Source: https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-information/foi-archive/foi-guidelines-archive/part-11-complaints-and-investigations-v1-2
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 11:58:48
Document Index: 337418463

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 11', 'art 11', 'art 10', 'art 10', 'art 10', 'art 7']

Part 11 — Complaints and investigations (v1.2)| Office of the Australian Information Commissioner - OAIC
Part 11 — Complaints and investigations (v1.2)
Printable version186.97 KB
Version 1.2, October 2014
11.2 The Information Commissioner cannot investigate a minister's handling of FOI matters. A similar restriction applies to the Commonwealth Ombudsman.
11.3 The Information Commissioner may undertake an own motion investigation into an agency’s actions in performing its functions or exercising its powers under the FOI Act (s 69(2)). The investigation may look at a single agency decision or action, at a systemic problem or recurring pattern in an agency’s practices and processes in handling FOI matters, or at a practice or problem occurring in more than one agency. The issue to be investigated may come to the attention of the Commissioner as a result of an IC review, of a series of applications for IC review, or in some other way.
11.4 Any person may complain to the Information Commissioner (s 70(1)). A complaint must be in writing and identify the agency against which the complaint is made (s 70(2)). The Commissioner’s office must give ‘appropriate assistance’ to anyone who wishes to complain and needs help to formulate their complaint (s 70(3)). This need may arise, for example, if a person has language or literacy difficulties or otherwise needs assistance in ascertaining the scope of an agency’s FOI Act obligations and framing a complaint against the agency.
11.5 The Information Commissioner must investigate all complaints unless a qualification in the FOI Act applies (s 69(1)). The Commissioner's view is that it is usually better for a person to complain to the relevant agency first, so as to give the agency the opportunity to resolve the person’s concerns and provide an appropriate remedy. The Commissioner may decide not to investigate the matter on the basis that the person has a right to complain to another body (including the agency) and has not exercised that right when it would be reasonable to do so (s 73 (c)). Other examples of circumstances in which the Commissioner may decide not to investigate include where the matter has already been resolved by an agency, could be dealt with by IC review or should be transferred to the Commonwealth Ombudsman, or where the complaint is frivolous, misconceived or lacking in good faith (as discussed below at [11.7]). A decision not to investigate may relate to the whole of a complaint or to part of a complaint (s 71).
11.9 The Information Commissioner does not have the same power as the Commonwealth Ombudsman to decline to investigate a complaint that relates to action that occurred more than 12 months previously (see Ombudsman Act 1976 s 6(1)(a)). However, this is a matter that the Commissioner would take into account in formulating the investigation results following the completion of an investigation (see [11.35] below).
11.10 The Information Commissioner can decide not to investigate a matter as a complaint if the alternative of IC review is available (s 73(b) — see Part 10 of these Guidelines). The complaints process set out in Part VII B is primarily intended to deal with the manner in which agencies handle FOI requests and procedural compliance matters. Examples might include a complaint of unreasonable delay by an agency in making a decision on an FOI request; a complaint that an agency did not provide adequate assistance to an FOI applicant to frame a request; a complaint by a third party that an agency failed to consult with them before deciding to release a document; or a complaint alleging a conflict of interest by the decision maker.
11.11 It is open to the Information Commissioner to investigate a complaint about an FOI decision even though the complainant has a right to seek IC review of the decision under Part VII. The Commissioner’s view is that this path should not be chosen unless there is a special reason to undertake a complaint investigation and the matter can be dealt with appropriately and effectively in that manner. IC review will ordinarily be the more appropriate remedy for a person to seek review of the merits of an FOI decision, especially an access refusal or access grant decision.
11.12 If a complaint to the Information Commissioner raises numerous issues, some of which are appropriate for investigation and others for IC review, the Commissioner may advise the complainant to apply for IC review.
