledge to undertake investigations of this nature,'' Mr Sasse said. ''I suspect that the lack of urgency stems from resourcing issues rather than any lack of purpose.''
He declined to answer questions about his stint at Leighton in 2011.
Another source familiar with the Australian Federal Police investigation revealed that AFP agents privately complained about inadequate resources to conduct a proper probe.
ASIC - which failed to respond to inquiries from Fairfax Media - is already under pressure for failing to investigate alleged corporate law breaches linked to the Reserve Bank bribery scandal. ASIC referred questions about Leighton to the federal police, which stressed it was treating the Leighton case as a ''priority''.
''We are working to ensure that all alleged criminal activity is uncovered,'' Commander Ian McCartney said.
In a statement, Leighton Holdings said on Wednesday that it was co-operating with police, had strong anti-corruption policies and that its directors have ''at all times executed their duties with the appropriate care and diligence'' required by law.
Mr Stewart's note says Mr Savage had claimed that Monaco-based firm Unaoil had been paid kickbacks by Leighton via an inflated $87 million contract of which the value of ''real work'' was ''less than half''.
Unaoil is run by an Iranian family that boasts close ties to Iraq's oil minister and Prime Minister. Unaoil was recently named in the British High Court as a company with influence among Middle Eastern and African officials and that was once wired a commission ''disguised as payment for office equipment''.
Mr Savage was given a $2 million bonus when he left the company on March 31, 2011, despite internal concerns about his knowledge of corruption.
Mr Stewart's memo of November 23, 2010, says Mr Savage allegedly suggested an extra $23 million illicit payment to win a further $500 million worth of work in Iraq.
''It is exactly what got the AWB into trouble with their trucking contract at two to three times market rates,'' Mr Stewart recorded himself telling Mr Savage, in reference to the Iraq bribery scandal involving AWB Limited in 2006.
''Wal King is still CEO and if he is OK with it, go for it,'' Mr Stewart's memo says.
The memo was not passed to police until November 2011, a year after Mr Stewart wrote it and only after lawyers working for Leighton accidentally stumbled over it.
When Fairfax Media tried to question Mr Stewart about the bribery allegations this week, he responded: ''I don't know anything about it at all.''
Mr King declined to speak to Fairfax Media. A company source still close to Mr King cast doubt on Mr Savage's claim - as recorded by Mr Stewart - that he had discussed inflating the Iraqi contract with the former chief executive.
But the confidential Leighton files also reveal that Mr King and other top executives were emailed in 2009 by a whistleblower about a ''payoff'' made to a corrupt Leighton employee in connection to a barge-building project in Asia.
They also reveal the whistleblower's corruption concerns were subject to bungled internal investigations, despite spanning ''several countries'', including Indonesia and India, and exposing ''criminal'' conduct, including a ''systemic fraud''.
''It is not difficult to understand the frustration expressed by [the whistleblower] ... that there has been an attempt to cover up these issues,'' a company memo says.
The whistleblower allegations exposed another company middleman, Malaysian-based businessman Pakianathan Sri Kumar, who was allegedly involved in corruption.
Mr Sri Kumar has worked with Leighton in Iraq, Indonesia, India and Tanzania and the whistleblower said he had heard that the businessman received ''a 10 per cent kickback'' on certain projects, ''some of which is passed to Leighton executives''.
Leighton's Indian projects alleged to be tainted by corruption were multimillion-dollar offshore works in the Indian town of Cochin and the district of Jamnagar.
In confidential legal advice provided to Leighton in late 2010, Sydney lawyer Malcolm Davis warned that Leighton executives may be tainted by corruption or serious mismanagement.
''It is perhaps trite to say that 'reputational' risk to LHL [Leighton Holdings] and the greater LH Group is extreme were it ever to become known that LIL [Leighton International] ... engaged in conduct of the kind referred to in the allegations of impropriety.''
Mr Davis said it ''beggars belief'' that a Leighton senior project manager who had engaged in clearly ''criminal conduct'' with Mr Sri Kumar in Indonesia was not sacked.
The manager, Gavin Hodge, allegedly stole $500,000 worth of steel from Leighton to build a barge for Indian company Adani in a black-market racket. Rather than being sacked, Mr Hodge was given a bonus and thanked for his work by a Leighton executive who knew of his alleged corruption, Russell Waugh.
Mr Waugh, who could not be reached, is now a top executive at engineering and property services company UGL.
After Mr Davis' scathing advice, Leighton finally fired Mr Hodge and initiated private legal proceedings against him to recover $500,000 he allegedly stole.
Note Printing Australia/ Securency/ Leighton Holdings/ASIC / Bribery/ Coverup
So it appears ASIC is overwhelmed by its enormity as a regulator.
So if you don't understand what is occurring at ASIC I will tell you.
ASIC uses its " discretion " to fuck over the Law and any complaints.
This is similar to the "discretion" used by the Insolvency trustee Service Australia or now Australian Financial Security Authority.
This is ocuring because the Principal Legal officer is giving corrupt Legal Advice and similar would be occurring at ASIC also.
But wait there is more.................. any complaints made to the Commonwealth Ombudsman are being fucked over . Section 15 of the Commonwealth Ombudsmans Act requires that systemic corrupt conduct be referred to the relevant minister though this is basically never done.
Because the Commonwealth Ombudsman fails to act as required this allows corrupt conduct to flourish.
The Australian Federal Police also find it extremely difficult to co-ordinate themselves with the CDPP so clearly it shows the complete deterioration of Government department though seer incompetence.
Just like ITSA Asic uses discretion to fuck you over!!!!!!!!!!!
12-241MR ASIC relief decisions: February to May 2012
Friday 28 September 2012
ASIC has released its latest report about decisions on applications to grant relief from the law, covering 1 February to 31 May 2012.
