Thursday, February 12, 2026

Justice for a Former Lawyer

ENGLISH: A public record of one former lawyer’s efforts to seek lawful, transparent, and accountable decision-making in Western Australia.

中文(简体): 一名前律师为争取西澳合法、透明及可问责的公共决策过程而建立的公开记录。

BAHASA MELAYU: Rekod awam usaha seorang bekas peguam untuk menuntut keputusan yang sah, telus dan boleh dipertanggungjawabkan di Australia Barat.

Public Comment – CCC Report (Submission ID: 954bc53a-6463-4c3f-a056-9227ce06fd43)

ENGLISH:
This public comment accompanies my report to the Corruption and Crime Commission regarding systemic failures across multiple Western Australian public agencies between 2020 and 2026. The matters raised concern the WA Police Force, the Supreme Court of Western Australia, the Court of Appeal, and Landgate. Across these agencies, mandatory procedures were not followed, statutory duties were disregarded, and requests for reasons or clarification were repeatedly ignored. These failures included the refusal to take or investigate a lawful crime report, judicial decisions issued without addressing the evidence or providing reasons, and Landgate’s acceptance and processing of documents contrary to the Transfer of Land Act. Despite formal notifications, none of the agencies took corrective action or provided procedural explanations. This comment is published to ensure transparency, maintain a public record, and support accountability in the administration of justice and public functions.

中文(简体):
此公开评论与我向西澳反腐败与犯罪委员会(CCC)提交的报告一并发布,内容涉及 2020 至 2026 年期间多个西澳公共机构的系统性失职行为。相关机构包括西澳警察、最高法院、上诉法院及 Landgate。这些机构在处理相关事项时未遵循强制性程序,忽视法定职责,并多次无视我提出的理由说明或澄清请求。失职行为包括拒绝接受或调查合法的报案、法院在未处理证据或未提供理由的情况下作出裁决,以及 Landgate 违反《土地转让法》接受和处理文件。尽管已正式通知,各机构均未采取纠正措施或提供程序性解释。此评论旨在确保透明度、建立公开记录,并促进司法和公共行政的问责机制。

BAHASA MELAYU:
Komen awam ini disiarkan bersama laporan saya kepada Suruhanjaya Pencegahan Rasuah dan Jenayah (CCC) mengenai kegagalan sistemik dalam beberapa agensi awam di Australia Barat antara tahun 2020 hingga 2026. Agensi yang terlibat termasuk WA Police Force, Mahkamah Agung Australia Barat, Mahkamah Rayuan, dan Landgate. Dalam tempoh ini, prosedur mandatori tidak dipatuhi, kewajipan statutori diabaikan, dan permintaan untuk alasan atau penjelasan tidak diberikan. Kegagalan tersebut merangkumi keengganan menerima atau menyiasat laporan jenayah yang sah, keputusan kehakiman tanpa menangani bukti atau memberikan alasan, serta tindakan Landgate memproses dokumen bertentangan dengan Akta Pemindahan Tanah. Walaupun telah dimaklumkan secara rasmi, tiada agensi mengambil tindakan pembetulan atau memberikan penjelasan prosedural. Komen ini diterbitkan demi ketelusan, sebagai rekod awam, dan untuk menyokong akauntabiliti dalam pentadbiran keadilan dan fungsi awam.

Annexure – Public Transparency Record

ENGLISH:
This annexure forms part of the public transparency archive relating to the report submitted to the Corruption and Crime Commission of Western Australia. It provides supporting information, context, and documentation relevant to the matters raised.

中文(简体):
本附录为提交至西澳反腐败与犯罪委员会的报告之公共透明档案的一部分,提供与所述事项相关的补充信息、背景资料及文件。

BAHASA MELAYU:
Lampiran ini merupakan sebahagian daripada arkib ketelusan awam berkaitan laporan yang dikemukakan kepada Suruhanjaya Pencegahan Rasuah dan Jenayah Australia Barat. Ia menyediakan maklumat sokongan, konteks dan dokumentasi berkaitan perkara yang dibangkitkan.


Public Transparency Footer

ENGLISH:
This post is published in the interest of transparency, accountability, and procedural fairness. All sensitive personal information has been redacted. This archive is maintained to ensure a clear public record of the issues raised and the steps taken.

中文(简体):
本帖旨在促进透明度、问责制和程序公正。所有敏感个人资料均已删除。本档案旨在确保对所提出问题及相关处理步骤的公开记录。

BAHASA MELAYU:
Catatan ini diterbitkan demi ketelusan, akauntabiliti dan keadilan prosedur. Semua maklumat peribadi sensitif telah dipadamkan. Arkib ini diselenggara untuk memastikan rekod awam yang jelas mengenai isu yang dibangkitkan dan tindakan yang diambil.

Justice for a Former Lawyer

ENGLISH:
This site is a public transparency archive documenting legal, administrative, and procedural issues involving public agencies in Western Australia. It is maintained to create a clear record of events, correspondence, and outcomes, and to support accountability and procedural fairness.

