OFFICIAL
Our Ref: LEX 3276
19 December 2024
ADS (Right to Know)
Email
: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx Dear ADS
Freedom of Information request
I refer to your request dated 26 October 2024 made under the
Freedom of Information Act 1982 (the
Act).
Attached at Annexure A to this letter is my decision and statement of reasons for that decision. A
schedule of documents identified as falling into the scope of your request is at Annexure B.
I have decided to publish the documents in part in respect of your request. Publication of the
documents will be made on the AFP website a
t https://www.afp.gov.au/about-us/information-
publication-scheme/routinely-requested-information-and-disclosure-log in accordance with
timeframes stipulated in section 11C of the Act.
Yours sincerely
Casey
FOI Team Leader - Corporate
Freedom of Information
Chief Counsel Portfolio
OFFICIAL
Freedom of Information
/ GPO Box 401 Canberra City ACT 2601
/ Email: xxx@xxx.xxx.xx
POLICING FOR A SAFER AUSTRALIA
ABN 17 864 931 143
afp.gov.au
OFFICIAL
ANNEXURE A
STATEMENT OF REASONS RELATING TO AN FOI REQUEST BY
ADS (RIGHT TO KNOW)
I, Casey, Team Leader, Freedom of Information, am an officer authorised under section 23 of the
Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Act) to make decisions in relation to the Australian Federal Police
(AFP). What follows is my decision and reasons for the decision in relation to your request.
A. BACKGROUND
1. On 26 October 2024, the AFP received your request in the following terms:
“Please provide all up to date internal policy and materials on the processes and decision
making to investigate or continue an investigation when a report of criminal activity is received
involving money laundering or the products or proceeds of crime.”
2. On 4 November 2024, you agreed to a 28 day extension of time pursuant to section 15AA of the
Act.
B. SEARCHES
1. Searches for documents were undertaken by Criminal Assets Confiscation (CAC) and National
Operations State Service Centre (NOSSC) as the business areas holding documents relevant to
your request.
C. WAIVER OF CHARGES
1. Given the request has totalled only 43 pages and was not a complex request to process, I am
waiving any further fees and charges which are normally associated with the processing of
applications under the Act.
D. EVIDENCE/MATERIAL ON WHICH MY FINDINGS WERE BASED
1. In reaching my decision, I have relied on the following:
(a) the scope of your request;
(b) the contents of the documents identified as relevant to the request;
(c) advice from AFP officers with responsibility for matters contained in the documents;
(d) the Act; and
(e) the guidelines issued by the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner under section
93A of the Act.
E. DECISION
1. I have identified four (4) documents relevant to your request.
2. I have decided to:
(a) release four (4) documents in part with deletions pursuant to sections 22(1)(a)(ii), 47E(c) and
47E(d) of the Act.
3. A schedule of each of document and details of my decision in relation to each document is at
Annexure B.
4. My reasons for this decision are set out below.
F. REASONS FOR DECISION
OFFICIAL
OFFICIAL
Material to which section 22(1)(a)(ii) applies:
1. Section 22 of the Act allows the AFP to grant access to an edited copy of a document that has
been modified by deletions to remove material that is either exempt or irrelevant to the request.
2. Parts of the documents contain information outside the scope of this request. Information
relating to reports of criminal activity that do not involve “money laundering or the products or
proceeds of crime” have been deemed exempt and are removed under this section due to
irrelevancy.
3. Accordingly, I find parts of the document would be reasonably regarded as irrelevant to the
request under section 22(1)(a)(ii) of the Act.
Material to which section 47E(c) applies:
4. Section 47E(c)
of the Act provides that:
“A document is conditionally exempt if its disclosure under this Act would, or could reasonably
be expected to, do any of the following:
…
(c)
have a substantial adverse effect on the management or assessment of
personnel by the Commonwealth, by Norfolk Island or by an agency.”
5. The FOI Guidelines at paragraph [6.103] state the following in respect of section 47E(c):
“For this conditional exemption to apply, the document must relate to either:
•
the management of personnel – including broader human resources policies and
activities, recruitment, promotion, compensation, discipline, harassment and work
health and safety
•
the assessment of personnel – including the broader performance management
policies and activities concerning competency, in-house training requirements,
appraisals and underperformance, counselling, feedback, assessment for bonus or
eligibility for progression.” (footnotes omitted).
