Australia's national corruption watchdog has been a timid and secretive "fizzer" given its handling of investigations, an inquiry has heard.
A parliamentary committee launched the inquiry into the National Anti Corruption Commission (NACC)'s functions in March, following accusations of deception, conflict of interest and inefficiency since it was established three years ago.
The NACC's former commissioner Paul Brereton resigned in May, part-way through a five year term. He faced scrutiny over advice he provided to the Inspector-General of the Australian Defence Force since starting the role.
The commission was also plagued with criticism about its investigation into Robodebt.
"We are just on three years of the NACC (being established) and I don't think there is anybody that I ever speak to who says anything other than they are disappointed in what has occurred, " Geoffrey Watson, director of The Accountability Roundtable, told the committee.
"Some would even say it is a fizzer.
"The only reason the NACC exists is to enhance confidence in the federal public sector, and there would be a lot of people who would say the last three years have acted to diminish that public confidence."
Mr Watson, who has previously worked with Mr Brereton and commended his character, said the NACC was properly resourced, and instead faced systemic issues from the top.
It was viewed by Australians as "timid" and "secretive", failing to use the powers it has, he said.
Most investigations are conducted privately by law to keep sources safe, but there are exceptions if an investigation is seen to be in the public interest.
Mr Watson said many things that should be made public were not, as the law impeded that from happening.
Despite that, protections for whistleblowers were given through a complex string of laws that work together, instead of a broad policy, other witnesses told the inquiry.
That meant some public servants were not protected when disclosing information to the NACC.
Centre for Public Integrity's research director Gabrielle Appleby said the NACC's existing framework allowed for regular public updates and better explanation of how it assessed inquiries, without breaching confidence.
The public would feel the NACC was more successful if proper, easy to understand information about significant decisions was published, she said.
Professor Appleby felt the commission was entering an important period of transition following Mr Brereton's resignation.
"Many of the issues we raise ... depend on institutional leadership and culture. Therefore, the appointment of the next commissioner will be critical in shaping the NACC's priorities, public standing and success," she said.
Recruitment for a new commissioner began this week through an open process.
Australian Associated Press