Australian Fisheries Management Authority and Whish-Wilson (Freedom of information)

This matter concerned an application by Senator Peter Whish-Wilson to the Australian Fisheries Management Authority (AFMA) for access to documents relating to the fishing operations of the FV Geelong Star in the Small Pelagic Fishery during 2015, specifically seeking accounts of marine mammal deaths, including observer reports, location data, video, and photographs. AFMA initially refused access to ten documents, citing exemptions under sections 47, 47F, and 47G of the *Freedom of Information Act 1982* (Cth). Senator Whish-Wilson sought an Information Commissioner (IC) review of this decision, later revising his request to exclude certain personal information. AFMA then issued a revised decision, proposing to grant access with redactions to protect personal identification and proprietary information regarding fishing gear. Seafish Tasmania Pty Ltd, the operator of the FV Geelong Star, subsequently applied for an IC review of AFMA's revised decision, arguing for broader exemptions. The case came before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) for review.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether it had jurisdiction to review the Information Commissioner's decision, and whether it possessed the power to refuse access to a document to which access had already been granted. A further question arose regarding the Tribunal's ability to vary an access refusal decision under section 55G of the *Freedom of Information Act 1982* (Cth) when the revised decision did not grant full access to the requested documents. The Tribunal was required to determine the scope of its review powers in light of AFMA's evolving position and Seafish's objections.

The Tribunal determined that it did have jurisdiction to review the Information Commissioner's decision. It reasoned that the process initiated by Senator Whish-Wilson's application for IC review, and subsequently Seafish's application for IC review of AFMA's revised decision, fell within the Tribunal's remit. The Tribunal clarified that its power to review decisions under the *Freedom of Information Act 1982* (Cth) extended to situations where an agency, after an initial refusal, made a revised decision to grant access with redactions. The Tribunal affirmed its authority to consider the merits of exemption claims and to make its own determination on whether access should be granted, refused, or granted with modifications, even if an agency had previously indicated a willingness to provide some form of access. The Tribunal's reasoning underscored the principle that the ultimate decision on disclosure rests with the review body, ensuring that the objects of the Act are met.