Findings of corrupt conduct
The Commission found that Craig Izzard engaged in corrupt conduct by:
- from 2015, being party to an agreement whereby Ibrahim Beydoun paid $10,000 to Nosir Kabite, which Mr Kabite agreed to share with Mr Izzard, in return for which Mr Izzard improperly exercised his official functions to:
- intimidate Raed Ykmour into departing from 30 Bellfield Avenue, Rossmore, in order to assist Mr Beydoun to relocate his business to that property
- assist Mr Beydoun to avoid detection for the illegal operation of his skip bin business at 30 Bellfield Avenue, Rossmore
- assist Mr Beydoun with respect to the DA for the operation of his skip bin business at 30 Bellfield Avenue, Rossmore
- between September 2015 and March 2016, agreeing to receive from Mr Kabite cash payments, and receiving at least two mobile telephones, firewood and free removal of rubbish, as a reward for assisting Mr Kabite by improperly exercising his official functions by deliberately failing to investigate the unlawful waste disposal activities and not enforcing waste disposal laws in relation to Mr Kabite’s operations at Bandon Road Vineyard.
The Commission found that Nosir Kabite engaged in serious corrupt conduct by:
- from 2015, being a party to an agreement whereby he received $10,000 from Mr Beydoun, which he agreed to share with Mr Izzard, in return for Mr Izzard improperly exercising his official functions to:
- intimidate the tenant at 30 Bellfield Avenue, Rossmore, to vacate those premises in order to assist Mr Beydoun to relocate his business to that property
- assist Mr Beydoun to avoid detection for the illegal operation of his skip bin business at 30 Bellfield Avenue, Rossmore
- assist Mr Beydoun with respect to the DA for the operation of his skip bin business at 30 Bellfield Avenue, Rossmore
- between September 2015 and March 2016, giving Mr Izzard money, at least two mobile telephones, firewood and not charging him for the removal of rubbish for the purpose of influencing Mr Izzard to improperly exercise his public official functions so as not to enforce waste disposal laws with respect to Mr Kabite’s operations at Bandon Road Yard.
The Commission found that Ibrahim Beydoun engaged in serious corrupt conduct by:
- from 2015, being a party to an agreement whereby he paid $10,000 to Mr Kabite with the intention that Mr Kabite would share that money with a Liverpool City Council officer in return for that officer improperly exercising his official functions to:
- intimidate the tenant at 30 Bellfield Avenue, Rossmore, to vacate those premises in order to assist Mr Beydoun to relocate his business to that property
- assist Mr Beydoun to avoid detection for the illegal operation of his skip bin business at 30 Bellfield Avenue, Rossmore
- assist Mr Beydoun with respect to the DA for the operation of his skip bin business at 30 Bellfield Avenue, Rossmore
Recommendations for prosecutions
The Commission must seek the advice of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) on whether any prosecution should be commenced. The DPP determines whether any criminal charges can be laid, and conducts all prosecutions. The Commission provides information on this website in relation to the status of prosecution recommendations and outcomes as advised by the DPP. The progress of matters is generally within the hands of the DPP. Accordingly, the Commission does not directly notify persons affected of advice received from the DPP or the progress of their matters generally.
The Commission is of the opinion that consideration should be given to obtaining the advice of the DPP with respect to the prosecution of Craig Izzard for:
- an offence pursuant to section 249B(1)(a) of the Crimes Act 1900 in relation to agreeing to receive a share of $10,000 for improperly exercising his official functions
- an offence pursuant to section 249B(1)(a) of the Crimes Act and for the common law offence of misconduct in public office for agreeing to receive cash payments and other gifts as a reward for improperly exercising his official functions by failing to investigate and not enforcing waste disposal laws in relation to operations at Bandon Road Yard, Vineyard.
The Commission is of the opinion that consideration should be given to obtaining the advice of the DPP with respect to the prosecution of Nosir Kabite for:
- an offence pursuant to section 249B(2)(a) of the Crimes Act in relation to offering a corrupt reward to Mr Izzard for Mr Izzard to misuse his official functions to improperly assist Mr Beydoun
- an offence pursuant to section 249B(2)(a) of the Crimes Act and an offence of aiding and abetting an offence of misconduct in public office for paying money and providing other benefits to Mr Izzard for the purpose of influencing him to improperly exercise his official functions so as not to enforce waste disposal laws in relation to Mr Kabite’s operations at Bandon Road Yard, Vineyard.
The Commission is of the opinion that consideration should be given to obtaining the advice of the DPP with respect to the prosecution of Ibrahim Beydoun for an offence pursuant to section 249B(2)(a) of the Crimes Act in relation to paying a corrupt reward of $10,000 in the anticipation that a public official would misuse their official functions.
Updates
Briefs of evidence were provided to the DPP on 8 September 2017.
On 18 October 2018, the DPP advised that there is sufficient evidence to charge Craig Izzard with two counts of misconduct in public office, Nosir Kabite with one count of accessory before the fact to misconduct in public office and one count of aiding and abetting misconduct in public office, and Ibrahim Beydoun with one count of aiding and abetting misconduct in public office.
Charges have been filed in all matters.
On 5 June 2019, Mr Beydoun was also charged with an offence of give corrupt commission pursuant to section 249B of the Crimes Act. On 18 July 2019, Mr Beydoun pleaded guilty. On 5 September 2019, Mr Beydoun was sentenced to an Intensive Corrections Order for a period of 13 months with 300 hours community service.
