Queensland is poised to repeal the police disciplinary system established after the landmark Fitzgerald corruption inquiry, prompting concerns from civil liberties experts that the proposed changes have “fundamental” flaws.



Legislation to establish a new police discipline system was tabled in the state parliament last month, after years of pressure from the influential Queensland police union. The bill has bipartisan support and will likely pass later this year.



The police union president, Ian Leavers, has hailed the demise of “the old punitive police discipline system” established in 1990, in the immediate aftermath of the Fitzgerald inquiry.



The new system encourages the use of “management strategies” rather than formal sanctions for police misconduct and misbehaviour. Officers can no longer have their salary reduced. Complaints are to be “streamlined” to ensure they do not take longer than 12 months.

Queensland police accused of 'whitewash' over investigation into shredded rape file Read more

Terry O’Gorman, a long-time champion of civil liberties in Queensland, said the existing police discipline system was flawed and an overhaul needed but the proposed changes were “narrow and only address police union complaints”.



He said the system established post-Fitzgerald envisaged an oversight body, the Criminal Justice Commission, that would spend much of its time investigating police. The modern iteration, the Crime and Corruption Commission, has instead become a “super police force” that mostly handles major criminal cases.



“The Fitzgerald process is now somewhat old and we accept that the police discipline process put in place by Fitzgerald has to necessarily be reviewed over time,” O’Gorman said.



“But the fundamental flaw in the current model compared with that of Fitzgerald, is that Fitzgerald envisaged the Crime and Corruption Commission would ... dedicate a significant part of its resources to investigating police.



“[The CCC] is now an inherently contradictory organisation.”



O’Gorman said in his view there was “a high level of dissatisfaction” among community members who had made complaints about their dealings with police. Guardian Australia has chronicled cases where officers were investigated by superiors, and where complaints were dismissed after limited inquiries.

“Systemic issues of excessive use of force on the street, and the overwillingness of local police when they’re investigating other police to write off complaints with no basis, haven’t been addressed [by the bill].”



Renee Eaves, part of the Queensland police accountability taskforce and the author of Flirt with Justice, said the new system appeared to be a “backflip on Fitzgerald’s recommendations”.



The landmark 1989 report said police internal investigations service was a “friendly, sympathetic, protective and inept overseer” that “provided warm comfort to corrupt police”.



Eaves questioned the merits of reverting to a system described by the police commissioner Ian Stewart as “less legalistic and less adversarial”.



“The police have given us no reason to trust that they can investigate themselves impartially,” Eaves said.



“We need a transparent system that will hold those trusted with power to account; this is dangerously close to what Fitzgerald warned us about.”

Eaves said the bill also did nothing to address a common problem: that complainants were routinely “assessed” rather than actively investigated, meaning the police or the CCC simply looked at basic available evidence rather than seeking out new evidence or conducting interviews.

The state’s police minister, Mark Ryan, in a statement announcing the changes, said the new system would “build on the Fitzgerald legacy”.



“Thirty years ago Tony Fitzgerald asked us all to remain eternally vigilant so that history would never repeat itself,” Ryan said.



Ryan’s statement included comments from Leavers and said the union had instigated the review. Leavers said it was a “great step forward for police”.



Retiring commissioner Stewart said there would be new potential sanctions for officers found guilty of misconduct, including suspension without pay, probation and community service.



“The public can rest assured that no changes are being made to a person’s ability to report officer misbehaviour or misconduct and the bill improves current processes after complaints are received.”