The ICAC Act defines unsatisfactory conduct and as conduct engaged in by a public officer (whether or not the identity of the public officer is known) or by a public body:

  1. that involves illegality, impropriety, negligence or incompetence; or;
  2. that is connected to public; and
  3. which results in:

    iii) substantial mismanagement of public resources; or
    iv) the inappropriate or significantly ineffective use of public resources; or
    v) substantial mismanagement in relation to the performance of official functions; or

    vi) substantial detriment to the public interest.

With respect to the above paragraph, incompetence:

  1. is conduct that would not be engaged in by a reasonable public officer of public body:
    • having the skills and knowledge reasonably expected of a person or body with the role of the public officer or public body; and
    • having taken appropriate steps to obtain adequate resources, information and advice.
  2. does not include:
    • that is less than best practice; or
    • that is a matter of policy about which reasonable public officers or public bodies may disagree.

Unsatisfactory conduct does not include any conduct engaged in by a judicial officer in the performance of judicial functions.