中文(简体):
本网站为公共透明档案,用于记录涉及西澳公共机构的法律、行政及程序问题。通过整理事件、往来文件及结果,本档案旨在建立清晰记录,并促进问责制和程序公正。

BAHASA MELAYU:
Laman ini merupakan arkib ketelusan awam yang mendokumentasikan isu undang-undang, pentadbiran dan prosedur melibatkan agensi awam di Australia Barat. Ia diselenggara untuk mewujudkan rekod yang jelas mengenai peristiwa, surat-menyurat dan keputusan, serta menyokong akauntabiliti dan keadilan prosedural.

3 comments:

  1. # **📌 TRI‑LINGUAL ARCHIVE VERSION**
    ### *Escalation & Formal Submission – Oversight Gap Affecting WA Ombudsman (Complaint C/45628)*
    *(English – 中文 – Bahasa Melayu)*
    # **ENGLISH VERSION**
    **Escalation and Formal Submission – Oversight Gap Affecting WA Ombudsman and Consequences for Complaint C/45628**
    This document records my escalation to the Joint Standing Committee on the Corruption and Crime Commission (JSCCCC) and my formal submission to the Public Administration Committee (PAC), following the Ombudsman’s constructive refusal to investigate Complaint C/45628.
    In correspondence dated 16 February 2026, Dr Sarah Palmer (JSCCCC) confirmed:
    > “At present there is no parliamentary mechanism to ensure accountability of the Ombudsman…”
    This aligns with the CCC’s 2024 report and Report 15 (“Who guards the guardians”), both of which identified a structural oversight gap that remains unaddressed.
    My case demonstrates the practical consequences of this gap:
    - The Ombudsman constructively refused to investigate my complaint.
    - No mechanism exists within the State system to review such refusals.
    - Members of the public are left without any avenue for administrative justice.
    Accordingly, I submitted the following:
    ### **1. Request for Escalation (JSCCCC)**
    - Escalate the oversight gap to the Presiding Officers or relevant Ministers.
    - Confirm whether the Committee can receive and record affected cases.
    - Advise whether any interim measures exist for complainants.
    ### **2. Formal Submission (PAC)**
    - Acknowledge the systemic oversight gap.
    - Record cases demonstrating its consequences.
    - Consider reviving or re‑examining Report 15.
    This submission is made in the public interest and for the strengthening of Western Australia’s administrative integrity framework.
    # **中文版本(简体)**

    **升级与正式提交——关于西澳监察专员监督缺口及其对投诉 C/45628 的影响**

    本文件记录了我向反腐败与犯罪委员会联合常设委员会(JSCCCC)的升级请求,以及向公共行政委员会(PAC)提交的正式意见书。背景是监察专员对我的投诉 C/45628 作出了构成性拒绝。

    在 2026 年 2 月 16 日的来信中,JSCCCC 的 Sarah Palmer 博士确认:

    > “目前议会没有任何机制可以确保监察专员的问责……”

    这一点与 2024 年 CCC 的报告及《第 15 号报告:谁来监督监督者》一致,均指出监督缺口至今未获解决。

    我的案件显示了这一缺口的实际后果:

    - 监察专员构成性拒绝调查我的投诉。
    - 州内没有任何机制可以审查此类拒绝。
    - 公民在行政公正方面完全无路可走。

    因此,我提出以下内容:

    ### **1. 向 JSCCCC 的升级请求**
    - 将监督缺口提交给议会主席或相关部长。
    - 确认委员会是否可以接收并记录受影响的案件。
    - 说明是否存在任何临时措施供投诉人使用。

    ### **2. 向 PAC 的正式提交**
    - 承认系统性监督缺口的存在。
    - 记录显示其后果的案件。
    - 考虑重启或重新审查《第 15 号报告》。

    此提交旨在维护公共利益,并加强西澳行政体系的廉正。
    # **VERSI BAHASA MELAYU**

    **Peningkatan & Penyerahan Rasmi – Jurang Pengawasan terhadap Ombudsman WA dan Kesan kepada Aduan C/45628**

    Dokumen ini merekodkan tindakan saya meningkatkan isu ini kepada Jawatankuasa Tetap Bersama mengenai Suruhanjaya Rasuah dan Jenayah (JSCCCC), serta penyerahan rasmi saya kepada Jawatankuasa Pentadbiran Awam (PAC), selepas Ombudsman menolak secara konstruktif untuk menyiasat Aduan C/45628.

    Dalam surat bertarikh 16 Februari 2026, Dr Sarah Palmer (JSCCCC) mengesahkan:

    > “Pada masa ini tiada mekanisme parlimen untuk memastikan akauntabiliti Ombudsman…”

    Ini selaras dengan laporan CCC 2024 dan Laporan 15 (“Siapa mengawasi para pengawas”), yang mengenal pasti jurang pengawasan struktur yang masih belum ditangani.