6. Parts of the documents have been identified as being exempt under section 47E(c). This material
contains the names of AFP appointees below SES level.
7. The information I have identified as conditionally exempt could publicly identify staff not only as
working for the AFP, but their work location and activities. The public disclosure of this
information could expose those appointees to unwelcome behaviour from hostile actors. Law
enforcement employees have been a target of planned and actual attacks in Australia. AFP
appointees have also been the target of attempts to obtain information.
8. Publicly identifying a person as an AFP appointee could also compromise the ability of some to work
in operational areas which require them to have no public profile.
9. These risks are not far-fetched, and need to be considered in the context that information released
under FOI can be easily published online, and may widely available. On the basis that they present
risks to the health and safety, wel being, morale and career development of AFP appointees, I am
satisfied that release this information could have a substantial adverse effect on the management of
personnel within the AFP.
10. However, I must give access to this information unless, in the circumstances, access at this time
would be contrary to the public interest.
OFFICIAL
OFFICIAL
11. I have considered the following factors favouring disclosure:
(a)
the general public interest in access to documents as expressed in sections 3 and 11B of
the Act; and
(b)
the public interest in people being able to scrutinise the operations of a government
agency and in promoting governmental accountability and transparency.
12. I have considered the following factor against disclosure:
(c)
prejudice to the safety, welfare and morale of AFP personnel;
(d)
release may have a substantial adverse effect on the management of personnel in future.
13. Ultimately, while there is a public interest in providing access to documents held by the AFP,
consequently, I have given greater weight to factors (c) and (d) above, and conclude that on
balance, disclosure is not in the public interest. I consider the need to ensure the safety of AFP
personnel, and the AFP’s ability to support and manage its personnel weighs against disclosure.
14. Accordingly, I find those parts of the document identifying staff names are exempt under section
47E(c) of the Act.
Material to which section 47E(d) applies:
15. Section 47E(d) of the Act provides that:
“A document is conditionally exempt if its disclosure under this Act would, or could reasonably
be expected to, do any of the following:
…
(d)
have a substantial adverse effect on the proper and efficient conduct of the
operations of an agency;…”
16. The documents or parts of documents identified as exempt under this section of the Act contain
information, the release of which, would have a substantial adverse effect on the conduct of AFP
operations – specifically, the AFP’s expected functions as a law enforcement agency.
17. The AFP performs statutory functions relating to services by way of the prevention and
investigation of offences. The information identified as exempt under this section of the Act
provides details relevant to the AFP’s processes in detecting, investigating, preventing and
prosecuting criminal offending. I am of the view that disclosure of the information could
reasonably be expected to have a substantial adverse effect on the proper and efficient
performance of those functions.
18. Information that guides the AFP in deciding how to proceed when a report of crime is received
reveals protected processes that would compromise the proper functioning of the organisation.
These processes must be protected for the benefit of public safety and the efficiency of the AFP
as a crime-fighting organisation. In order for the AFP to safely and properly pursue and
investigate reports of crime, the detailed processes involved must remain undisclosed and secure
from public knowledge.
19. Further, information redacted under this section of the Act reveals internal AFP email addresses
and contact details. These contact details are not widely known (such as through government
directories or websites). They are not the established channels of communication with the
relevant agency established to ensure the efficient functioning its operations. To disclose this
information would impact on the AFP’s day to day operations by resulting in the diversion of AFP
resources to responding to unsolicited correspondence received through those points of contact.
In addition, public release of this information would expose the agency to diversion of external
OFFICIAL
OFFICIAL
enquiries and possible harassing or vexatious communication from the established
communication channels, thereby adversely impacting their agency operations.
20. However, I must give access to this information unless, in the circumstances, access at this time
would be contrary to the public interest.
21. I have considered the following factors favouring disclosure:
(a)
the general public interest in access to documents as expressed in sections 3 and 11B of
the Act; and
(b)
the public interest in people being able to scrutinise the operations of a government
agency and in promoting governmental accountability and transparency.
22. While it may be argued the release of this information would promote the objects of the Act,
scrutinise the operations of a government agency and promote government accountability and
transparency, I consider release would make only a minimal (if any) contribution to those public
interest factors.
