Latest world news

Westpac’s scandal highlights a system failing to deter corporate wrongdoing

Published

7 years ago

November 25, 2019

Elise Bant, University of Melbourne and Jeannie Marie Paterson, University of Melbourne

The news that Australia’s anti money-laundering regulator has accused Westpac of breaching the law on 23 million occasions points to the prospect that powerful members of corporate Australia are still behaving badly.

This despite the clear lessons offered by the Banking Royal Commission.

Regulators are still struggling to find the right balance between pursuing wrongdoers through the courts – an admittedly costly, time-consuming and highly risky business – and finding other means to punish and deter misconduct.

Australia’s anti money-laundering regulator, AUSTRAC, is seeking penalties against Westpac in the Federal Court.

Each of the bank’s alleged contraventions attracts a civil penalty of up to A$21 million. In theory, that could equate to a fine in the region of A$391 trillion.
In practice, it is likely to be a mere fraction of that sum. Commonwealth Bank breached anti-money-laundering laws and faced a theoretical maximum fine of nearly A$1 trillion, but settled for A$700 million.

No doubt the reality that companies can minimise penalties is a factor in why breaches continue.

This impression is reinforced by revelations last week that financial services company AMP continued to charge fees to its dead clients despite the shellacking it received at the hands of the royal commission.

Last month a Federal Court judge refused to approve a A$75 million fine agreed between the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission and Volkswagen to settle litigation over the car company’s conduct in cheating emissions tests for diesel vehicles. The judge was reported to be “outraged” by the settlement, which meant Volkswagen did not admit liability for its misconduct.

The A$75 million is a drop in the ocean of the likely profits obtained from this systemic wrongdoing and pales into insignificance next to fines imposed in other countries.

Proposals for law reform

So business as usual, right?

Maybe not for long. The Australian Law Reform Commission has just released a discussion paper on corporate criminal responsibility.

It points out that effective punishment and deterrence of serious criminal and civil misconduct by corporations in Australia is undermined by a combination of factors.

These include a confusing and inconsistent web of laws governing the circumstances in which conduct is “attributed” to the company. Similar problems of inconsistency arguably also undermine other key areas, such as efforts to give courts the power to impose hefty fines based on the profits obtained by the wrongdoing

The repeated attempts to come up with new and more effective attribution rules arise because corporate wrongdoers are “artificial people”. For centuries, courts and parliaments have struggled with how to make them pay for what is done by their human managers, employees and (both human and corporate) agents. All too often a company’s directors disclaim all knowledge of the wrongdoing.

To fix this, the ALRC recommends having one single method to attribute responsibility. It builds on the attribution rule first developed in the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) and now used, in various forms, across various statutes.

The ALRC proposes that the conduct and state of mind of any “associates” (whether natural individuals or other corporations) acting on behalf of the corporation should be attributable to the corporation.

This goes well beyond the traditional focus on directors and senior managers and would provide some welcome consistency in the law.

Importantly, serious criminal and civil breaches that require proof of a dishonest or highly culpable corporate “state of mind” can be satisfied either by proving the state of mind of the “associate” or that the company “authorised or permitted” the conduct.

A “due diligence” defence would protect the corporation from liability where the misconduct was truly attributable to rogue “bad apples” in an otherwise a well-run organisation. There would be no protection in the case of widespread “system errors” and “administrative failures” so pathetically admitted during the royal commission.

The ALRC also proposes that senior officers be liable for the conduct of corporations where they are in “a position to influence the relevant conduct and failed to take reasonable steps to prevent a contravention or offence”.

This would place the onus on those in a position to change egregious corporate practices to show they took reasonable steps to do so.

Removing the penalty ceiling

These recommendations, if adopted could prove a game-changer for regulators asking themselves “why not litigate?” and corporations used to managing the fall-out of their misconduct as simply a “cost of business”.

The ALRC’s recommendations that the criminal and civil penalties should be enough to ensure corporations don’t profit from wrongdoing will be welcomed by many. Some academics have gone further and argued that the law should be changed to make it clear that civil, not just criminal penalties, should be set at a level that is effective to punish serious wrongdoing.

The ALRC also raises the question whether current limits on penalties should be removed. The Westpac scenario might be just the kind of case to make that option attractive.

Elise Bant, Professor of Law, University of Melbourne and Jeannie Marie Paterson, Professor of Law, University of Melbourne

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Latest world news

India envoy Dinesh Trivedi meets PM Modi after talks with Bangladesh PM Tarique Rahman

India’s High Commissioner to Bangladesh Dinesh Trivedi met PM Modi after talks with Bangladesh PM Tarique Rahman amid diplomatic tensions.

Published

3 days ago

August 12, 2026

APNLive Desk

India’s High Commissioner to Bangladesh Dinesh Trivedi met Prime Minister Narendra Modi in New Delhi on Tuesday, a day after his meeting with Bangladesh Prime Minister Tarique Rahman in Dhaka.

According to the High Commission of India in Bangladesh, Trivedi sought PM Modi’s guidance on further strengthening the bilateral relationship between India and Bangladesh through a constructive and people-centric approach.

The meeting came a day after Trivedi held discussions with Tarique Rahman on matters of mutual interest and ways to advance ties between the two neighbouring countries.