    Kes saya menunjukkan akibat praktikal jurang ini:

    - Ombudsman menolak secara konstruktif untuk menyiasat aduan saya.
    - Tiada mekanisme dalam sistem negeri untuk menyemak penolakan tersebut.
    - Orang awam tidak mempunyai saluran untuk mendapatkan keadilan pentadbiran.

    Sehubungan itu, saya mengemukakan perkara berikut:

    ### **1. Permintaan Peningkatan (JSCCCC)**
    - Meningkatkan isu jurang pengawasan kepada Pegawai Yang Dipertua atau Menteri berkaitan.
    - Mengesahkan sama ada jawatankuasa boleh menerima dan merekodkan kes yang terjejas.
    - Menyatakan sama ada terdapat langkah sementara untuk pengadu.

    ### **2. Penyerahan Rasmi (PAC)**
    - Mengakui kewujudan jurang pengawasan sistemik.
    - Merekodkan kes yang menunjukkan akibatnya.
    - Mempertimbangkan untuk menghidupkan semula atau mengkaji semula Laporan 15.

    Penyerahan ini dibuat demi kepentingan awam dan bagi memperkukuh integriti pentadbiran di Australia Barat.

    ReplyDelete
  2. ======================================================
    OVERSIGHT GAP TIMELINE – WA OMBUDSMAN
    Complaint C/45628 (Nicholas N. Chin)
    ======================================================

    [1] 2024 – CCC REPORT IDENTIFIES OVERSIGHT GAP
    • CCC tables report (8 Oct 2024)
    • Finds no effective mechanism to oversee Ombudsman
    • Recommends structural reform

    -----------------------------------------------------------

    [2] 14 NOV 2024 – REPORT 15 TABLED
    • “Who guards the guardians”
    • Recommends stronger oversight of Ombudsman
    • Parliament dissolves soon after → no government response

    -----------------------------------------------------------

    [3] 2025 – OVERSIGHT GAP REMAINS UNADDRESSED
    • New Parliament does not revive Report 15
    • No mechanism created to review Ombudsman decisions

    -----------------------------------------------------------

    [4] 2026 – COMPLAINT C/45628
    • Ombudsman constructively refuses to investigate
    • No lawful explanation provided
    • No internal review mechanism available

    -----------------------------------------------------------

    [5] 16 FEB 2026 – DR SARAH PALMER CONFIRMS GAP
    • “At present there is no parliamentary mechanism
    to ensure accountability of the Ombudsman…”
    • Confirms CCC findings and Report 15

    -----------------------------------------------------------

    [6] 16 FEB 2026 – ESCALATION TO JSCCCC & PAC
    • Request for escalation to Presiding Officers
    • Formal submission to PAC
    • Request for recording of affected cases
    • Request to revive Report 15

    -----------------------------------------------------------

    [7] PUBLIC ARCHIVE (TRI‑LINGUAL)
    • English, Chinese, Malay versions published
    • Transparency record established
    • Evidence preserved for future inquiries

    ======================================================

    ReplyDelete
  3. # **📣 MEDIA‑READY SUMMARY (FOR JOURNALISTS)**
    ### *Short, sharp, factual — suitable for press, MPs, or public briefings*

    **MEDIA SUMMARY – SYSTEMIC OVERSIGHT FAILURE IN WA OMBUDSMAN SYSTEM**

    A written statement from the WA Parliament’s Joint Standing Committee on the Corruption and Crime Commission (JSCCCC) has confirmed that **Western Australia currently has no parliamentary mechanism to ensure accountability of the Ombudsman**.

    In correspondence dated 16 February 2026, Dr Sarah Palmer, Principal Research Officer, stated:

    > “At present there is no parliamentary mechanism to ensure accountability of the Ombudsman…”

    This admission aligns with:

    - the **Corruption and Crime Commission’s 2024 report**, which identified the same oversight gap; and
    - **Report 15 (2024)**, *“Who guards the guardians”*, which recommended stronger oversight but received no government response before Parliament dissolved.

    **Case Example – Complaint C/45628**
    Nicholas N. Chin’s complaint to the Ombudsman was **constructively refused without lawful explanation**, and no mechanism exists within the State system to review or scrutinise that refusal. This case demonstrates the real‑world consequences of the oversight gap.

    **Escalation and Submission**
    On 16 February 2026, Mr Chin lodged:

    1. **An escalation request** to the JSCCCC, seeking referral of the oversight gap to the Presiding Officers or relevant Ministers; and
    2. **A formal submission** to the Public Administration Committee (PAC), requesting recognition of the oversight gap and revival of Report 15.

    **Public Interest Significance**
    The absence of any review mechanism means that:

    - the Ombudsman can refuse to investigate a complaint;
    - no parliamentary body can review that refusal; and
    - members of the public have no avenue for administrative justice.

    This represents a **structural accountability vacuum** in Western Australia’s integrity framework.

    ReplyDelete