South Australia's anti-corruption watchdog, ICAC, says its reputation suffered due to a botched inquiry into a former prominent government official. 

John Hanlon, accused of abusing public office in 2020 for trips to Melbourne and Germany, saw two cases against him dropped, always maintaining his innocence. 

SA’s Independent Commissioner Against Corruption (ICAC) now regrets not pursuing a trial in the matter. ICAC Commissioner Ann Vanstone has also confessed to “significant errors” in her agency's handling of the investigation into the ex-Renewal SA boss.

In a report presented to the state parliament this week, Commissioner Ann Vanstone stated; “A matter that should have been adjudicated at trial has not been, and the Commission's reputation has been damaged; both of which are matters of regret”.  

She also criticised certain media and parliamentary figures for crafting “a largely false narrative around this investigation and subsequent prosecution”.

She urged those who have undermined whistleblowers for fulfilling their duty to report and uphold public administration's integrity to cease doing so.

The initial charge against Mr Hanlon, brought forth in 2020 during the tenure of former ICAC Commissioner Bruce Lander KC, revolved around his overseas trips while serving as the CEO of the state government agency. 

Mr Hanlon consistently maintained his innocence, and no adverse findings were issued against him.

Last year, the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) dropped the case against Mr Hanlon for the second time. 

This decision came after the District Court excluded six statements from German citizens because ICAC investigators had acquired them unlawfully without the German government's consent.

Following a review of the investigation, ICAC inspector Philip Strickland found that there was “sufficient evidence” to justify investigating Mr Hanlon's interstate and international travels. 

However, the commission “substantially mismanaged” aspects of its inquiries, with some elements amounting to “maladministration”.

Acknowledging these issues, Commissioner Vanstone noted that investigators poorly planned their trip to Germany and failed to adhere to critical legal procedures. She said these failures were serious and expressed regret that the matter did not proceed to trial.

However, she cautioned against drawing unfounded conclusions about the investigation's flaws. 

She highlighted that the media and parliamentary discourse on the investigation had unfairly impugned the motivations of complainants and labelled them as ‘vexatious underlings’, damaging the reputation of whistleblowers.

In her report, Commissioner Vanstone noted that the investigation into Mr Hanlon took place over four years ago and that ICAC had since evolved into a different organisation. 

She pointed to the establishment of a “multi-disciplinary team” for each investigation as evidence, comprising an investigator, legal officer, and prevention analyst. 

She says this approach ensures that investigations align better with the commission's statutory functions while addressing key risks, including legal ones.

ICAC has also bolstered its record-keeping practices, revised internal policies and procedures, and provided training to employees to meet stringent requirements.