Rogue ATO investigator has taxpayer fitted with ankle monitor
Nine months later, Taxpayer A submitted a letter from his GP stating that “the ankle tracking device had aggravated the medical problem” and that “there was a possible loss of limb due to diabetes”.
The bail requirement was later lifted.
Helen Petaia, who apologized to the ATO and won a confidential settlement in her own fight seven years ago, is supporting Taxpayer A through her case.
“The only word to describe how he was treated is cruelty,” Petaia said.
“Placing a bracelet on the wrist of a middle-aged woman who only did it to defend herself is the biggest human rights violation on this planet,” he said.
“It might actually be polite to describe the ATO officers involved in harsh terms, but in fact I would say they are basically delusional. I mean, who would do that to a human being? He wasn’t a flight risk.”
Loading
An ATO spokesman refused to answer a number of questions, including whether ankle monitoring devices were still being used on Australian taxpayers with no current criminal history.
“It would be inappropriate for the ATO to comment on this specific matter as it is before the courts,” the spokesman said.
“Decisions regarding the application of bail conditions, including the nature and extent of monitoring, are determined by the courts, not the ATO.”
The ATO does not want to publicly disclose what action has been taken, citing the appeal following the Supreme Court’s decision against Anthony Rains.
The Director of Commonwealth Prosecutions also declined to answer the question of whether there had been a review of Anthony Rains’ other investigations, particularly those currently before the courts.
57-year-old businesswoman “Julie Clarke” has been targeted by the ATO for seven years but this has been stopped by the Brisbane Supreme Court.Credit: A Current Event
A spokeswoman for Attorney General Michelle Rowland said her office could not question whether such a review should be conducted.
“The CDPP is an independent body. It is solely responsible for decisions about which matters it chooses to prosecute,” its spokesman said.
Deputy Finance Daniel Mulino, the minister responsible for the ATO, made a statement. A Current Event He said he was “aware of the decision” six weeks ago and had “discussed the matter with the ATO commissioner”.
But at a press conference in Canberra last week he said he would “inquire about this case in due course” and explained that he was satisfied with the “very rigorous processes within the ATO”.
Shadow attorney general Andrew Wallace called it “completely inappropriate” and said Mulino should have intervened in a case he believed “smelt very bad”.
“This certainly raises very serious concerns about how not only the investigator acted in this case but also the ATO more broadly,” Wallace said.
Wallace believes there should be high-level discussions about whether it is appropriate to proceed with an appeal in the Julie Clarke case.
“I think questions need to be asked about whether the interests of justice really require that the appeal be pursued,” he said.
Start your day with a summary of the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter.
