The discussion surrounding the establishment of a federal anti-corruption commission in Australia is not new or short-lived. As a nation that values democracy and public trust, Australia has various agencies like the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity (ACLEI) and the Commonwealth Ombudsman, among others, that aim to promote transparency and combat corruption. However, there is a clear need for a centralized federal anti-corruption body. Historically, there have been persistent political efforts to establish such a commission, with the objective always being to strengthen integrity at the federal level. Figures like Senator Larissa Waters, leading the Greens, have provided sustained momentum to this cause through the introduction of the National Integrity Commission Bill 2018 (2.). It passed the senate in September 2019 but lapsed at the end of the 46th Parliament. Independent MPs like Cathy McGowan and Helen Haines have also emphasized the importance of transparent public hearings in their proposed versions of the National Integrity Commission Bill (NIC) 2018, which lapsed in November 2019 and the Australian Federal Integrity Commission Bill 2021 respectively in April 2022.Despite commendable efforts, a significant disagreement has emerged between the major political parties. The Coalition's proposal of the Commonwealth Integrity Commission (CIC) in 2018, although a step in the right direction, has faced skepticism due to its perceived limited powers, leading some to label it a "toothless" tiger (Knaus, 2020). Criticism has been directed at the proposed CIC for its lack of transparency, as it does not conduct public hearings for corruption allegations in the public sector. Furthermore, its restrictive criteria for launching investigations, including a narrow definition of corruption and high thresholds for initiating probes, have raised concerns. Additionally, provisions that could discourage whistleblowers and grant the attorney general broad powers to withhold information have sparked worries about the commission's effectiveness and potential for government oversight.The Australian Labor Party's (ALP) subsequent proposal of a more comprehensive National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) has highlighted the divergence in political vision. These differences, influenced by Australia's political spectrum, have manifested in the contrasting conservative approach of the Coalition and the progressive commitment of the ALP. The journey towards establishing an effective integrity commission is further complicated by the often magnified nature of political allegations.However, the 2022 election marked a turning point. Anthony Albanese, leading the Labor Party, demonstrated a strong commitment to establishing the anti-corruption commission. The differing positions of the Morrison-led government and the Labor Party became the focal point of political debates. The controversies surrounding the Morrison government, such as Rachelle Miller's allegations and the unfulfilled promises of an integrity commission, have intensified the need for a federal oversight body.The subsequent victory of the Labor Party, led by Albanese, renewed the promise to the Australian public to establish a federal anti-corruption commission by the end of 2022. The call for a national anti-corruption commission, advocated by organizations like Transparency International since 2005, became stronger with the revelations from a similar organization: the NSW ICAC. The need for an independent corruption body became clear, especially considering Australia's declining reputation in terms of corruption perceptions. In November 2022, a significant step was taken when the Labor party, fulfilling an election promise, introduced and passed the bill to establish the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NAAC). While the Labor's model was praised as an improvement over the Morrison government's Commonwealth Integrity Commission, it faced criticism. Specifically, experts and minor political parties raised concerns about its limited provision for hearings, which were only allowed under vaguely defined 'exceptional circumstances'. Yielding to pressure, minor parties enforced an amendment requiring the approval of at least one non-government member for the selection of the NAAC commissioner.The proposed appointments by the Hon Mark Dreyfus KC MP became a topic of discussion, with figures such as the Commissioner, two Deputy Commissioners, a Chief Executive Officer, and an Inspector coming into the spotlight. Paul Brereton, known for his investigative work on crimes committed by soldiers in Afghanistan, was chosen to lead the Commission. His credentials and previous experience positioned him as a formidable figure in the fight against corruption.The NACC drew inspiration from successful commissions at the state level. Despite receiving broad support from Australian political parties, several issues sparked debate. The effectiveness of the NACC, the complexities surrounding public hearings, the comprehensive definition of corruption, the necessary independence of the commission, and the selection criteria for its commissioner were among the key topics. Advocates argued for the NACC to have financial and political autonomy, suggesting that it should be on par with roles like the federal auditor-general in terms of status and budget.As of July 1, 2023, when the commission became operational, the immediate response was overwhelming. With 44 referrals on the first day and a staggering 437 within just over two weeks, the establishment of the NACC demonstrated its crucial importance. Commissioner Brereton provided insights, emphasizing that while not every referral would lead to an investigation, the commission had already identified potential areas of focus. Contrary to popular belief, the NACC is not solely investigating historical matters but also prioritizing current and relevant issues.Enshrined in the National Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2022, the NACC positioned itself as a symbol of integrity, aiming to address corrupt behaviors involving Commonwealth public officials. The Act outlines the wide range of corruption, from breaches of public trust to the misuse of power for personal gain. Its jurisdiction is limited to Australian Government public officials, ensuring that its focus remains clear. However, it is important to note that certain high-ranking positions, such as judges and the Governor-General, fall outside the commission's scope.