By Monique Caroll, Partner, Darren James, Partner and Michael Deighton-Smith, Senior Associate.
A Royal Commission into the ‘Big Build’ has been announced by the new Victorian Premier, Ben Carroll. Whilst the exact terms of reference have yet to be confirmed, the Commission will likely examine how criminal elements and corruption integrated themselves into the construction industry in Victoria, especially in relation to government infrastructure projects. The Premier has suggested that in doing so, the Commission may call as witnesses, amongst others, previous Premiers including Daniel Andrews and Jacinta Allen.
We look at what to expect from the Big Build Royal Commission.
Royal Commissions in Victoria are established under the Inquiries Act 2014 (Vic) by way of letters patent issued by the Governor on the advice of the Premier. In practice, this means that the Premier (and government of the day) will design the terms of reference, the Commission’s focus, and the subjects to be reported on as well as the timing of the inquiry. Unlike court proceedings, which can impose a penalty following certain findings, the purpose of a Royal Commission is not to impose penalties but to examine and understand issues that are often large and systemic rather than individual instances of wrongdoing.
As a result, Royal Commissions have an exceptionally broad set of powers. Under the Inquires Act, Royal Commissions can compel a witness to appear and give evidence or produce documents as directed by the Commissioner. Importantly, many of the standard legal protections, such as legal professional privilege or the privilege against self-incrimination, do not generally exist when evidence is called before a Royal Commission. Whilst there is very little protection from the compulsive power of the Commission, there may be limited protections in certain circumstances. These are likely to be defined by Practice Guidelines released by the Commission, and to the extent they are available should be utilised cautiously. If they are incorrectly applied the producer will be in contravention of the Inquiries Act.
A business or person may wish to apply to be represented in the Commission to be heard on matters which affect their interest. In determining these applications, the Commission will typically apply a ‘direct or substantial interest test’, though may limit the matters on which the person or company may be heard.
The exact timing of any Commission is uncertain. The Premier has suggested that the Commission should start prior to the November state election though, without terms of reference, that timing may be difficult.
Once the Commission has completed its inquiries, it will prepare a report to be tabled in Parliament. That report will be made public and will likely feature findings and recommendations for policy reform.
Importantly, under the Inquiries Act, documents or evidence produced under compulsion are not admissible in subsequent court proceedings (with limited exceptions for evidence that was or could be independently obtained). This is to reflect the significant compulsive power of the Commission.
Accordingly, while the Commission may come to findings of factual matters, it will not itself be able to impose any criminal or civil penalties. Witnesses who hinder the investigation or make false or misleading statements may face penalties but those will be imposed by a Court not the Commission.
That being said, it is not uncommon for a Royal Commission’s findings to themselves lead to policy reform or regulatory change. For example, following the Royal Commission into Misconduct in the Banking, Superannuation and Financial Services Industry, significant reforms were made to the sector including the banning of certain types of commissions and a previously unprecedented level of scrutiny by the regulator over certain licensees.
Reports made to various media sources allege that:
An investigation into whether these allegations are accurate may result in findings suggesting or indicating that the following offences have occurred:
Part 10.9 of the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) (Criminal Code) makes it an offence for a Corporation or its employees or directors, to make, alter, destroy or conceal an accounting document to conceal or facilitate a person receiving a benefit not legitimately due to the person. This may occur in concealing the true nature of payments made.
Section 83 of the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic) (Crimes Act) contains a similar offence for individuals who furnish information or documentation which the person knows is or may be misleading, false or deceptive in a material particular (such as false time sheets for shifts not worked).
Sections 390.3 and 390.4 of the Criminal Code make it an offence for a person to associate with a criminal organisation or to provide material support to a criminal organisation. The offences may be committed in circumstances where there is a risk that provision of support or resources will aid the organisation even if it does not actually do so.
The Criminal Code and the Crimes Act also each contain offences with respect to dealing in the proceeds of crime and with respect to dealing with property when the corporation or person is aware, reckless or negligent as to whether it will be used in the commission of a crime.[6]
Similarly, the Crimes Act makes it an offence for an owner or occupier of land or premises to intentionally permit the land or premises to be used for drug trafficking.[7]
The Crimes Act contains a range of offences prohibiting the giving to an agent, such as an employee, money or other benefits to act in a particular way, to show favour or to secure a particular outcome. The Criminal Code contains similar offences with respect to foreign public officials the definition of which includes employees of organisations owned by a foreign government.
If you expect to be called to give evidence to the Commission or that evidence given may concern you, it is important to seek prompt legal advice about your rights and what is required from you.
Royal Commissions, especially when conducted under significant political pressure, typically have short deadlines for the preparation and production of evidence, including large volumes of documentary evidence.
Accordingly, it is important to seek assistance as well as advice regarding what exactly you might need to produce as evidence, as well as, protections that may be available including in relation to what information is made publicly available.
[1] https://lens.monash.edu/how-the-big-build-corruption-allegations-brought-down-the-victorian-premier/
[2] https://lens.monash.edu/how-the-big-build-corruption-allegations-brought-down-the-victorian-premier/
[3] https://lens.monash.edu/how-the-big-build-corruption-allegations-brought-down-the-victorian-premier/
[4] https://lens.monash.edu/how-the-big-build-corruption-allegations-brought-down-the-victorian-premier/
[5] https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-07-29/victoria-big-build-underbelly-exposed-by-royal-commission/106968696
[6] See Division 2A of the Crimes Act and Part 10.2 of the Criminal Code.
[7] See section 72D.
If you would like further information on any of the above, or have any queries regarding other matters, please do not hesitate to contact Partners Monique Carroll on +61 3 9605 0833 or Darren James on +61 3 9605 0952
If you would like further information or have any queries regarding other matters, please do not hesitate to contact:
