Latest news with #inquiry
RNZ News
4 days ago
- Entertainment
- RNZ News
Pacific Waves for 26 July 2025
Pacific musical giant 'Fiji' dies age 55; ISA launches inquiry into The Metals Company; Bougainville woman minister confident of second term. Tags: To embed this content on your own webpage, cut and paste the following: See terms of use.
RNZ News
4 days ago
- Business
- RNZ News
ISA launches inquiry into The Metals Company
The International Seabed Authority Council has launched an inquiry into noncompliance by deep sea mining front runner The Metals Company. Tags: To embed this content on your own webpage, cut and paste the following: See terms of use.
The Guardian
22-07-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
The Guardian view on the Orgreave inquiry: scrutiny of South Yorkshire police's actions is long overdue
Sunday's announcement that there will be an inquiry into the shocking violence used against striking miners by police at Orgreave in 1984, and the subsequent fabrication of police evidence, is a vindication of the long campaign fought by trade unionists and activists. That 'there were no deaths' was one of the justifications given by Theresa May's government for the decision not to order an inquiry in 2016. But the brutal treatment of miners picketing the South Yorkshire coking plant and the criminal case brought against them a year later for rioting have cast deep shadows. The inquiry, chaired by Pete Wilcox, the bishop of Sheffield, will aim to bring long-hidden truths about the policing of the strike into the light. Placing these facts in the public domain matters to those affected, some of whom faced the prospect of lengthy prison sentences until police statements and evidence in court were discredited, with paragraphs shown to have been dictated by detectives. But the inquiry has wider significance. Policing by consent, by definition, rests on trust, not brute force. To be worthy of public confidence, forces must be willing to learn, and be held accountable for wrongdoing. The fact that the same police force, South Yorkshire, bore responsibility for the disastrous loss of life at Hillsborough stadium, five years after Orgreave, underscores that need. If the force and its chief constable, Peter Wright, had been properly challenged after the miners' trial collapsed, might the catastrophe in Sheffield, or at least the alleged cover-up afterwards, have been avoided? In a Guardian article in 2012, David Conn highlighted striking similarities between the two episodes, and linked the victim-blaming that followed the Hillsborough disaster with the portrayal of striking miners as a vicious 'enemy within'. This inquiry is a victory for journalists and film-makers as well the campaign itself. The inquiry's format, modelled on the Hillsborough Independent Panel, marks a bold break with the most familiar one for government-ordered inquiries – which are usually headed by a judge. The Orgreave panel will have the power to summon witnesses. But it may opt to focus mainly on documentary evidence, mostly records held by police forces, rather than conducting lengthy oral sessions. Given how much time has already passed – the 40th anniversary of the collapsed trial is this month – the hope must be that work proceeds swiftly once the panel's membership is agreed. Inquiries are not perfect. They can take too long and cost participants a colossal effort. While they make recommendations, it is politicians who decide whether or not to take these up, and police and prosecutors who determine whether criminal charges follow. But when whole institutions are recognised to have gravely, systematically failed people – as happens tragically often – an inquiry provides a vital public forum for the first stage of redress: digging out the truth. The miners of Orgreave have waited too long for this moment. It should not have taken decades for a home secretary to agree to a formal process, particularly given all that is known about Hillsborough, and given that the force settled a civil claim by paying 39 miners £425,000 in 1991. But belated scrutiny of the actions, culture and leadership of South Yorkshire police in the relevant period is infinitely preferable to none at all. The announcement is a win for all of civil society, as well as a determined group of campaigners.
Zawya
22-07-2025
- Politics
- Zawya
President Ramaphosa suspends South Gauteng Director of Public Prosecutions
President Cyril Ramaphosa has, in terms of section 14(3) read with 12(6)(a) of the National Prosecuting Authority Act, suspended South Gauteng Director of Public Prosecutions, Adv Andrew Chauke, with immediate effect pending an inquiry into Adv Chauke's fitness to hold office. Having asked Adv Chauke to provide reasons why he should not be suspended, President Ramaphosa has decided suspension is the correct course of action pending an inquiry. President Ramaphosa has informed Adv Chauke of his decision in writing and indicated that the President and the public would benefit from an independent assessment of issues that require elucidation and on which there are disputes of fact. The President believes Adv Chauke's continued tenure as Director of Public Prosecutions – while facing serious accusations – would negatively affect the reputation of the National Prosecuting Authority as a whole. President Ramaphosa is also concerned that Adv Chauke will not be able to fulfil his functions optimally while facing an inquiry. Distributed by APO Group on behalf of The Presidency of the Republic of South Africa.