23. On the other hand, I consider the prejudice to the agency operations and should be given greater
weight. I have considered the following factors against disclosure:
(c)
the need for the agency to maintain the confidentiality with regard to the subject matter
of information relating to the AFP’s procedures during an investigation;
(d)
the need for the agency to maintain the efficiency of current procedures;
(e)
that if information concerning internal contact details were revealed, it may have a
substantial adverse effect on the conduct of AFP operations in the future; and
(f)
if such information was disclosed, it would divert AFP resources from the proper conduct
of their expected operations.
24. While there is a public interest in providing access to documents held by the AFP, I have given
greater weight to factors (c) to (f) above and conclude that on balance, disclosure is not in the
public interest, given the need to ensure the effectiveness and integrity of current procedures
during police investigations and established communication channels. I find that release of the
documents or parts of the documents would be an unreasonable disclosure under section 47E(d)
of the Act.
***YOU SHOULD READ THIS GENERAL ADVICE IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE LEGISLATIVE
REQUIREMENTS IN THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 1982***
REVIEW AND COMPLAINT RIGHTS
If you are dissatisfied with a Freedom of Information decision made by the AFP, you can apply either for
internal review of the decision, or for a review by the Information Commissioner (IC). You do not have to
apply for internal review before seeking review by the IC.
For complaints about the AFP’s actions in processing your request, you do not need to seek review by
either the AFP or the IC in making your complaint.
REVIEW RIGHTS under Part VI of the Act
Internal review by the AFP
Section 54 of the FOI Act gives you the right to apply for internal review of this decision. No particular
form is required to make an application for internal review, however, an application needs to be made in
writing within 30 days of this decision. It would assist the independent AFP decision-maker responsible
OFFICIAL
OFFICIAL
for reviewing the file if you set out in the application, the grounds on which you consider the decision
should be reviewed.
Section 54B of the FOI Act provides that the internal review submission must be made within 30 days.
Applications may be sent by email
(xxx@xxx.xxx.xx) or addressed to:
Freedom of Information
Australian Federal Police
GPO Box 401
Canberra ACT 2601
REVIEW RIGHTS under Part VII of the Act Review by the Information Commissioner
Alternatively, section 54L of the FOI Act gives you the right to apply directly to the IC for review of this
decision. In making your application you wil need to provide an address for notices to be sent (this can
be an email address) and a copy of the AFP decision.
Section 54S of the FOI Act provides the timeframes for an IC review submission. For an
access refusal
decision covered by section 54L(2), the application must be made within 60 days. For an
access grant
decision covered by section 54M(2), the application must be made within 30 days.
Applications for IC review may be lodged by email
(xxxxx@xxxx.xxx.xx), using the OAIC’s online
application form (available a
t www.oaic.gov.au) or addressed to:
Office of the Australian Information Commissioner
GPO Box 5128
Sydney NSW 2001
The IC encourages parties to an IC review to resolve their dispute informal y, and to consider possible
compromises or alternative solutions to the dispute in this matter. The AFP would be pleased to assist
you in this regard.
Complaint
If you are unhappy with the way we have handled your FOI request, please let us know what we could
have done better. We may be able to rectify the problem. If you are not satisfied with our response, you
can make a complaint to the IC. A complaint may be lodged using the same methods identified above. It
would assist if you set out the action you consider should be investigated and your reasons or grounds.
More information about IC reviews and complaints is available on the OAIC’s website at
https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-information/reviews-and-complaints/.
OFFICIAL
ANNEXURE B
SCHEDULE OF DECISION – LEX 3276
RELEASE OF DOCUMENTS – ADS (RIGHT TO KNOW)
Document
Folio No
Author
Description
Decision
Exemption
No
1
1-3
Australian
CAC-CCC Terms of
Release in Part
Sections 22(1)(a)(ii) and 47E(d)
Federal Police
Reference
(AFP)
2
4-7
AFP
Criminal Assets
Release in Part
Section 47E(d)
Confiscation – Impact
Prioritisation Matrix
3
8-31
AFP
User Guide: Operational
Release in Part
Sections 22(1)(a)(ii), 47E(c) and 47E(d)
Prioritisation Model
Version 3.0
4
32-43
AFP
Better Practice Guide on
Release in Part
Sections 22(1)(a)(ii) and 47E(d)
Processing
Report/Requests within
the AFP
SCHEDULE OF DECISION – LEX 3276
1
Document Outline
