Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) Chair Joe Longo has rebutted an interim Senate report criticising the regulator’s enforcement record and rejected lawmakers’ claims that it was “obstructing” the ongoing inquiry into the regulator. 

“Enforcement is at the heart of what we do,” Mr Longo said on Friday in his opening statement before the Senate Economics References Committee. 

“It would be hard to find a day when ASIC is not in a State or Federal Court somewhere in the country… we entirely reject assertions that ASIC is a weak corporate regulator. On the contrary, we have been, and continue to be, an active and effective litigator.” 

He told the committee that over the past three years the regulator has commenced more than 125 criminal actions that led to 92 criminal convictions and 39 custodial sentences.  

He says the criminal proceedings have resulted more than $2 million in fines. In the same period ASIC commenced close to 200 civil actions, resulting in over 130 successful civil claims and more than $500 million in penalties imposed by the courts. 

Mr Longo appeared before the Senate Economics References Committee after it released an interim report as part of an ongoing inquiry into the capacity and capability of the regulator to undertake proportionate investigation and enforcement action arising from reports of alleged misconduct. 

The interim report says since the inquiry was referred in October last year, the committee has placed a series of questions on notice with ASIC that focus on various investigation and enforcement matters and the referral of the inquiry. 

To date the committee has placed 109 questions on notice with ASIC and the regulator has provided responses to 104 of the questions posed. 

The report says ASIC has refused to provide answers to some questions with Mr Longo making 13 public interest immunity claims. 

“The committee is concerned by ASIC’s behaviour in relation to the commencement of this inquiry,” the report says. 

“Rather than engaging with the committee in a transparent and accountable manner, from the outset ASIC has chosen to attempt to undermine and influence the process of the inquiry before evidence had been gathered or hearings held.” 

The committee says it “only seeks to understand matters relating to closed cases” and is not interested in pursuing the records of open investigations. 

“Accordingly, the committee has accepted ASIC’s claims of public interest immunity where questions on notice have related to open ASIC investigations and has only pursued questions where ASIC has confirmed that a matter is closed,” the report says. 

But Mr Longo said information about closed investigations can still prejudice ASIC’s related and future investigations. 

“It can disclose ASIC's methods and legal advice, and also adversely impact people who have assisted ASIC and, of course, unfairly prejudice people who’ve been the subject of our investigations. 

“ASIC is a law enforcement agency. And as a law enforcement agency like the AFP, the ATO and other agencies—there are limits on what documents we can share.” 

Click here for the interim report.