A NSW parliamentary committee has concluded that Sally Dowling, the state's Director of Public Prosecutions, gave false evidence under oath about her office's involvement in pitching a story to radio station 2GB regarding the sentencing of a young Indigenous offender. The report, released on 7 July 2026 and spanning 75 pages, documents 14 separate instances of false or misleading testimony given by Dowling to the inquiry The Guardian.

The upper house committee voted 4-3 to find that Dowling authorised the pitch to 2GB and then "falsely denied having done so" when questioned. This finding anchors a broader dispute within the legislative inquiry, which was originally established to examine protections preventing the identification of children in NSW court proceedings — a matter covered by state law.

The October 2024 Incident

On 25 October 2024, Ben Fordham's breakfast program on 2GB broadcast details from a sentencing hearing involving an Indigenous child. While the child was not named on air, the broadcast mischaracterised a courtroom acknowledgment of country as a "welcome to country," a factual error the inquiry's report identifies. A subsequent police investigation into whether the child had been illegally identified concluded without charges The Guardian.

The committee determined there was "no genuine public interest" in the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions "proactively and surreptitiously" pitching the story, and that such action risked identifying the child and would "most likely constitute a breach of the prosecution guidelines."

The committee's case relies heavily on testimony from ODPP media manager Sally Killoran. She described a meeting with Dowling and an external media adviser the day before broadcast, during which the adviser suggested 2GB would be more interested than the Daily Telegraph. Killoran testified that no one objected to this, leading her to believe she had approval to proceed. Dowling has acknowledged her office pitched the story but has "strongly rejected" any suggestion she personally authorised it.

A Judge's Allegations

The inquiry's findings were significantly shaped by a 68-page submission from District Court Judge Penelope Wass. Wass alleged that Dowling organised the leak and characterised it as "designed to embarrass and defame me and to undermine the independence of a district court judge with whom the ODPP has had issue." Wass is among several district court judges who have criticised the ODPP's handling of sexual assault prosecutions under Dowling's tenure — a tension that predates the 2GB episode and formed part of the committee's assessment of her credibility.

The committee has recommended that NSW Attorney General Michael Daley consider establishing a formal inquiry with compulsory powers — the authority to compel testimony and documents — to examine its findings and determine whether grounds exist for removing Dowling from office. This recommendation, rather than the findings themselves, carries practical significance: NSW does not remove a sitting DPP without substantial procedure, and any formal proceeding would need to meet an evidentiary standard beyond the committee's civil, majority-vote process.

Daley has rejected the report outright, calling it "a stitch-up from the outset" and describing it as "the worst… that I have seen in my nearly 21 years in parliament." His intervention is notable given that he appeared before the same Portfolio Committee No. 5 — Justice and Communities at a Budget Estimates hearing on 11 March 2026, part of the parliamentary record preceding the report. Dowling had earlier flagged to the committee in an April 2026 letter a separate criminal matter in which NSW Police believed an ODPP staff member had leaked information — evidence that leak concerns within her office extend beyond the 2GB episode.

The narrow 4-3 vote split warrants attention. A committee finding delivered by bare majority, on the credibility of a sitting DPP under oath, invites scrutiny of the process as much as the conclusion. This is likely why Daley's "stitch-up" characterisation has gained some currency. Top prosecutors have publicly supported Dowling following the report's release, suggesting the prosecutorial community's view does not align with the committee majority WAtoday.

What unfolds next depends on Daley, who as Attorney General has discretion over whether to establish the compulsory-powers inquiry the committee recommended. His public dismissal of the report suggests such a step is unlikely without additional political pressure. The underlying tension — between a parliamentary committee's civil findings and the higher standard of proof required to remove a statutory officer — will likely determine whether this matter advances toward Dowling's removal or remains a contested and unresolved episode in the ODPP's recent history.