13 January 2025
Our reference: EACTFOI-20241104-02

Ty Wilson-Brown
Via email: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx

Dear Ty Wilson-Brown
Freedom of Information Access Application:
Vote secrecy in the 2024 ACT Election
I refer to your access application made under the Freedom of Information Act 2016 (FOI
Act), received by Elections ACT on 4 November 2024.
Your application requested access to:
“…documents, including correspondence, held by the Commission in relation to
vote secrecy in the 2024 legislative assembly election.
The specific documents I request are:
-  Documents relied upon by the commissioner to determine that Computer
Programs used for the 2024 election satisfy the requirements of the Electoral
Act: "the program wil … not allow a person to find out how a particular elector
cast his or her vote".
-  Discussion, analysis, and responses to any vote secrecy issues discovered in
any versions of 2024 election systems.”
Authority
I am an information officer appointed by the ACT Electoral Commissioner to make
decisions about access to government information held by Elections ACT, in accordance
with section 18 of the FOI Act.
Under section 40(1) of the FOI Act, we must respond to your application within 30
working days of receipt. Section 40(2) provides for an additional 15 working days to allow
us to consult with third parties. On 9 December 2024 we advised you that we were
consulting with third parties, and therefore a decision on your access application must be
made on or by 14 January 2024.

— 2 —
Decision
I have identified five documents containing information within the scope of your access
application. These are outlined in the attached Schedule of documents.
I have decided to:
  grant partial access to four documents
  refuse access to one document.
Under section 35(1)(c) of the FOI Act, I have refused access to some of the information
that you have requested. This is because it is contrary to the public interest information.
The reasons are outlined in the attached Reasons for decision.
Copies of partially released documents are attached. In accordance with section 50 of the
FOI Act, redactions have been applied to information that is contrary to the public interest
to disclose.
Online publishing – Disclosure Log
Under section 28 of the Act, Elections ACT maintains an online record of access
applications cal ed a disclosure log. Your original access application and my decision wil
be published on our disclosure log at
https://www.elections.act.gov.au/about-the-commission/freedom-of-information
Your personal details wil  not be published.
Review options
Decisions on access requests are reviewable decisions as identified in schedule 3 of the
Act. You have the right to seek Ombudsman review of this outcome under section 73 of
the Act within 20 working days from the day that a decision is provided to you, or a
longer period allowed by the Ombudsman.
For more information and the application form for Ombudsman review, please visit:
https://www.ombudsman.act.gov.au/accountability-and-oversight/freedom-of-
information/foi-complaints-and-reviews
Alternatively, you may write to the ACT Ombudsman at:
GPO Box 442. CANBERRA ACT 2601
Or via email: xxxxxx@xxxxxxxxx.xxx.xx
Under section 84 of the Act, if a decision is made under section 82(1) on an Ombudsman
review, you may apply to the ACT Civil and Administrative Tribunal (ACAT) for review of
the Ombudsman decision.
Further information may be obtained from the ACAT at:
ACT Civil and Administrative Tribunal
GPO Box 370
CANBERRA CITY ACT 2601
Telephone: (02) 6207 1740
www.acat.act.gov.au/

— 3 —
Further information
If you have any queries concerning our processing of your request, or would like further
information, please contact xxxxxxxxx@xxx.xxx.xx or cal (02) 6205 0033.
Yours sincerely

Ro Spence
Information Officer
Deputy Electoral Commissioner
ACT Electoral Commission

— 4 —
Reasons for decision
What you requested
“…documents, including correspondence, held by the Commission in relation to vote
secrecy in the 2024 legislative assembly election.
The specific documents I request are:
-  Documents relied upon by the commissioner to determine that Computer Programs
used for the 2024 election satisfy the requirements of the Electoral Act: "the program
wil … not allow a person to find out how a particular elector cast his or her vote".
-  Discussion, analysis, and responses to any vote secrecy issues discovered in any
versions of 2024 election systems.”
Summary of my decision
I have decided to:
  grant partial access to four documents
  refuse access to one document.
What I took into account
In reaching my decision, I took into account:
  your access application dated 4 November 2024
  the documents containing the information that falls within the scope of your access
application
  consultation with third party or parties about information concerning them
  the Human Rights Act 2004
  the FOI Act
  the Commonwealth FOI Guidelines
  the ACT Ombudsman FOI Guidelines.
Reasons for my decision
I am authorised to make decisions under section 18 of the FOI Act. As a decision maker, I
am required to determine whether the information within scope is in the public interest to
release. To make this decision, I am required to:
  assess whether the information would be contrary to public interest to disclose as per
Schedule 1 of the Act
  perform the public interest test as set out in section 17 of the Act by balancing the
factors favouring disclosure and factors favouring non-disclosure in Schedule 2 of the
Act.

