Published on Monday, 25 August 2025
Victims of police misconduct must be allowed their voice
Victims of police misconduct are having their voices silenced by a system that is failing to provide justice, transparency and accountability, Inner Melbourne Community Legal will tell a Parliamentary inquiry today.
Current confidentiality provisions for investigations by the Independent Broad-based Anti-Corruption Commission mean the victims of police harm face criminal convictions simply for talking about the outcome of their complaint or their experiences during the course of the investigation.
Inner Melbourne Community Legal will today appear before an inquiry by the Victorian Parliament’s Integrity and Oversight Committee to call for amendments to the Independent Broad-Based Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2012 (IBAC Act) to increase transparency and accountability of complaints of police misconduct.
These changes are needed because current confidentiality and secrecy provisions in the IBAC Act are denying victims of police misconduct real justice.
This is compounded by the tiny proportion of fewer than 1 per cent of police misconduct complaints that are actually investigated by IBAC.
Complainants are often resorting to civil litigation instead, but while this may secure financial compensation it is not delivering justice through public accountability because settlements are usually accompanied by non-disclosure agreements.
“The current legislative framework for IBAC to deal with complaints of police misconduct is not fit for purpose and is often causing more harm than help to victims,” said IMCL Chief Executive Officer Nadia Morales.
“The secrecy and confidentiality around IBAC investigations is denying victims their day of justice and allows Victoria Police to hide systemic issues from public view.
“Even worse, the current system criminalises complaints and is having a chilling effect, with clients feeling disempowered and unable to freely discuss their experiences without fear of committing a criminal offence.
“Lack of transparency means that police perpetrators are managing to avoid public accountability when they are disciplined or dismissed from the force.
“The consequence of this is that the primary vehicle for independent examination of police misconduct is through costly and lengthy civil litigation or through the coronial process when it is too late.
“For many clients, they want their experience to be publicly acknowledged and for there to be some sense of accountability.
“It is often said that sunlight is the best form of disinfectant, but IBAC is holding the blinds closed when it comes to police misconduct.”
IMCL oversees the Police Accountability Program and through that chairs the Federation of Community Legal Centres’ Police Oversight Working Group, made up of legal practitioners working in police accountability across the state from both the community and private legal services.
A submission endorsed by nine police oversight working group organisations is recommending the repeal of sections of the IBAC Act which make it a criminal offence to discuss investigations of police complaints. This would enable victims of police misconduct to reclaim their experiences.
Other recommendations including strengthening the powers of IBAC to review complaints referred to Victoria Police for investigation that allege criminality or corruption or systemic failures, such as racialised policing, misidentification of family violence or excessive use of force; and to require IBAC to publicly publish their recommendations arising out of investigations into police complaints.
IMCL’s Police Accountability Program Manager, Anna Nguyen and Director of Policy and Advocacy, Michelle Reynolds will be giving evidence to the inquiry at 4.20pm today alongside affiliated advocates.