Police Deputy Commissioner Catherine Burn and former co-deputy Nick Kaldas are in the spotlight, with the Operation Prospect report finally tabled in NSW Parliament and released to the public.

Operation Prospect investigated allegations of improper surveillance of more than 100 senior NSW police between 1999 and 2001 as part of the Mascot Task Force.

The NSW Ombudsman's office today described the operation as the "largest single investigation ever undertaken by an Ombudsman in Australia".

The Acting NSW Ombudsman made adverse findings against some senior NSW Police in an 850-page report billed as "a thorough and definitive examination of a troubled era".

Recommendations: The NSW Crime Commission apologise to targets of Operation Mascot and destroy recordings

The NSW Crime Commission apologise to targets of Operation Mascot and destroy recordings NSW introduce a Public Interest Monitor to review application for listening device warrants

NSW introduce a Public Interest Monitor to review application for listening device warrants Changes to the laws that empower the approval of listening device warrants to make the granting of warrants more tightly focussed

Changes to the laws that empower the approval of listening device warrants to make the granting of warrants more tightly focussed Greater privacy for those caught on listening devices who are not the target of police operations

Greater privacy for those caught on listening devices who are not the target of police operations The NSW Police Force and Crime Commission review protocols for joint operations

The publication of the review will put pressure on Deputy Commissioner Cath Burn, who is in charge of counterterrorism and investigations in NSW.

A total of five adverse findings were made against her in the Operation Prospect report.

As well as finding Ms Burn was responsible for a breach of an informant's bail conditions, it also found her leadership in an investigation into the person code-named Officer P amounted to unreasonable conduct as the probe relied on weak information and was unwarranted.

Another investigation into a serving officer code-named Officer F arose from a "mistake" and was also unreasonable, according to the report.

Ms Burn was also found to have prepared memorandums that contained misleading or inaccurate information during March and May, 2002.

Her conduct in failing to advise the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) that an informant had made key admissions during a record of interview was unreasonable, the report stated.

The NSW Police Force has released a statement saying it had received the report and the findings and recommendations would "require careful consideration before NSW Police is in a position to respond formally."

It said it would not make any further comment until then.

The NSW Police Association condemned the release of the report and said the release "highlights the inherent unfairness and lack of natural justice" for police, a spokesman said.

"We do not welcome this report."

Acting Premier John Barilaro said the Government would "consider the report and respond in due course".

Kaldas may have given misleading evidence

Three adverse findings over the conduct of former deputy commissioner Nick Kaldas are also made in the report.

Former deputy police commissioner Nick Kaldas was also mentioned in the report. ( AAP: Joel Carrett )

The acting ombudsman said Mr Kaldas's refusal prior to Operation Prospect to disclose details of his contact with former senior NSW Crime Commission official John Giorgiutti may amount to false and misleading testimony.

Such conduct may constitute a criminal offence, the report noted.

Mr Kaldas is also the target of 'unreasonable conduct' criticism over access to confidential records. The report found he failed to record and report confidential documents that he received anonymously in line with his duties as a deputy commissioner.

The report found Mr Kaldas, who lost a bid to suppress the adverse findings, engaged in unreasonable conduct under the Police Act by requesting and receiving information from another officer contrary to the NSW Police code of conduct and conflict of interest policies.

It also contains adverse findings against several serving officers.

Crime commission responsible for unreasonable conduct in Mascot taskforce

The NSW Crime Commission has come in for heavy criticism, with the Operation Prospect report finding it was responsible for unreasonable conduct by police attached to the Mascot Task Force, a special internal affairs crime unit set up in the wake of Wood Royal Commission.

The Crime Commission approved the filing of affidavits in court — used to justify listening device warrants — that were based on ambiguous evidence and hearsay, the report found.

It said there was a "lack of administrative rigour at the time in NSW Crime Commission document preparation processes".

The Acting Ombudsman John McMillan was also critical of the management of the Mascot task force, saying there were "significant cultural and management issues within Mascot" that remained unaddressed as the operation proceeded. Operation Mascot was terminated in 2003.

Professor McMillan said junior officers, who became increasingly uncomfortable with the scope of the bugging operation, did not feel confident to approach their superiors to pass on concerns.

"This carried the distinct danger that decisions and directions could not be queried or challenged by officers who were asked to carry out particular tasks," Professor McMillan said.

"It could compromise the ability of staff to stop and ask if what was being done was wrong."

Professor McMillan would not say whether people who had findings of unlawful conduct made against them had been referred to the Director of Public Prosecutions.

"The decision to prosecute a person for a breach of a criminal penalty division is a decision to be made by the DPP," he said.

"The first stage in that process is to examine whether there is prima facie evidence that an offence has been committed.

"The other two stages are to examine the prospects of a prosecution."

In his report, Professor McMillan stated "the term 'unlawful conduct' in the Police Act is not synonymous with the narrower term 'illegal conduct'".

"I'm well aware that different standards apply in a criminal prosecution and I'm well aware that there may be other considerations that the DPP would consider," he said.

"We do not identify in this report whether anybody's name has been referred to the DPP, in my view that would be unfair to do that."

The Acting Ombudsman also found many of the warrants used to monitor police were obtained improperly, saying the "conduct of writing warrants was unreasonable".

But Professor McMillan said since then police processes had improved, and the laws regarding listening devices had changed.

"We have probably all faced that situation where somebody has said 'here, sign this' but I think this is a recognition that that is an inherently dangerous practice," he said.

Loading...