Saturday 1 July 2023


01 July 2023

Gajalakshmi Paramasivam





On 27 October 2021, I expressed my experience-based belief about the ICAC under the title ‘IS ICAC Being Frivolous?’

Back then, I viewed the matter through the  Independent Commission Against Corruption Act 1988.  The main objective is stated as ‘to promote the integrity and accountability of public administration by constituting an Independent Commission Against Corruption as an independent and accountable body—


My focus today is through section 2A (a)(ii) of this Act which highlights the pathway through which to achieve  the stated purpose:

2A(a)(ii)  to educate public authorities, public officials and members of the public about corruption and its detrimental effects on public administration and on the community.


Educating at tertiary level, needs to be ‘free’ of judgment. The process must educate each member of the public at their own level. In many ways, our former premier Ms Berejiklian highlighted that she was democratic and prompted me to state in October ’21 -‘We Australians pride ourselves over our laws relating to de facto relationships. All that was demoted to ‘mythology’ by the ICAC

In Democracy, the truth of the citizen, expressed through the lawful process ranks above facts based judgment through the law. The ordinary folks without positions have the opportunity to vote for the person and be part of the experience of manifestation of a fact. This is how soul-power works.

The believer does not need visible evidence to establish that s/he is right. This is the value of Affidavit evidence. Belief is a natural power that connects minds. This is the power that drives the system of Democracy. When an inquiry is driven by evidence, it loses the value of belief and becomes relative. The role of ICAC, to the extent it relied on evidence became that of the Judiciary.

The current government has the duty to preserve the integrity of the Parliament, by taking action against the ICAC, for abuse of power.


No comments:

Post a Comment