By HARRY PALMER
When public outcry demands a Royal Commission, many people believe they are calling for an independent inquiry that will identify culprits and lead to punishment. That belief is mistaken.
Governments encourage the idea that a Royal Commission is an investigation independent of political influence, armed with broad powers to hold public hearings, compel witnesses under oath, and uncover the truth. In reality, this public presentation is largely designed to appease the majority. It bears little resemblance to how Royal Commissions actually function.
I have served on three Royal Commissions as a forensic computer and evidence investigator. From that experience, I can say plainly: there is nothing independent about a Royal Commission. Government control is embedded before the commission even begins.
How a Royal Commission is controlled
A Royal Commission is instigated entirely by government: Terms of Reference are constructed through Letters Patent on the advice of the Federal Executive Council, which is made up of government ministers.
These Letters Patent are authorised by the Governor-General, a government appointee.
This process alone removes any realistic notion of independence.The commissioner and commission staff are appointed by government, often drawn from individuals trusted to remain within acceptable political boundaries. Control is retained at every stage.
The depth and scope of the inquiry are determined by the terms of reference. Anything outside those boundaries, no matter how serious, can be ignored or excluded from the final report.
Even where criminality is clearly uncovered, a Royal Commission has no power to prosecute. A commissioner can only make recommendations. Whether anything happens next is entirely up to the government of the day.
A rare exception: The Gyles Royal Commission
The NSW Royal Commission into Building Industry Productivity (1992), led by Roger Gyles QC under Liberal Premier Nick Greiner, was a rare example of a Royal Commission with real consequences.
The Commission uncovered widespread illegality, corruption, intimidation, violence, secret commissions, extortion, and industrial misconduct. It recommended major legal and structural reforms, including:
Disbanding the Building Workers’ Industrial Union (BWIU) establishing a Building Industry Task Force to enforce existing laws (I served as an investigator on this Task Force). This added teeth to the royal commission bypassing the commissioners report to government.
The Building Industry Task Force was established during the life of the Commission and headed by Crown Prosecutor Paul Menzies QC. It was staffed by prosecutors, law enforcement officers, and industry experts, laying criminal charges, secured convictions, and enforced the law.
Convictions were obtained for offences including demanding money with menaces and obtaining financial advantage by false declarations. The associated Code of Practice for NSW government building sites was highly effective, improving efficiency and reducing strikes.
The Commissioner recommended the Task Force’s life be extended, and the Liberal government initially accepted that recommendation.
Political reality reasserts itself
In 1995, the Task Force was disbanded by the Labor change of government under Premier Bob Carr, a government sympathetic to union interests. This occurred just as further corruption and criminal matters were moving toward court.
The message was clear: even when a Royal Commission develops “teeth,” those teeth can be pulled the moment political priorities change.
Another example: The Wood Royal Commission
The NSW Wood Royal Commission (1995–1997) found corruption within the police force to be rampant from top to bottom. Widespread, systemic corruption, including “noble cause” corruption (fabricating evidence, planting drugs) and corrupt networks with organized crime, hindering justice and harming the innocent.The estimated cost was around $64 million, yet, like many Royal Commissions, its long-term enforcement outcomes were limited.
The reality
Royal Commissions are not independent truth-seeking bodies. They are political instruments, tightly controlled by government through terms of reference, appointment, scope, timing, outcome and follow-up.
They can expose wrongdoing, but they cannot enforce accountability. That power remains with the very institutions often implicated in the findings.
Public faith in Royal Commissions rests more on perception than on reality and usually are a massive waste of taxpayer’s money.