Victoria’s Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission is rightly recognised as one of the most powerful investigative bodies in the state — but power without accountability is its own form of risk. That is precisely why the Victorian Inspectorate exists: a second-tier oversight body whose entire purpose is to watch the watchdog.
For readers who follow our Big Build Watch coverage, where questions of procurement integrity, public-sector conduct and accountability frameworks appear regularly, understanding how Victoria’s integrity architecture is layered is essential context. This explainer unpacks what the Victorian Inspectorate is, what it can and cannot do, and why it matters.
What is the Victorian Inspectorate? #
The Victorian Inspectorate (VI) is an independent statutory body established under the Victorian Inspectorate Act 2011 (Vic). It operates separately from the government of the day and reports directly to the Victorian Parliament — not to a minister, and emphatically not to IBAC or Victoria Police.
The VI’s jurisdiction covers several of Victoria’s integrity and oversight agencies, including IBAC, the Office of the Victorian Information Commissioner, the Victorian Ombudsman, the Commissioner for Environmental Sustainability, and the Victorian Electoral Commission. In practice, however, the bulk of the VI’s visible work — and the work most likely to attract public attention — concerns IBAC and the use of coercive powers during IBAC examinations.
The Victorian Inspectorate Act empowers the VI to inspect, monitor and review those agencies, to receive complaints about them, and to report its findings to Parliament. The Inspector — currently Dr Eamonn Moran PSM KC — is appointed by the Governor in Council on the recommendation of a joint parliamentary committee, a mechanism designed to insulate the role from executive interference.
The coercive-powers function: why it matters most #
IBAC’s most significant and most controversial tool is its power to compel witnesses to appear at private examinations and answer questions under oath — even where those answers might incriminate the witness. This is a dramatic departure from the ordinary right to silence that applies in criminal proceedings. Witnesses at IBAC examinations can be compelled to answer and cannot, in most circumstances, refuse on the basis that an answer might be self-incriminating.
This coercive power is considered necessary for corruption investigations, where witnesses will rarely volunteer damaging information. But it carries obvious human-rights implications, and the potential for abuse — deliberate or inadvertent — is real.
The VI’s role here is to ensure those powers are used lawfully, proportionately, and with proper procedural safeguards. Under the Victorian Inspectorate Act, the VI has a standing obligation to inspect IBAC’s use of its coercive powers. That means reviewing whether warrants are properly authorised, whether examination procedures comply with the law, whether legal representation is being offered appropriately, and whether any witnesses have been treated unlawfully or unreasonably.
Where the VI finds problems, it can make recommendations to IBAC, report to Parliament, or — in serious cases — refer matters to the relevant authority for further action. It is not a rubber stamp. VI inspection reports have, on a number of occasions, identified procedural shortcomings and prompted operational changes within IBAC.
Handling complaints about IBAC conduct #
The Victorian Inspectorate also operates as the complaints body for people who believe IBAC (or another integrity agency under the VI’s jurisdiction) has acted improperly toward them. This pathway is especially significant for individuals who have been the subject of, or a witness at, an IBAC investigation.
Complaints to the VI can concern a range of alleged conduct: procedural unfairness during an examination, improper disclosure of confidential information, failure to properly manage a complaint, or broader allegations that IBAC has acted outside its statutory mandate. The VI has the power to investigate such complaints independently, to require IBAC to produce documents and information, and to interview IBAC officers.
It is important to be precise about what the VI cannot do: it cannot overturn an IBAC finding, re-run an IBAC investigation, or direct IBAC to charge or not charge anyone. Its power is one of scrutiny and accountability, not substitution. Where it finds conduct warranting criticism, it can recommend remedial action and — critically — report publicly to Parliament.
For individuals, the complaint pathway offers a form of recourse that would otherwise be largely absent. Without the VI, a person who believed they were mistreated during a coercive examination would have few practical options beyond costly litigation.
Published reports and parliamentary accountability #
One of the VI’s most consequential tools is its reporting function. The Victorian Inspectorate publishes inspection reports, investigation reports, and annual reports that are tabled in Parliament and made publicly available. These documents are, in a practical sense, part of Victoria’s democratic record on how integrity powers are being exercised.
Past VI reports have examined the lawfulness of IBAC’s use of telecommunications interception warrants, the handling of confidential witness information, and compliance with obligations around legal professional privilege during examinations. In several instances, those reports have led to public debate, parliamentary scrutiny, and revisions to IBAC’s operating procedures.
For journalists and researchers, VI reports are a crucial primary source. They are publicly available on the VI’s website and can be relied upon as official documents — meaning fair and accurate reporting of their contents carries qualified privilege for publication purposes. VCN draws on VI reports regularly in our Big Build Watch coverage when examining how integrity agencies are functioning across major infrastructure procurement environments.
The VI’s relationship with the IBAC Committee #
The VI does not operate in isolation. Victoria’s integrity architecture also includes the Parliament’s Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission Committee — a joint parliamentary committee that scrutinises both IBAC and the Victorian Inspectorate. The committee can conduct reviews, receive submissions and table reports, and call witnesses including the Inspector and the IBAC Commissioner.
This layering — VI watching IBAC, and the parliamentary committee watching both — is deliberate. No single oversight body should be the last word on how extraordinary powers are exercised in a democratic system. The architecture acknowledges that accountability must be ongoing, structural, and multi-directional rather than episodic.
It is worth noting, however, that critics — including some legal practitioners and civil liberties advocates — have argued that the current framework still leaves gaps. Questions have been raised about the adequacy of resources available to the VI relative to the volume and complexity of IBAC’s activity, and about the timeliness of VI inspections. Those are legitimate debates, and they are properly conducted in parliamentary committee hearings and in academic and legal literature — not resolved by VCN.
Why this matters for Big Build and public integrity #
For readers following our Big Build Watch series, the relevance is direct. Major infrastructure programs involve billions of dollars in public expenditure, complex procurement processes, and large workforces drawn from both the public and private sectors. They are, by their nature, environments where corruption risks are elevated — and where, consequently, IBAC’s investigative activity has at times been significant.
When IBAC investigates conduct connected to a major project — whether involving a public official, a contractor, or a subcontractor — the coercive examination powers may be brought to bear. Understanding that those powers are subject to independent oversight by the VI is part of understanding whether Victoria’s integrity framework is functioning as designed. It is not enough to know that investigations are occurring; the question of how they are conducted, and whether the law is being followed throughout, is equally important.
The Victorian Inspectorate is not a glamorous body. It rarely appears on the front page. But in the architecture of public accountability, it is load-bearing — and for a newsroom that covers courts, IBAC and integrity issues in depth, keeping it visible is part of our job.
The Victorian Inspectorate’s published reports and further information about its complaint processes are available at vicinspectorate.vic.gov.au. IBAC’s published investigation reports are available at ibac.vic.gov.au.
If you have information about corruption or misconduct in the public sector, you can contact Crime Stoppers on 1800 333 000 or report directly to IBAC at ibac.vic.gov.au. Reports to IBAC can be made anonymously. If you are experiencing distress related to an integrity investigation or legal matter, support is available through Lifeline on 13 11 14 and Beyond Blue on 1300 22 4636.
