Content area
Full text
Introduction
Preventing fraud is of widespread interest to investors, business owners, auditing professionals and the public at large. White collar and management fraud leaves a costly mark on individuals and on economies taken as a whole. Even in New Zealand, considered to have a reasonably low level of fraud, costs to business run to well over $40 million a year; a statistic that only considers prosecuted cases (Tan, 2010).
The New Zealand Serious Fraud Office (SFO) is the government agency charged with investigating and prosecuting such fraud. SFO investigations into white‐collar fraud are often highly profile and are usually rigorously defended by the well‐financed suspects that tend to be charged (Bradshaw, 2006). SFO members may, therefore, find themselves caught between obtaining evidence against fraudsters and concurrently defending their own ability and authority to do so. With the 2007 introduction of a bill that would dissolve the SFO and refer white‐collar crime to a less‐empowered police investigations unit, a major change to that agency and to that authority is posed. The purpose of this study is to evaluate threats of SFO dissolution as conveyed in the public press. The contribution is in forming an understanding of these media patterns and what they say about institutional change within the SFO. In particular, and through the lens of press perspectives, it may be possible to discern patterns of institutional norming, diffusion or internal actions of change deriving from the deinstitutionalization threats faced by the SFO.
Background
The SFO, a New Zealand government department, was established in 1990 under the Serious Fraud Act. It draws on the expertise of 33‐38 employees – forensic accountants, police‐trained investigators and lawyers – to investigate complaints of white‐collar fraud. It was formed in response to crimes uncovered during and after the 1987 New Zealand share market crash (“Explanatory Note”, SFO (Abolition and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2008, 2008) (the Bill). The SFO was seen to be a vehicle to regain business confidence in the New Zealand stock exchange and was central to post‐crash law reform.
SFO members are charged with investigating complaints of large frauds (usually over $500,000 (New Zealand Herald, 2009), cases of public interest and/or complex financial frauds. The SFO Director has, under statute, the authority to require suspects to provide documentation...