Leigh and Australian Federal Police (Freedom of information)

This matter concerned an application by Dr Andrew Leigh MP to the Australian Federal Police (AFP) for access to documents relating to an unauthorised leak of an Office of National Assessments report and the subsequent AFP investigation. The AFP initially indicated a practical refusal reason due to the substantial resources required to process the request. Dr Leigh subsequently narrowed his request to focus on final reports and outcome letters. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) was required to determine whether certain personal information within an AFP report was exempt from disclosure under the *Freedom of Information Act 1982* (Cth).

The primary legal issues before the AAT were whether the disclosure of the names of former staff of the Minister for Foreign Affairs, contained within an AFP post-operational assessment report, would constitute an unreasonable disclosure of personal information under section 47F of the *Freedom of Information Act 1982* (Cth), and whether such disclosure would be contrary to the public interest. The applicant also sought to rely on parliamentary proceedings and media references to those proceedings, raising a question about whether such reliance would invite inferences contrary to section 16(3)(c) of the *Parliamentary Privileges Act 1987* (Cth).

The AAT reasoned that while the staff interviewed would have had an expectation of confidentiality, disclosing their names in the context of the redacted report would not involve an unreasonable disclosure of personal information. This was because the report concluded there was no direct evidence of their involvement in the leak, nor did it suggest they came under unfavourable police attention; they were interviewed in the performance of their usual duties. Consequently, the AAT found that the information about these staff members, when considered as a whole within the redacted report, was not prejudicial and they would suffer little or no detriment from disclosure. The Tribunal also determined that the applicant could not rely on parliamentary proceedings or media references.

The AAT varied the AFP's decision, ordering that the names of the interviewed staff on page 5 of the AFP's post-operational assessment report would not involve an unreasonable disclosure of personal information. Dr Leigh was to be given access to a copy of that page, modified under section 22 of the *Freedom of Information Act 1982* (Cth) by the deletion of exempt and irrelevant material, but with the names of the interviewed staff included. The decision was ordered not to come into operation for 28 days to allow the AFP an opportunity to consider an appeal.