11.13 The Commonwealth Ombudsman retains authority to investigate under the Ombudsman Act a complaint about action taken by an agency under the FOI Act (s 89F). However, an amendment to the Ombudsman Act qualifies the Ombudsman’s discretion to deal with such complaints. Section 6C of that Act provides that the Ombudsman must consult with the Information Commissioner before deciding to investigate a complaint about a matter that is the subject of a completed investigation by the Commissioner, or that is or could be the subject of a complaint to the Commissioner and could be dealt with more appropriately or effectively by the Commissioner. The Ombudsman and the Commissioner must consult with a view to avoiding the same matter being investigated by both officers. If the Ombudsman decides not to investigate a complaint on this basis, the Ombudsman must transfer the complaint and all relevant documents and information to the Commissioner, and notify the complainant in writing (with reasons for the decision) (s 6C(3)). The Commissioner must then deal with the matter as a complaint under Part VII B of the FOI Act (s 6C(4)).
11.14 The Information Commissioner has a similar power to transfer a complaint (or part of a complaint) to the Ombudsman if the Commissioner is satisfied that it could be dealt with more effectively or appropriately by the Ombudsman (s 74). Two examples of such situations are given in the FOI Act (examples to s 74). One is where the complaint is about an IC review. The second example is where the complaint is only one part of a wider grievance about an agency’s actions. The Commissioner must consult with the Ombudsman to avoid any overlap in inquiries, and may decide not to investigate or continue an investigation after that consultation (s 74(2)). If the Commissioner decides not to investigate a complaint on this basis, the Commissioner must transfer the complaint and all relevant documents and information to the Ombudsman, and notify the complainant in writing (with reasons for the decision) (ss 74 (3), (4)).
11.15 If the Ombudsman has started to investigate a decision not to grant access to a document and the Attorney-General certifies that disclosure would be contrary to the public interest (Ombudsman Act s 9(3)(a), (c) or (d)), the Ombudsman’s right to seek reasons for the decision or require information about the decision is not affected (s 89H). A report by the Ombudsman on an investigation of agency action under the FOI Act must not include exempt matter or information about the existence or non-existence of a document that would be exempt under s 33, 37(1) or 45A (ss 89G and 25(1)).
11.16 The Information Commissioner must notify the agency where an investigation of a complaint or an own motion investigation is proposed (s 75(1)). Similarly, the Commissioner must give written notice (with reasons) to the agency and the complainant (if there is one) if the Commissioner decides not to investigate or continue to investigate (ss 75(2)–(4)).
11.17 The FOI Act sets out certain rules that apply to the conduct of the Information Commissioner’s complaint investigations and own motion investigations. The guiding principle is that an investigation shall be conducted in private and in the way the Commissioner considers fit (s 76(1)). The same principle applies to investigations conducted by the Commonwealth Ombudsman (Ombudsman Act s 8(2)).
11.18 The Information Commissioner may obtain information from an agency officer and make any inquiry relevant to an investigation (s 76(2)). The Commissioner also has specific compulsory powers (discussed below at [11.24]–[11.33]).
11.19 The Information Commissioner has a limited power to enter premises to carry on an investigation or to inspect documents on the premises. This could be done, for example, to inspect agency documents, or to investigate whether an agency conducted a proper search for documents.
11.20 An ‘authorised person’ may enter premises occupied by an agency, or premises occupied by a contracted service provider that are used predominantly for the purposes of a Commonwealth contract (ss 77(1), (2)). An ‘authorised person’ means an information officer (the Information Commissioner, the FOI Commissioner or the Privacy Commissioner, as defined in the Australian Information Commissioner Act 2010 ), or an APS employee at Executive Level 2 or above in the OAIC who has been authorised by the Information Commissioner (s 77(6)).
a restricted area declared under s 14 of the Defence (Special Undertakings) Act.
11.23 The Attorney-General may also prohibit entry to a place by declaration, if satisfied an investigation may prejudice the security or defence of the Commonwealth (ss 78(3),(4)). These requirements are consistent with the rules applying to the Ombudsman’s powers of entry for an investigation (Ombudsman Act ss 14(2), (3)).