The Guardian
22-07-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
Sofronoff knew ‘destructive' potential of leaking confidential documents to Australian and ABC journalists, court hears
Walter Sofronoff was fully aware of the 'destructive' potential of leaking confidential documents relating to his inquiry into the prosecution of Bruce Lehrmann to journalists, the federal court has heard. Hearings continued on Tuesday into the former Queensland judge's legal challenge to findings by the Australian Capital Territory's Integrity Commission that he had engaged in 'serious corrupt conduct' by leaking documents relating to his investigation into the Lehrmann case to Janet Albrechtsen at the Australian and Elizabeth Byrne at the ABC. Those leaked documents included notices sent to then-ACT director of public prosecutions Shane Drumgold that the inquiry was considering making adverse findings against him. Scott Robertson SC, representing the ACT Integrity Commission, told the court those documents were disclosed to journalists knowing they posed a significant risk to Drumgold's career. 'It wasn't an accidental disclosure, it was a knowing disclosure,' Robertson said. A 2022 criminal trial against Lehrmann, who was accused of raping Brittany Higgins in the ministerial office of Senator Linda Reynolds at Parliament House in 2019, was abandoned with no verdict because of juror misconduct, and prosecutors decided against a re-trial. Lehrmann denied the allegations. Sofronoff was appointed by the ACT government to determine whether the investigation into the trial had been affected by political influence or interference. His report ruled that out but made 'serious findings of misconduct' against Drumgold, which were partially overturned in March 2024. The Integrity Commission launched an investigation in May 2024 to determine whether Sofronoff acted corruptly in leaking confidential documents, including providing the inquiry's final report to journalists before its official public release. Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email The corruption watchdog's report, known as the Juno report, said Sofronoff claimed his conduct 'complied with the requirements of the Inquiries Act' and that, in leaking the documents, he had 'acted in the public interest to ensure the media were adequately informed' about his inquiry and 'in a position to comment accurately' about it. The commission found that Sofronoff 'had not, in fact, acted in good faith', that his actions 'undermined the integrity of the Board's processes and the fairness and probity of its proceedings to such an extent as to have been likely to have threatened public confidence in the integrity of that aspect of public administration. It therefore constituted serious corrupt conduct.' Sofronoff is challenging this finding on the argument that the commission made a series of errors in its interpretation of legislation, and that there was no evidence to support findings that he had acted dishonestly or not in good faith. Robertson said Sofronoff clearly knew the material he was disseminating ought to be kept confidential and that parties affected by it would expect him not to send it to journalists. The non-publication order that Sofronoff issued in April 2023 over the material provided to his own inquiry (as there was a risk that adverse findings may be made at the time), showed he 'quite appropriately' believed that material should be kept confidential, 'yet he acted inconsistent with that own indication', Robertson said. Evidence for that inconsistency included Sofronoff sending two subpoenaed statements relating to the investigation into Drumgold to Albrechtsen in a text message with the words 'strictly confidential' attached, Robertson said. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion While a number of people were notified that Sofronoff's inquiry was considering making adverse comments against them, Sofronoff only leaked the notices of possible adverse comment against Drumgold to Albrechtsen, the court heard. Serious adverse findings could, and in this case did, destroy Drumgold's career. The destructive potential of those documents could not reasonably have been lost on Sofronoff, Robertson said, as he was 'an individual of extensive [legal] pedigree'. 'As sensitive and confidential documents go, it's hard to identify a more serious example. The public release of these documents and even the use of it as journalistic background is or was apt to undermine Mr Drumgold's interest, that's the factual context in which the commission makes its relevant findings.' Robertson argued that if Justice Wendy Abraham were to find that the facts behind the commission's finding were not in error, she would be 'very unlikely' to find error in the subsequent evaluation of Sofronoff's conduct as dishonest. Sofronoff's barrister, Adam Pomerenke KC, said there was a difference between 'disclosure' and 'publication', and that the suppression order only related to publication. Sofronoff was aware of the terms of his own suppression order, but 'knew that [material] would not be published while this order was operative. That's a different thing from being disclosed'. Justice Abraham queried the distinction, saying: 'A person providing a statement [to the inquiry] would not expect that to be provided to a journalist without their knowledge, at this stage, with the order in place, would they? They would have the expectation that it would not be.' 'I'm going to stick to that distinction between publication and disclosure, it's a recognised distinction,' said Pomerenke. The court reserved its judgement.
