From what I can pick up, the AFL "independent' review is the only review being conducted. At the very least, it the only one really in the public spotlight.
Can someone explain to me why that's even acceptable, from a legal or government standpoint?
Shouldn't the review be completed by a higher body? Work Safe or the actual legal courts or a government inquiry team, not just a bunch of people that the AFL selected and paid for?
The AFL is an overarching company, with the individual clubs essentially the franchisees of that company.
If the same allegations were made against a Coles store (and were publicised to a similar extent), would the Head Huncho's over at Wesfarmers HQ be allowed to run their own "independent" review and then call the case closed? No. Work Safe would. Or one of the numerous layers of the Australian courts or somesuch.
What about a mining (or even worse: an oil and gas) company? Would the media, the general population, the government and the victims (the alleged victims at that point) be OK with that same company organising & paying for an "independent" review, and then call the case closed? Nope.
Or maybe thats exactly what does happen, and I just don't hear about it because the AFL is more high profile. Maybe I'm the one with my head in the sand and full of delusional fantacies. (Like that belief that every year for the last couple of decades pops up around now and lasts though to ~March that "this is the year" Freo wins the flag)