SA Police issued a statement to InDaily a short time ago disclosing the results of a confidential internal investigation it conducted into Fellows.

Fellows has oversight of SA Police’s Licensing Enforcement Branch (LEB), which in July 2022 supported a Stadium Management Authority (SMA) application to vary its liquor license so it could sell alcohol in aluminium cans.

In March, SA-Best MLC Frank Pangallo accused Fellows under parliamentary privilege of having “obvious conflicts” in SA Police’s decision to agree to the SMA’s application.

Pangallo claimed the conflict of interest arose because Fellows was also deputy chair of the Adelaide Football Club, which “stood to benefit financially from increased revenue from liquor sales”.

In response to Pangallo’s claims, Police Minister Joe Szakacs disclosed in Hansard on May 30 that Fellows was under a confidential internal police investigation to establish whether she had a conflict of interest.

Today, SA Police said its Internal Investigation Section had completed its investigation and made “no finding of misconduct related to this matter”.

Police also said their investigation had now been reviewed by the Office of Public Integrity, which determined “no further action is required”.

“In accordance with the Police Complaints and Discipline Act 2016 (‘the PCDA’) a complaint was made, and the circumstances were assessed by SAPOL’s Internal Investigation Section (IIS),” police said.

“This assessment was referred to the Office for Public Integrity (OPI) who have independent oversight for all police complaints.

“SAPOL has been notified by OPI that their review is now complete and no further action is required.

“There was no finding of misconduct related to this matter. The matter is now filed.”

Section 45 of the PCDA prohibits disclosure of information connected with investigations into police complaints unless authorised by the Police Commissioner, Independent Commission Against Corruption or Office of Public Integrity.

Maximum penalties of $2500 or six months jail are in place for illegal disclosure, meaning the results of most internal police complaint investigations are kept secret.

SA Police said Acting Police Commissioner Linda Williams had chosen to make the results of the Fellows investigation public due to unique circumstances.

“Ordinarily, outcome of assessments made under the PCDA are not made public, however given the circumstances of this particular matter, the Acting Commissioner has considered it is in the public interest to report the outcome of this assessment,” police said.

“For the avoidance of doubt, pursuant to s.46 of the PCDA the Acting Commissioner has authorised publication of the information contained in this statement.”

SA Police has previously said that the decision not to oppose beer cans at Adelaide Oval was “solely” made by the officer in charge of the Licensing Enforcement Branch, Chief Inspector Greg Hutchins.

A spokesperson for the OPI confirmed that it had not chosen to change the outcome of SA Police’s internal investigation.

“The OPI reviewed the assessment by the IIS of the complaint about Assistant Commissioner Linda Fellows within the legislated 3 business day timeframe allowed by the Act,” the OPI spokesperson said.

“The OPI determined not to exercise its power under the Act to reassess the complaint or substitute an assessment.”

The OPI did not clarify when its review was completed.

The 12-month trial of aluminium cans at Adelaide Oval has three months left to run. An Adelaide Oval spokesperson on Wednesday said there have been “no reported adverse behavioural incidents involving cans” to date.