Findings of corrupt conduct

The ICAC found that Daniel Paul engaged in corrupt conduct by:

  • accepting $13,000 from Mr Diekman in 2008 as a reward for Mr Paul assisting Kings Security Group Pty Ltd in relation to the University of Western Sydney (UWS) access control project and to influence him to favour Kings in relation to that project in the future
  • deliberately failing to disclose to the UWS tender evaluation committee (TEC) his conflict of interest arising from his personal and financial relationship with Mr Diekman
  • accepting $20,000 in 2009 from Mr Diekman as a reward for Mr Paul having improperly exercised his public official functions to assist Kings to win an Art Gallery of NSW (AGNSW) tender
  • accepting $27,500 from Q Video Systems (QVS) in 2009 as a reward for improperly exercising his public official functions to assist QVS to become the main supplier of security products for the AGNSW contract
  • deliberately failing to disclose to the AGNSW his conflicts of interest arising from his relationships with Mr Diekman, Kings and QVS
  • deliberately failing to disclose to Sydney Ports Corporation (SPC) and to Woollahra Municipal Council his conflicts of interest arising from his relationships with Mr Diekman and Kings.

The ICAC found that Peter (Charles) Diekman engaged in corrupt conduct by:

  • paying Mr Paul $13,000 in 2008 as a reward for Mr Paul Mr Paul improperly exercising his public official functions to assist Kings in relation to the UWS access control project and for further assistance that Mr Diekman anticipated Mr Paul might provide in the future
  • arranging for Mr Paul to be paid $20,000 in 2009 as a reward for Mr Paul exercising his public official functions to improperly assist Kings to win the AGNSW tender
  • providing or authorising the provision of benefits to Mr Huskic, of the then Northern Sydney Central Coast Area Health Service (NSCCAHS) between 2006 and 2011 in return for Mr Huskic having exercised his public official functions to favour Kings and in the expectation that he would do so in the future
  • agreeing with Mr Huskic, in 2010, to submit two dummy quotes to the NSCCAHS for the Gosford hospital carpark security upgrade, knowing Mr Huskic would represent them as genuine quotes, and authorising the submission of those quotes
  • dishonestly providing Austek Security Solutions with the Kings costings for an SPC project in 2007 with the intention that these would be used by Austek managing director Jonathan Nguyen to submit a higher Austek quote to SPC, so Kings' chances of winning the contract for the SPC project would be increased.

The ICAC found that Robert Huskic engaged in corrupt conduct by:

  • seeking and accepting benefits from Mr Diekam between 2006 and 2011 in return for exercising his public official functions to favour Kings and in the expectation that he would do so in the future
  • Requesting Mr Diekman, in 2010, to arrange for the creation of dummy quotes for the Gosford hospital carpark security upgrade and his use of those quotes, knowing they were false.

The ICAC found that Peter Roche engaged in corrupt conduct by agreeing with Mr Diekman that:

  • Mr Paul be paid $20,000 in 2009 as a reward for Mr Paul exercising his public official functions to improperly assist Kings to win the AGNSW tender
  • Mr Huskic be provided with benefits between 2006 and 2011 as a reward for Mr Huskic having exercised his public official duties to favour Kings in the expectation that he would do so in the future.

Paul Thompson engaged in corrupt conduct by arranging for Mr Paul to be paid $27,500 by QVS in 2009 as a reward for Mr Paul exercising his public official functions to assist QVS to become the main supplier of security products for the AGNSW project.   

David McMicking engaged in corrupt conduct by agreeing with Mr Huskic, in 2010, to submit two dummy quotes to the NSCCAHS for the Gosford hospital carpark security upgrade, knowing Mr Huskic would represent them as genuine quotes, and authorising the submission of those quotes.

Jonathan Nguyen engaged in corrupt conduct by dishonestly using Kings' costings for the SPC project in 2007 to ensure that his company, Austek, submitted a higher quote than Kings to SPC, so that Kings' chances of winning the contract for the SPC project would be increased.