ARLC Criticised for ‘Overreacting’ to ‘Trump-esque’ Power Play

Former Wests Tigers chairman Lee Hagipantelis has described the ARL Commission’s recent move to grant itself the authority to impose charges on NRL players for on-field misdemeanours as ‘Trump-like’.

This new mandate allows the Commission to bypass the match review committee, enabling it to alter existing charges or even initiate new ones independently.

In a significant shift, ARLC representatives will now be integrated into the processes of the MRC. Detractors of this decision argue that it effectively grants the ARLC roles of judge, jury, and executioner.

Hagipantelis voiced his concerns, insisting the ARLC should remain uninvolved in the judicial proceedings.

“Initially, I found myself a bit perplexed – I wasn’t sure if we were discussing the ARL or the Trump administration, given its tendency to centralise power,” he remarked during an interview on SEN this Tuesday.

“Historically, there has always been a clear separation between the executive and judiciary. They should not intermingle.

“We’re witnessing a similar situation in America right now, where the Trump administration is exerting pressure on the judiciary. In contrast, the ARL should completely detach itself from any judicial role.

Catch the 2025 NRL premiership live and free on Nine and 9Now.

“I remain uncertain about what the underlying motivation for this move is.”

Criminal lawyer Paul McGirr, who successfully defended Viliame Kikau from a dangerous contact charge earlier this month, expressed his “significant concerns” regarding the decision while speaking to The Sydney Morning Herald.

“Using an analogy, it would be akin to having a superintendent or a commissioned officer within the police force approaching the prosecution and stating, ‘We want to pursue this case’,” he commented.

“And remember, the prosecution is still an arm of the police. How would the average person feel about their chances [of acquittal] in such a scenario?

“I want to clarify that I have the highest regard for [judiciary chair Geoff] Bellew and the panel, and I don’t imply any wrongdoing on their part.

“However, in legal circles, justice must not only be served, but also be perceived to be served.

“In my view, we are already witnessing excessive policing. From my limited experience with these cases, it appears the match review committee is overly cautious, penalising players who realistically should not be penalised.”