— 5 —
Schedule 1
I have decided that one document contains information that is contrary to the public
interest to disclose under Schedule 1 of the FOI Act.
  Schedule 1, 1.13(1) – Information the disclosure of which would, or could reasonably
be expected to damage the security of the Commonwealth, the Territory or a State.
Elections ACT has met with the Electoral Assurance Integrity Taskforce (EIAT). The EIAT
is made up of relevant agencies across the Federal Government and works col ectively to
provide information and advice to the Australian Electoral Commission on matters that
may compromise the integrity of federal electoral events. Agencies include the Australian
Federal Police, Australian Security Intel igence Organisation, Australian Signal Directorate,
AUSTRAC, Office of National Intel igence, and other federal agencies.
One document relevant to your application contains information about the work of the
EIAT and of its associated agencies. In relation to national security issues, the
Commonwealth FOI Guidelines refer decision makers to ‘mosaic theory’:
“This theory holds that individually harmless pieces of information, when combined
with other pieces of information, can generate a composite — a mosaic — that can
damage Australia’s national security, defence or international relations.”
https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-information/freedom-of-information-
guidance-for-government-agencies/foi-guidelines/part-5-exemptions
Information held by Elections ACT is not subject to the Commonwealth FOI provisions,
however the Commonwealth FOI guidelines provide relevant guidance on factors to
consider when assessing release of Commonwealth information. I am of the view that this
document, if released, could be pieced together with other sources of information to
cause harm to the security of the Commonwealth. On this basis I am satisfied that release
of this document could reasonably be expected to damage the security of the
Commonwealth.
  Schedule 1, 1.14(1)(c) – Information the disclosure of which would, or could
reasonably be expected to endanger a person’s life or physical safety.
Further, the document contains information about officers of EIAT member agencies. Due
to the nature of their work, members of security agencies may be subject to increased
risk of harassment or threats to their safety. It is my view that the information if
disclosed, could reasonably be expected to result in a threat to a person’s life or physical
safety.
Schedule 2
I have decided that some parts of documents that contain the information you requested
contain information that would, on balance, be contrary to the public interest to disclose
under the test set out in section 17 of the FOI Act.
I have identified that the fol owing factors are relevant to determine if release of the
information contained within these documents is within the public interest.
Factors favouring disclosure under Schedule 2 of the Act
  Schedule 2, 2.1(a)(vi i) – reveal the reason for a government decision and any
background or contextual information that informed the decision.

— 6 —
Factors favouring nondisclosure under Schedule 2 of the Act
  Schedule 2, 2.2(a)(i ) – prejudice the protection of an individual’s right to privacy or
any other right under the Human Rights Act 2004.
Documents relevant to your application contain personal information of individuals,
including names, mobile phone numbers, and email addresses. I have considered how the
public interest would be advanced by releasing this information in part or in whole. It is
my view that the information if disclosed, could reasonably be expected to prejudice the
protection of an individual’s right to privacy under the Human Rights Act 2004.
Considering the type of information to be withheld from release, I am satisfied that the
factors in favour of release can stil  be met while protecting the personal information of
the individuals involved. On balance, and the information available to me, I am satisfied
that the disclosure of this personal information is not in the public interest.
Having applied the test outlined in section 17 of the Act and deciding that release of
personal information contained in the documents is not in the public interest to release, I
have chosen to redact this specific information in accordance with section 50(2). Noting
the pro-disclosure intent of the Act, I am satisfied that redacting only the information that
I believe is not in the public interest to release wil  ensure that the intent of the Act is
met.

Document Outline