11.25 Each of these powers is discussed below. The powers are the same as the Information Commissioner’s powers when conducting a review (ss 55R–55U, 55W–55X — see Part 10 of these Guidelines).
11.26 The Information Commissioner can by written notice require the production of information and documents in connection with an investigation (s 79). This power ensures the Commissioner can obtain all the material relevant to an investigation. Failure to comply with a production notice is an offence punishable by six months imprisonment (s 79(5)).
11.27 The Information Commissioner can take possession of the documents, make copies, take extracts and hold the documents as long as necessary for the investigation (s 80(1)). While the Commissioner holds the documents, the Commissioner must permit a person to exercise any right they otherwise have to inspect the documents (s 80(2)).
11.28 The Information Commissioner has the same power to require production of exempt documents in conducting investigations as in exercising the IC review function (s 81). The limitations that apply to the exercise of this power under the IC review function, including in relation to national security and cabinet documents, also apply to investigations. These include the requirements to return exempt documents and to ensure that they are not disclosed to people other than staff of the OAIC in the course of performing their duties. For more details about these limitations, see Part 10 of these Guidelines.
11.29 The Information Commissioner can by written notice require a person to attend to answer questions for the purposes of an investigation (ss 82(1), (2)). Failure to comply with a notice is an offence punishable by six months imprisonment (s 82(3)).
11.30 A person who appears before the Information Commissioner pursuant to a notice under s 82 can be required to take an oath or affirmation that their answers will be true (s 83(1), (2)). Refusing to take the oath or affirmation, refusing to answer a question or giving false testimony is an offence punishable by six months imprisonment (s 83(3)).
11.34 On completing an investigation, the Information Commissioner must provide a ‘notice on completion’ to the agency and to the complainant (if there is one) (s 86). The Commissioner’s notice must include the investigation results, the investigation recommendations (if any), and the reasons for those results and any recommendations (s 86(2)). A notice must not include exempt matter or information about the existence or non-existence of a document that would be exempt under s 33, 37(1) or 45A (ss 89C and 25(1)).
11.36 The agency may provide comments on the notice to the Information Commissioner (s 86(3)). The FOI Act does not detail a procedure the Commissioner is to follow upon receiving comments from an agency. Whether the Commissioner replies to the agency or takes further action will depend on the nature of the agency’s comments in responding to any opinions, conclusions or suggestions of the Commissioner in the notice on completion. If the notice included an investigation recommendation, the Commissioner will take the agency comments into account in deciding whether to take further action.
11.37 In addition to including opinions, conclusions or suggestions in a notice on completion, the Information Commissioner may also make ‘investigation recommendations’, which are ‘formal recommendations to the respondent agency that the Commissioner believes that the agency ought to implement’ (s 88). If the Commissioner is not satisfied that the agency has taken adequate and appropriate action to implement a formal recommendation, the Commissioner may issue a written ‘implementation notice’ requiring the agency to provide within a specified time particulars of any action the agency will take to implement the Commissioner’s recommendations (s 89).
11.38 The Information Commissioner may subsequently report to the minister responsible for the agency and the minister responsible for the FOI Act, if the Commissioner is not satisfied that the agency has taken adequate and appropriate action to implement the recommendations or has not responded to the implementation notice within the specified time (s 89A). The minister responsible for the FOI Act must table the report before each House of the Parliament (s 89A(5)). Section 89B prescribes the matters that must be addressed in a report to ministers, including the action that the Commissioner believes would be adequate and appropriate to implement the investigation recommendations. The report must not include exempt matter or information about the existence or non-existence of a document that would be exempt under s 33, 37(1) or 45A (ss 89C and 25(1)).
11.39 Under Part V of the FOI Act, a person has the right to apply for amendment or annotation of an incorrect record of personal information that is used by an agency for administrative purposes (see Part 7 of these Guidelines). As in an IC review, the Information Commissioner as part of an own motion investigation or complaint investigation can recommend that such incorrect records be amended, subject to certain limitations (s 89D). Similar limitations apply to the Ombudsman’s investigations (s 89J).