I wish to present an incident that has occurred with regard to the production of some FOI documents by the Department of Education. In December 2007 an FOI application was put before the Administrative Decisions Tribunal (ADT). The Judiciary member at the DET noted that the application had originally been lodged in July 2007 and that the DET had not provided the documents or responded to our internal review request. They had been mucking us around. Unfortunately as a result of that I had lodged the ADT application a little late within the time frame so the Judiciary Member said that it would be best for us to file a new FOI application as otherwise the DET could say that the ADT didn't have the power to hear the matter if the matter necessitated going to hearing. (FOI-07-099 then FOI-07-395)
It was also a fact that at a previous hearing at the ADT in 2003 the Department of Education made some formal agreements that they would provide access to certain test papers and documents and following that there would be a meeting with the Selective Schools Unit to discuss processes, discrepancies and issues. To date the Department of Education has not honoured these agreements made at the ADT. A fresh FOI application was therefore lodged so as to ensure that the DET would be forced to honour the agreements they made at the ADT. (FOI-07-384)
In late December 2007 we were advised by the DET that a new FOI officer was handling the matters in FOI unit of the DET. When I spoke to the new FOI officer in early January she advised me that she had a lot of work on her plate and that she would try to get the documents to me by the required time-frame. At that point she informed me that she had been rostered off for a week in January. This concerned me as firstly she had only just started and secondly I have been making allegations of bias, manipulation and tampering of documents and conspiracy to cover up against the Department of Education for years so I sent this email to the FOI officer.
SENT: Friday, 4 January 2008 2:18:54 PM Subject RE: FOI Documents
Further to our telephone conversation I advise that I am somewhat concerned about your advice to me that you are rostered of for a week in January.
Given that my family are making formal allegations of a conspiracy to cover up bias, bullying, tampering, manipulation and misconduct by DET staff in various Departments, your absence is of a concern to us as your absence would give ample opportunity for another to access the documents and change or prepare information.
I would request that we be afforded procedural fairness with regard to the processing of these FOI applications. We have made serious allegations against Departmental staff that have never been investigated or addressed and we believe that it is inappropriate to allow these persons access to the documents, or to request these persons prepare the documents about matters pertaining to them.
We seek your assurances that the documents will be held in safe keeping during your absence and that the special circumstances in this matter be taken into consideration with a view to affording our family procedural fairness and natural justice.
I await hearing from you. Jolanda Challita.
This email was responded by the FOI Unit as follows: Sent: Tuesday, January 8, 2008 - 11:35 AM.
Dear Mrs Challita. I refer to your email below. I am taking leave for the period 14 to 21 January 2008.
I currently have custody of a number of documents provided by various units within the Department in response to your earlier application FOI-07-099 (withdrawn at ADT 17/12/07). From my preliminary examination these documents are caught by your current application FOI-07-395.
These documents will be retained securely in my office at Level 7, 35 Bridge Street, Sydney during my absence. Access will be available only to John Murn, Acting Director, Legal Services and officers within the FOI Unit during this period.
I sent the following email in response: Sent: Tuesday 8 January 08, 2008 - 12:34 PM here
Further to your email below I would advise that John Murn has been previously extensively involved in my families matters (see attached email) and is implicated in the allegations that my family is making of a conspiracy to cover up, so it is inappropriate to allow John Murn access to documents. Certain members of the FOI unit have also been implicated.
I note that with regard to FOI-07-384 you have extended the time until the 18th January 2008. This date is during the period that you will be on leave. I would therefore formally request that all information/documents already in your possession be forwarded to me before you take leave and that all remaining information/documents be held in signed sealed envelopes in safe keeping so that nobody except you can have access to the documents and or deals with this FOI application. I appreciate that this might delay my application by another week but I believe that the measures are necessary due to the serious allegations made against Departmental staff.
I await hearing from you in this regard.
Should you have any difficulty reading the email attached I have set it out hereunder. I can forward the email by fax if it does not arrive in a manner that can be read.
"Gentlepeople" Thank you for your good work, in relation to the matter of Mrs Challita.
I've prepared a draft letter (attached) which contains the material that Magda has prepared in response to Mrs Challita's letter of 22 August 2003. I have made some minor amendments to this material and would be grateful if you could read through to make sure I haven't mucked anything up.
I have taken the liberty of presuming that you do not want to investigate a complaint about essentially the same issues but there still seems to be two outstanding points.
One is Mrs Challita's desire to again look at the test papers. I have decided to just ignore that for the moment unless you counsel me otherwise.
The second is somewhat of a surprise. On 4 August 2003 the Minister wrote to Mrs Challita advising that he in turn had 'advised Mr Chris Carroll. R/Director of Student Assessment and School Accountability, that your formal complaints should be dealt with in accordance with the Departments Responding to Suggestion and Complaints and Allegations" Procedures." And then that "Mr Carroll will proceed to set the process in place and will contact you in due course to advise you of progress." Mrs Challita says that she has never been contacted by Chris Carroll. Can you tel me what the position is with this and what transpired then and the Ministers letter of 19 December 2003??? Regards John
Yours sincerely Jolanda Challita
The email was responded by the FOI unit with this: Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 - 12:54 PM
I note your request that no other officer deal with your application during this period.
Your application for access to documents has not yet been determined.
The documents contained in the file FOI-07-099 and FOI-07-384 will be retained securely in my office during my absence.
