NSW DPP Sally Dowling accused of false evidence over 2GB media leak and judge dispute

Consensus Summary

A NSW parliamentary committee report has accused Director of Public Prosecutions Sally Dowling of authorising a media leak to 2GB in October 2024 and then giving false evidence under oath during an inquiry. The report, released in July 2026, found that Dowling falsely denied authorising the leak, which involved sharing details of a sentencing hearing involving a young Indigenous offender. The story, aired on 2GB’s breakfast show, alleged that District Court Judge Penelope Wass had allowed the offender to perform an acknowledgment of country in court, which Dowling’s office later claimed was a retaliatory move after Wass criticised the ODPP’s handling of sexual assault cases. The committee, which was originally tasked with examining identity protections for children in court proceedings, instead focused almost entirely on the dispute between Dowling and Wass.

The controversy stems from a long-standing professional rift between Dowling and Wass, who had publicly criticised the ODPP’s approach to sexual assault prosecutions. Wass submitted a 68-page document to the inquiry alleging that Dowling’s office deliberately leaked the story to 'embarrass and defame' her. The leak also raised concerns about potential breaches of child identity protections, though a police investigation in 2025 found no evidence of wrongdoing. The committee’s report, supported by a 4-3 majority, concluded that Dowling’s denials were false and recommended that Attorney-General Michael Daley consider removing her from office or establishing a new oversight committee for the ODPP. Daley, however, rejected the findings, calling the report the 'worst' he had seen in his nearly 21 years in parliament and expressing full confidence in Dowling.

Dowling’s defence hinges on her claim that she did not authorise the leak and only became aware of it days before her December 2025 testimony. She admitted attending an internal meeting on October 24, 2024, where pitching the story to 2GB was discussed but insisted she did not approve it. The SMH and Guardian report that Dowling was distracted during the meeting, reading emails and texts about other ODPP matters, while the ABC focuses more on the broader impact of the leak on Wass’ reputation. A letter dated June 30 from Dowling’s counterparts across Australia described her as a 'person of integrity,' further complicating the committee’s findings. The dissenting voices, including Labor MPs Cameron Murphy, Bob Nanva, and Greens MP Sue Higginson, argued that the report’s conclusions were unsupported by evidence and relied on speculation rather than facts.

While the SMH and Guardian provide detailed accounts of the internal meeting and Dowling’s alleged false testimony, the ABC places greater emphasis on the political and procedural controversies surrounding the inquiry itself. The ABC notes that Daley rejected the recommendation for a separate inquiry, calling it a waste of taxpayers’ money, while the SMH and Guardian highlight the committee’s perceived bias and the lack of a key witness—the external media adviser—who did not appear before the inquiry. The Guardian also points out that the loss of parliamentary committees’ power to compel witnesses may have undermined the inquiry’s credibility. Despite these differences, all three outlets agree that the report has deepened divisions within the NSW legal and political spheres, with the ODPP and its supporters dismissing the findings as politically motivated.

The unresolved question now is whether Daley will act on the committee’s recommendations, particularly the call for a formal inquiry into Dowling’s conduct. The SMH and Guardian suggest that Daley’s decision to instruct the Crown Solicitor’s Office to review the report with senior counsel may be a precursor to further legal or political battles. Meanwhile, the dissenting MPs and Dowling’s supporters continue to challenge the report’s validity, arguing that the findings are flawed and lack sufficient evidence. The controversy also raises broader concerns about the independence of the ODPP and the role of media leaks in legal disputes, particularly when children’s identities are involved. As the debate continues, the focus remains on whether the committee’s report will lead to meaningful reforms or simply exacerbate the existing tensions between the judiciary and the prosecution service.