On 16 August 2019, Mr Izzard was charged with an offence of corruptly receive commission pursuant to section 249B of the Crimes Act, in lieu of one of the misconduct in public office charges. On 18 October 2019, Mr Izzard pleaded guilty. On 28 February 2020, Mr Izzard's sentence hearing proceeded for a full day. On 24 April 2020, the Court imposed an aggregate sentence of imprisonment for 2 years and 6 months. The sentence is to be served by way of an Intensive Correction Order with an additional condition of 750 hours of community service.
On 28 October 2019, Mr Kabite was also charged with an offence of give corrupt commission pursuant to section 249B of the Crimes Act. On 7 November 2019, Mr Kabite pleaded guilty to this charge and the aid and abet misconduct in public office charge. On 28 February 2020, Mr Kabite's sentence hearing proceeded for a full day. On 24 April 2020, the Court imposed an aggregate sentence of imprisonment for 2 years and 6 months. The sentence is to be served by way of an Intensive Correction Order. The matter was adjourned to 19 June 2020 to allow for a Sentence Assessment Report to be completed in relation to whether Mr Kabite was suitable for home detention and/or community service to be made a component of the order. On 19 June 2020, Mr Kabite was found suitable for home detention but raised fresh issues for the Court to consider that may affect the non-parole period. The matter was adjourned to 24 July 2020 for final determination of the sentence. On that date, his Honour confirmed Mr Kabite’s sentence of an Intensive Corrections Order for a total term of 2 years 6 months with 18 months to be served by way of home detention. On 13 August 2020, Mr Kabite filed a notice of intention to appeal against his sentence. The notice of intention to appeal was extended with an expiry date of 5 May 2021.
Under recent changes to the Criminal Appeal Rules, notice of intention to appeal extensions are no longer granted, although defence may still file an application for leave to appeal out of time after the expiry date. The DPP has advised it will update the Commission should that occur.
Recommendations for disciplinary action
Craig Izzard has resigned from his position at the Western Sydney Regional Illegal Dumping Squad. As such, is it is not necessary to consider any recommendation in relation to disciplinary or dismissal action.
Recommendations for corruption prevention
The Commission has made the following 15 corruption prevention recommendations to improve the regulatory response and to address other issues and concerns raised in this investigation.
Recommendation 1
That the Western Sydney Regional Illegal Dumping Squad (WS RIDS) Management Committee restructures reporting arrangements within the WS RIDS to ensure that field officers report to a single manager who is responsible for overseeing their actions and approving key enforcement decisions.
Recommendation 2
That the WS RIDS Management Committee ensures field officers are rotated between member councils on a periodic basis to avoid the building of inappropriate relationships with members of the community.
Recommendation 3
That the Environment Protection Authority (EPA) strengthens its involvement in the WS RIDS Management Committee to ensure it properly directs and oversees the WS RIDS’s strategic and operational performance.
Recommendation 4
That the EPA strengthens the WS RIDS’s Funding Agreement to include additional specifications consistent with regulatory good practice, such as evaluating regulatory performance against strategic outcomes.
Recommendation 5
That the EPA strengthens and mandates the technical training of WS RIDS officers to ensure that all officers carry out compliant and effective regulatory activity.
Recommendation 6
That the EPA, in partnership with the host council, reviews WS RIDS position descriptions to ensure they reflect the skills and personal attributes necessary to be an effective RIDS manager or field officer.
Recommendation 7
That the EPA develops a case management system to be used by all RIDSs that will also support compliant processes, allow in-built approval levels for key decisions and provide metrics to improve oversight of the WS RIDS.
Recommendation 8
That the EPA works with relevant stakeholders to develop a scheme whereby sites where asbestos is present can be certified and information provided to the relevant local council for inclusion in a register of such sites.
Recommendation 9
That the EPA works with relevant government agencies to explore ways to improve and link DA processes and conditions of consent relating to the handling, transport and disposal of waste from construction and demolition sites.
Recommendation 10
That the EPA explores ways to reduce tipping fees for those who dump asbestos loads at licensed landfills.
Recommendation 11
That the EPA strengthens its regulatory response to illegal dumping by developing a suite of approaches to incentivise proper asbestos waste disposal.
Recommendation 12
That the EPA develops clear guidelines to ensure that confusion regarding the application of waste disposal laws is eliminated.
Recommendation 13
That the NSW Government considers enacting a specific and serious standalone offence for the disposal of asbestos waste.
Recommendation 14
That the NSW Government gives consideration to the establishment of a single coordinating authority, with appropriate regulatory powers and funding, that has statutory responsibility for overseeing all asbestos waste matters in NSW.
Recommendation 15
That Heads of Asbestos Coordination Authorities (HACA) continues to act as an executive committee to any newly-created coordinating authority.
Response to ICAC recommendations
The action plans posted below have been provided by the Environment Protection Authority, the NSW Government and Penrith City Council in response to the ICAC's corruption prevention recommendations. Their publication here is to show the status of the responses. It does not constitute approval or endorsement by the Commission.
Penrith City Council reported that it had implemented all of the recommendations made to it when it provided its action plan to the Commission. Consequently, its action plan should also be considered a final progres report on the implementation of these recommendations.
Progress on the implementation of recommendations made to the NSW Govenment has been provided in the progress reports supplied by the Environment Protection Authority.
Action plan - 24 month progress report - Environment Protection Authority (EPA)
Action plan - 12 month progress report - Environment Protection Authority (EPA)
Action plan - Environment Protection Authority (EPA)
Action plan - NSW Government
Action plan - Penrith City Council