arbiter
JournalsAccount

Australia’s integrity paradox: Criminal suspects may stay silent while public servants can be compelled to speak

Michael Stuckey

Alternative Law Journal2026https://doi.org/10.1177/1037969x261439956article
ABDC B
Weight
0.50

Abstract

This Comment examines the widening gap between criminal procedure protections against compelled self-incrimination and the compulsory fact-finding powers exercised by Australian integrity and anti-corruption bodies. It argues that while such regimes are justified by different institutional purposes, coercive examinations and secrecy directions can create prolonged reputational and procedural harm if not governed by clear thresholds, time discipline and transparent safeguards. The work proposes tighter legislative and policy guardrails, including regular review of secrecy, improved public reporting and stronger procedural fairness architecture around compulsory questioning.

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/1037969x261439956

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{michael2026,
  title        = {{Australia’s integrity paradox: Criminal suspects may stay silent while public servants can be compelled to speak}},
  author       = {Michael Stuckey},
  journal      = {Alternative Law Journal},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/1037969x261439956},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Australia’s integrity paradox: Criminal suspects may stay silent while public servants can be compelled to speak

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.