Dinesh Trivedi Meets Bangladesh PM

During his meeting with Tarique Rahman on Monday, Trivedi conveyed greetings from Prime Minister Modi and reiterated India’s commitment to working with the Bangladeshi administration and its people in a positive, constructive and forward-looking manner.

The two sides discussed issues of mutual interest and explored avenues for strengthening India-Bangladesh relations with a people-centric approach.

The engagement took place at the Prime Minister’s Office in the Cabinet Division at the Bangladesh Secretariat. Trivedi also shared his experience of serving in Dhaka over the previous two months.

Sheikh Hasina Extradition Request

The meeting assumed significance as Bangladesh has expressed hope that India will expedite the extradition process involving former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, who was ousted following a student-led uprising in 2024.

According to a statement issued by the Bangladesh Prime Minister’s Office, Dhaka also reiterated its request for India to return individuals it alleges were involved in the killing of Shahid Osman Hadi, a prominent figure associated with the July uprising who was shot on December 12, 2025.

Tarique Rahman stressed the need to create a suitable environment to take forward relations between Bangladesh and India.

Bangladesh Foreign Minister Khalilur Rahman, Prime Minister’s Foreign Affairs Adviser Humayun Kabir and other officials attended the meeting.

India-Bangladesh Ties Amid Diplomatic Friction

The latest high-level engagements come amid diplomatic tensions between the two countries following a virtual press interaction by Sheikh Hasina in New Delhi on August 5.

The event, organised by the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of South Asia to mark the second anniversary of her ouster, prompted strong objections from Dhaka.

During the interaction, Hasina said she remained determined to return to Bangladesh in December and restore democracy, while acknowledging the possibility of imprisonment or a death sentence upon her return.

Bangladesh’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs subsequently registered a strong protest and said the development had affected public sentiment and complicated efforts to strengthen bilateral cooperation.

India has said the government had no involvement in the event. Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said it was organised by a private media entity and clarified that New Delhi did not endorse views expressed at the forum.

Latest world news

Trump, PM Modi will resolve tariff issue over Russian oil trade, says US official

White House Trade Adviser Peter Navarro said Donald Trump and Prime Minister Narendra Modi will resolve the issue over US tariff threats linked to India’s Russian oil trade.

Published

3 days ago

August 12, 2026

APNLive Desk

US President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Narendra Modi will resolve the issue surrounding the threat of US tariffs linked to India’s purchase of Russian oil, White House Trade Adviser Peter Navarro said on Tuesday.

Navarro’s remarks came days after the US Senate passed a bill authorising the US President to impose tariffs of up to 100 per cent on the top five purchasers of Russian oil. The measure argues that such purchases directly contribute to financing Russia’s war in Ukraine.

Navarro comments on India’s Russian oil trade

Speaking to reporters at the White House, Navarro said India was not involved in the oil trade with Russia before the Ukraine war began in 2022.

He alleged that India became heavily involved in the trade after Russia’s invasion and sold refined products on behalf of Russia, which he said helped support the Russian war effort.

“Prior to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, India was not involved in the oil trade with Russia, but afterwards it got heavily involved,” Navarro said.

The White House adviser also claimed that the issue had since been resolved and attributed some of the shift in India’s Russian oil trade to an opinion article he recently wrote in the Financial Times.

Trump and Modi will resolve issue, Navarro says

Navarro said the relationship between Trump and Modi would help address the tariff-related issue.

“The president and your prime minister have a very good working relationship. They are going to work that out amongst themselves,” he said, adding that it was not his place to intervene.

His comments come amid US concerns over countries purchasing Russian oil and proposed measures aimed at imposing additional tariffs on major buyers.

Latest world news

US Senate passes Russia sanctions bill, India-China face 100% tariff risk

The US Senate has passed a Russia sanctions bill that could allow 100% tariffs on major buyers of Russian oil and gas, including India and China.

Published

7 days ago

August 8, 2026

APNLive Desk

The US Senate has approved a bipartisan Russia sanctions bill that could allow President Donald Trump to impose tariffs of up to 100% on major buyers of Russian oil or natural gas, including India and China.

The legislation was passed by an 86-11 vote and will now move to the US House of Representatives, which is scheduled to reconvene on August 31.

The bill is named in honour of Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, a strong supporter of Ukraine who died on July 11. Graham had pushed for tougher sanctions against Russia over its war in Ukraine.

India and China among major Russian energy buyers

The legislation gives the US president the power to impose tariffs on the world’s top five purchasers of Russian oil or natural gas.

India and China are among those countries, along with Azerbaijan, Hungary and Slovakia.

The bill also contains an exception for countries importing less than 15% of their natural gas from Russia and taking steps to reduce their dependence on Russian supplies.

What does the Russia sanctions bill contain?

Apart from the proposed tariffs, the legislation includes sanctions targeting Russian President Vladimir Putin, senior Russian political and military officials, financial institutions and energy projects.

The bill would also expand US sanctions to older and reflagged oil tankers allegedly used by Moscow to bypass existing restrictions on Russian oil and energy revenues.

At the same time, the White House would have the option to waive sanctions or restrictions if the president certifies to Congress that doing so is in the national interest.

Bill also extends Iran sanctions law

The legislation also contains a provision related to Iran. It would extend the expiration date of the Iran Sanctions Act of 1996 until 2031.

The law penalises companies that invest in Iran’s energy sector.

The bill’s passage in the Senate marks the next step in the US legislative process, but it still needs approval from the House of Representatives before it can move forward.