The report, Overview of decisions on relief applications (February to May 2012) (REP 303), aims to improve the level of transparency and the quality of publicly available information about decisions ASIC makes when asked to exercise its discretionary powers to grant relief from provisions of the Corporations Act 2001 (Corporations Act), the National Consumer Credit Protection Act 2009 (National Credit Act) or the National Consumer Credit Protection (Transitional and Consequential Provisions) Act 2009 (Transitional Act). The report also discusses the various relevant publications released during this period.
ASIC uses its discretion to vary or set aside certain requirements of the law where there is a net regulatory benefit or where ASIC can facilitate business without harming other stakeholders.
REP 303 summarises examples of situations where ASIC has exercised, or refused to exercise, its exemption and modification powers under the Corporations Act. The report also highlights instances where ASIC has considered adopting a no-action position regarding specified non-compliance with statutory provisions. Decisions by ASIC to refuse to exercise its powers are described on an anonymous basis.
The report provides examples of decisions that demonstrate how ASIC has applied its policy in practice which ASIC thinks will be of particular interest for capital market participants and for participants in the consumer credit and financial services industries. The report includes an appendix detailing the relief instruments referred to.
ASIC can modify or set aside certain provisions of Chapters 2D (officers and employees), 2J (share buy-backs), 2L (debentures), 2M (financial reporting and audit), 5C (managed investment schemes), 6 (takeovers), 6A (compulsory acquisitions and buy-outs), 6C (information about ownership of entities), 6D (fundraising) and 7 (financial services) of the Corporations Act.
ASIC also has powers to grant relief under the National Credit Act from the licensing provisions in Chapter 2 and the responsible lending conduct provisions in Chapter 3. ASIC has powers to give relief from the registration provisions in Schedule 2 of the Transitional Act.
ASIC publishes a copy of most of the relief instruments issued in the ASIC Gazette, which is available from the ASIC website. Credit instruments are available from the ASIC website under ‘Credit relief’.
Applications for relief must be in writing and should address the requirements set out in Regulatory Guide 51 Applications for relief (RG 51) (and any other regulatory guides relevant to the application).
Applications can be submitted electronically to applications@asic.gov.au. Fees are applicable for relief applications.
So it appears ASIC is overwhelmed by its enormity as a regulator.
So if you don't understand what is occurring at ASIC I will tell you.
ASIC uses its " discretion " to fuck over the Law and any complaints.
This is similar to the "discretion" used by the Insolvency trustee Service Australia or now Australian Financial Security Authority.
This is ocuring because the Principal Legal officer is giving corrupt Legal Advice and similar would be occurring at ASIC also.
But wait there is more.................. any complaints made to the Commonwealth Ombudsman are being fucked over . Section 15 of the Commonwealth Ombudsmans Act requires that systemic corrupt conduct be referred to the relevant minister though this is basically never done.
Because the Commonwealth Ombudsman fails to act as required this allows corrupt conduct to flourish.
The Australian Federal Police also find it extremely difficult to co-ordinate themselves with the CDPP so clearly it shows the complete deterioration of Government department though seer incompetence.
Saturday, 23 February 2013
ASIC.. Discretion to fuck you over
Just like ITSA Asic uses discretion to fuck you over!!!!!!!!!!!
12-241MR ASIC relief decisions: February to May 2012
Friday 28 September 2012
ASIC has released its latest report about decisions on applications to grant relief from the law, covering 1 February to 31 May 2012.
The report, Overview of decisions on relief applications (February to May 2012) (REP 303), aims to improve the level of transparency and the quality of publicly available information about decisions ASIC makes when asked to exercise its discretionary powers to grant relief from provisions of the Corporations Act 2001 (Corporations Act), the National Consumer Credit Protection Act 2009 (National Credit Act) or the National Consumer Credit Protection (Transitional and Consequential Provisions) Act 2009 (Transitional Act). The report also discusses the various relevant publications released during this period.
ASIC uses its discretion to vary or set aside certain requirements of the law where there is a net regulatory benefit or where ASIC can facilitate business without harming other stakeholders.
REP 303 summarises examples of situations where ASIC has exercised, or refused to exercise, its exemption and modification powers under the Corporations Act. The report also highlights instances where ASIC has considered adopting a no-action position regarding specified non-compliance with statutory provisions. Decisions by ASIC to refuse to exercise its powers are described on an anonymous basis.
The report provides examples of decisions that demonstrate how ASIC has applied its policy in practice which ASIC thinks will be of particular interest for capital market participants and for participants in the consumer credit and financial services industries. The report includes an appendix detailing the relief instruments referred to.
Background
ASIC can modify or set aside certain provisions of Chapters 2D (officers and employees), 2J (share buy-backs), 2L (debentures), 2M (financial reporting and audit), 5C (managed investment schemes), 6 (takeovers), 6A (compulsory acquisitions and buy-outs), 6C (information about ownership of entities), 6D (fundraising) and 7 (financial services) of the Corporations Act.
ASIC also has powers to grant relief under the National Credit Act from the licensing provisions in Chapter 2 and the responsible lending conduct provisions in Chapter 3. ASIC has powers to give relief from the registration provisions in Schedule 2 of the Transitional Act.
ASIC publishes a copy of most of the relief instruments issued in the ASIC Gazette, which is available from the ASIC website. Credit instruments are available from the ASIC website under ‘Credit relief’.
Applying for relief
Applications for relief must be in writing and should address the requirements set out in Regulatory Guide 51 Applications for relief (RG 51) (and any other regulatory guides relevant to the application).
Applications can be submitted electronically to applications@asic.gov.au. Fees are applicable for relief applications.
Download
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment