Records of discussions of ADRVP members relating to Essendon players
Dear Anti Doping Rule Violation Panel,
I would appreciate copies of records of ADRVP member discussions and meetings between ADRVP members and contact of ADRVP members with other persons in relation to the decision to place 34 Essendon players on the Register of Findings.
Yours faithfully,
Joan Hird
joan.hird@gmail,com
Dear Ms Hird,
Please see the attached correspondence in relation to your request for
access to documents under the Freedom of Information Act 1982.
Kind regards,
Pat
Dear Ms Hird,
Freedom of Information Request No.16-9
I refer to your request for access to documents relating to the ADRVP
under the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (FOI Act).
I note that in my correspondence of 12 May 2016 I referred to ASADA being
the appropriate authority to respond to the request and to make a decision
on the release of the documents. Whilst this may still be the case, it
would be appropriate for ASADA to confirm with the Office of the
Australian Information Commissioner (the OAIC) that this is correct prior
to proceeding.
Our intention is to ensure that a decision is made properly and by the
appropriate person.
A decision is currently due to you by Tuesday 7 June 2016. In order to
allow for ASADA to seek this advice from the OAIC would you consent to a
14 day extension of time to process this decision? This would make the due
date for this decision Tuesday 21 June 2016.
Kind regards,
Pat
Patrick Dale
Lawyer
Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority
T +61 (0) 2 6222 4259
F +61 (0) 2 6222 4359
E [1][email address]
W [2]www.asada.gov.au
Dear Mr Dale
Thank you for your message of 23 May 2016.
I am agreeable to an extension of the deadline for responding.
Yours sincerely,
Joan Hird
Joan Hird left an annotation ()
I have agreed to an extension of the deadline pending ASADA clarification with the Information Commissioner whether ASADA or the ADVRP should respond.
Dear Ms Hird,
Thank you for your prompt response to my request. I have notified the
Office of the Australia Information Commissioner of the agreed upon
extension and will endeavour to let you know the outcome of our
discussions with them as soon as possible.
Kind regards,
Pat
Patrick Dale
Lawyer
Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority
T +61 (0) 2 6222 4259
F +61 (0) 2 6222 4359
E [1][email address]
W [2]www.asada.gov.au
Dear Ms Hird,
Please see the attached correspondence in relation to your request for
access to documents under the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Cth). I
have also attached those documents released in accordance with that
decision.
Please let me know if you have any further queries about this request.
Kind regards,
Pat
Patrick Dale
Lawyer
Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority
T +61 (0) 2 6222 4259
F +61 (0) 2 6222 4359
E [1][email address]
W [2]www.asada.gov.au
"Important: This transmission is intended only for the use of the
addressee and may contain Protected, confidential or legally privileged
information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that
any use or dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
you receive this transmission in error please notify the author
immediately and delete all copies of this transmission."
References
Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
2. http://www.asada.gov.au/
Dear Legal,
I refer to the letter of 21 June 2016 from Judith Lind,
I thank her for the letter and attachments. Those attachments relate to minutes of 3 November 2014 and constitute a record of decisions as an outcome of discussions.
They do not constitute a record of discussions of the ADRVP, as per my FOI request and as cited in the letter of 21 June.
The letter of 21 June and attachments do dot comply with my FOI request.
Could you please therefore respond to my FOI request in full by the FOI prescribed date.
.
Yours sincerely,
Joan Hird
Dear Ms Hird,
The only documents identified as being within the scope of your request are those outlined in the decision letter of 21 June 2016.
Should you be dissatisfied with the decision I refer you to your review rights as outlined in the decision letter.
Kind regards,
Pat
Patrick Dale
Lawyer
Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority
T +61 (0) 2 6222 4259
F +61 (0) 2 6222 4359
E [email address]
W www.asada.gov.au
Dear Legal,
Thank you for your letter of 23 June 2016 in reply to my letter of the same date.
Could you please confirm that there are no records of discussions between ADRVP members and with other persons in relation to the decision to place 34 Essendon players on the Register of Findings, other than those provided to me under cover of the letter of 21 June from Judith Lind?
Yours sincerely,
Joan Hird
Dear Ms Hird,
As noted in your correspondence of 23 June 2016, your request for access
to documents included ‘copies of records of ADRVP member discussions and
meetings between ADRVP members with other persons in relation to the
decision to place 34 Essendon players on the Register of Findings’. All
documents identified as falling within that category have been provided to
you.
Kind regards,
Pat
Patrick Dale
Lawyer
Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority
T +61 (0) 2 6222 4259
F +61 (0) 2 6222 4359
E [1][email address]
W [2]www.asada.gov.au
Dear Legal,
Thank you for your letter of 23 June.
My letter to you of 23 June. raised a question of fact in relation to my request for copies of records of discussions of ADRVP members In relation to the decision to place 34 Essendon players on the Register of Findings. . .
Could you please respond to that question of fact with a factual response , whether or not there are no records other than those you have provided to me.
Yours sincerely,
Joan Hird
Dear Legal,
Thank you for you letter of 24 June 2016 in response to my letter of 23 June.
In that letter, I raised a factual question, whether or not there are records of discussions other than those provided to me .
Could you please provide a factual response to that question.
Yours sincerely,
Joan Hird
Joan Hird left an annotation ()
ASADA has provided a copy of the ADRVP decision, nothing else. In response, I asked whetheer there were any revords of discussions. ASADA then advised that the documents provided were the only documents identified as coming within the scope of my request. I have sent a follow up asking ASADA to respond to my question of fact whether there are any other records of discussions. it beggars belief that there are are no other records. it is my understanding that, if ASADA is not prepared to release such records, it must give a reason which conforms with the provisions of the FOI Act.
Dear Anti Doping Rule Violation Panel,
Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.
I am writing to request an internal review of ASADA's response to my FOI request to the Anti Doping Rule Violation Panel for records of discussions between ADRVP members and with other persons in relation to placing Essendon players on the Register of Findings.
By agreement with ASADA, the date for response was rescheduled to 27 June.
Prior to that date, I was provided with documents of one meeting recording the decision.
I have requested ASADA to provide other records. in response , ASADA advised that the documents provided were those identified as coming within the scope of my request.
ASADA has not responded to my question of fact whether other records are in existence.
It is my understanding that if other records exist, ASADA is required under FOI legislation to provide those records, or to cite an FOI exemption for refusal to provide records in existence.
A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/r...
Yours faithfully,
Joan Hird
Dear Ms Hird,
I confirm ASADA has received your request for an internal review as per your email below.
We received your request on 28 June 2016 and the 30 statutory period for processing your request commences from tomorrow. You should therefore expect a decision from us by 28 July 2016.
If you have any questions in relation to your request for a review please contact:
Kate Corkery
Senior Lawyer
[Anti Doping Rule Violation Panel request email]
Kind regards
Kate
Dear Ms Hird,
Please find attached the decision letter arising out of your request for internal review on 28 June 2016.
Kind regards
Kate
Mr Ben McDevitt AM APM
Chief Executive Officer
ASADA
Dear Mr McDevitt
Re internal Review under FOI Act
Thank you for your letter of 13 July 2016 in response to my request for an internal review.
Your letter misconstrues two important facts.
First, the documents provided to me do not constitute records of discussions, rather they are documents recording decisions.
Second, a plain reading of my FOI request establishes that the FOI request is not limited to material which might be available to the original FOI decision maker, or to documents held by ADRVP members. My request covers all documents of discussions irrespective of authorship and wherever/however held by ASADA .
it is my understanding that if such documents are in existence and are held by any ASADA official or form part of ASADA records, they are subject to the FOI Act,
My previous question of fact in that respect to ASADA has gone unanswered.
I would therefore be grateful if you could consult further with officers in your agency - including officers engaged in discussions with the ADRVP - as to the existence of records and respond to me within a reasonable time.
Yours sincerely,
Joan Hird
Dear Ms Hird,
The FOI Act only applies to information held in the form of a document. The definition of a ‘document’ in the FOI Act includes:
•any paper or other material on which there is writing or a mark, figure or symbol;
•electronically-stored information;
•maps, plans, drawings and photographs;
•any article from which sounds, images or writing are capable of being produced.
Agencies are not required to create a new document containing the information that is sought.
In order to reach a correct and preferable decision on your internal review request Mr McDevitt relied on record searches and consultation undertaken by the original decision maker. He also required that additional consultation be undertaken as a part of the internal review and the outcome of this consultation was set out in your decision letter.
ASADA and the Anti-Doping Rule Violation Panel have responded to your original request and your request for internal review and have released to you under the FOI Act all the documents that are in the scope of your request.
If you are unhappy with the decision under the FOI Act, you can request that the Australian Information Commissioner (Information Commissioner) review the decision.
Information on the FOI review process can be found at https://www.oaic.gov.au/freedom-of-infor....
Kind regards
Kate
Dear Legal,
Thank you for your letter of 18 July 3026.
Could you please respond to my question - with a yes or no - whether there are any ASADA documented records of disccussions held by ASADA other than the records of decisions you have supplied to me.
Yours sincerely,
Joan Hird
Dear Ms Hird,
It is not possible to give you a definitive yes or no answer to your question, nor is it appropriate to do so. You have made a request under the FOI Act for documents. ASADA has processed this request on behalf of the Anti-Doping Rule Violation Panel. In processing this request originally the documents (ultimately released in full) were identified through consultation with the secretariat of the Anti-Doping Rule Violation Panel and with the Panel itself.
In processing the internal review request ASADA consulted with all appointed members of the Anti-Doping Rule Violation Panel [on 3 November 2014] by asking them whether they held any documents which are records of discussions between ADRVP members and with other persons in relation to placing Essendon players on the Register of Findings. We advised the Panel members that examples of documents may include diary entries, notes etc. Each of the members of the Panel confirmed that they did not hold any documents. ASADA does not expect that there would be any additional documents within the scope of your request, however documents may exist that we have been unable to locate.
All reasonable searches have been made and consultation with all relevant persons was undertaken during the processing of your request. Accordingly, we have done all that is reasonable and practical under the FOI to respond to your request for documents.
Kind regards
Kate
Dear Legal,
Thank you for your letter of 19 July 2016.
Could you please clarify whether, in conducting the internal review, the secretariat to the Panel was consulted as to the existence of documents other than those provided to me. I find it puzzling that no records of discussions were established or maintained, including the minutes of meetings of the Panel additional to that of 3 November. Was that the only meeting of the Panel?
Also, if I had made my request directly to ASADA, would I have received a different response?
Yours sincerely,
Joan Hird
Dear Ms Hird,
1. The ADRVP secretariat was consulted during the original processing of your request. The CEO relied on this consultation during the internal review as there was no need to duplicate the same consultation.
2. There was only one meeting of the ADRVP in relation to the decision to place 34 Essendon players on the Register of Findings.
3. If you had made your request to ASADA it would have been processed in the same way and there is no reason to believe that the outcome would have been different.
ASADA has continued to respond to your ongoing enquiries in relation to this matter beyond the requirements of the FOI Act.
ASADA and the ADRVP now consider this matter closed and will not be responding to further enquiries in relation to it.
We restate your right to review is with the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner as set out in the internal review decision letter dated 13 July 2016.
Kind regards
Kate
Joan Hird left an annotation ()
I have been advised that the request has been directed to ASADA as the responsible authority. Under FOI rules, a response is due on 7 June. Otherwise, I am yet to have a response.