Macdonald v The Queen; Maitland v The Queen

The appeal in Macdonald v The Queen and Maitland v The Queen concerned the legality of evidence obtained through compulsory processes before the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) in New South Wales, and whether such evidence could be used by the prosecution prior to charges being laid. The appeal was heard in the High Court of Australia. The respondents were convicted of criminal offences following investigations by ICAC, and they argued that the use of compelled evidence obtained before ICAC violated their rights under the accusatorial principle. Specifically, they contended that the Independent Commission Against Corruption Act 1988 (NSW) did not abrogate the accusatorial principle, and thus compelled evidence obtained over objection in public hearings should not be made available to the prosecution prior to charges being laid.

The legal issues before the Court were whether the Independent Commission Against Corruption Act 1988 (NSW) abrogated the accusatorial principle, and if the findings of the primary judge were available on the evidence. The Court needed to determine if the compelled evidence obtained over objection in public hearings before ICAC could be made available to the prosecution prior to charges being laid, and whether the primary judge's findings were supported by the evidence. The respondents contended that the use of compelled evidence in this manner was a breach of their rights under the accusatorial principle, which requires that a person be given an opportunity to challenge the evidence against them before being convicted.

The Court held that the Independent Commission Against Corruption Act 1988 (NSW) did not abrogate the accusatorial principle, and that compelled evidence obtained over objection in public hearings before ICAC could not be made available to the prosecution prior to charges being laid. The Court found that the principle of legality required that the use of compelled evidence must be consistent with fundamental common law rights and principles, and that the accusatorial principle was such a fundamental principle. The Court also found that the primary judge's findings were available on the evidence, and that there was no error in the primary judge's approach to the evidence. The Court dismissed the appeals, holding that the evidence obtained before ICAC was properly admitted, and that the respondents' rights under the accusatorial principle were not breached.