Yours sincerely. Elissa Stathis
It just so happens that on 18 January 2008 I received a determination with regard to FOI-07-384 denying me access to the documents amongst other things:
I forwarded this email to the FOI Unit: Sent: Monday January 21, 2008 9:39 am.
We refer to emails below and advise that on 18 January 2008 we received a determiniation by Mr. Peter Cribbs dated 17 January 2008 with regard to FOI application FOI-07-384.
We received this determination despite the fact that there was a written agreement made that this FOI application would not be handled or accessed by anybody else in your absence and that the documents would be held in safe keeping in your office until your return from your one week's leave.
You will recall that in my emails I stated this:
"Given that my family are making formal allegations of a conspiracy to cover up bias, bullying, tampering, manipulation and misconduct by DET staff in various Departments, your absence is of a concern to us as your absence would give ample opportunity for another to access the documents and change or prepare information.
I note that with regard to FOI-07-384 you have extended th time until the 18th January 2008. This date is during the period that you will be on leave. I would therefore formally request that all information/documents already in your possession be forwarded to me before you take leave and that all remaining information/documents be held in signed sealed envelopes in safe keeping so that nobody except you can have access to the documents and or deals with this FOI application. I appreciate that this might delay my application by another week but I believe that the measures are necessary due ot the serious allegations made against Departmental staff."
And you responded with this:
I note your request that no other officer deal with your application during this period.
Your application for access to documents has not yet been determined.
The documents contained in file FOI-07-099 and FOI-07-384 will be retained securely in my office during my absence.
It is of serious concern to us that the documents have been accessed, and a determination made, during your absence by an officer who has previously had dealings in my family's case despite our allegations, agreements and concerns.
We therefore seek a formal investigation by independant and impartial persons into this breach and into the allegations made by my family and challenge the integrity of the Department, the determination, the documents and the decision.
Yours sincerely -
The email was responded by the FOI unit with this: Sent Thursday 31 January 2008 - 12:12 PM
I apologise for the delay in replying to your email of 21st January 2008 in which you express concern that another officer accessed the file and documents during my leave in January 2008.
I acknowledge your email of Wednesday 20 January 2008. I will provide a response by Monday 4 February 2008.
I then received this: Sent Friday 1 February 2008 - 4:54 pm.
Dear Mrs Challita - I attach my response to your email expressing concern another officer accessed this file and documents.
The original letter dated 31 January 2008 ws sent to your home addresed today via Express Post.
Your sincerely - Elissa Stathis.
I attach a copy of the letter sent (Page 1 and Page 2) and attachments. I will set out the letter hereunder.
I refer to your email dated Monday 21 January 2008, Subject FOI Documents FOI-07-384 in which you allege a breach of agreement regarding access to documents and request and independant inquiry.
In emails exchanged on 4 and 8 January you made certain requests in respect of the security of documents in respect of two Freedom of Information applications, FOI-07-395 and FOI-07-384.
In my first email (Tab A) I indicated that I had already had custody of documents in respect of FOI-07-395 (previously FOI-07-099). I advised you that these documents would be retained securely in my office with access available to the Acting Director Legal Services and other officers within the FOI Unit during my period of leave from 14 to 21 January 2008.
In my second email (Tab B) I noted your request for security of documents in respect of your two current applications and advised you that documents contained in FOI-07-99 and FOI-07-384 would be retained securely in my office during my absence.
I do not agree with your interpretation that there was a written agreement between us that that in respect of application FOI-07-384, the application would not be handled or accessed by anybody else in my absence.
Peter Cribbs was appointed as acting manager of the FOI Unit in my absence from 14 to 21 January 2008. Material and information in respect of application FOI-07-384 was received at the FOI Unit while I was on leave. It was appropriate for Mr Cribb, as acting manager, to address the issue of processing fees in respect of point 5 of your application, given that the time for requesting an advance deposit was to expire oin 18 January 2008. In the interest of providing you with as much information as possible as early as possible, Mr Cribb also addressed other aspects of your application and provide you with documents and other material.
I do not consider the integrity of the determination has been compromised by Mr. Cribb dealing with aspects of your application during my absence.
It is not appropriate for me as manager of the FOI Unit to consider your request for a formal investigation by independant and impartial persons into the matter.
Yours sincerely - Elissa Stathis
If you look at Tab B attached by the FOI Unit to the letter and compare it with the email that I actually sent, you will see that the email is missing information and certain bits have been cut out as they run completely off the page? This information that is cut out very conveniently works so as to present the picture in the email that the DET wants to present. Once again documents have been fiddled with to present the picture that the Department wants to present.
The following information in bold is missing from the emails on Tab A and B and the emails appear to be strategically cut.
- The words 'earlier application FOI-07-099 (withdrawn at ADT 17/12/07) is missing from the second paragaraph at Tab A.
- The words ‘Access will be available only to John Murn’, Acting Director in the second last line of Tab A of the second paragraph is missing.
- The attachment forwarded by me has been deleted as well as the words (see attached email) in the second line of the first paragraph in Tab B.
- The words certain members of the FOI unit have also been implicated are missing at the end of the first paragraph at Tab B.
- The words this date is during the period that you will be on leave is missing in the first line of the second paragraph at Tab B
- The words ‘Before you take leave and that all remaining’ is missing In the third line of the second paragraph at Tab B
- The words have access to the documents and or deals with this FOI application is missing from the 3rd last line.
- The words I believe that these measures are necessary due to the serious allegations made against Departmental staff is missing in the last sentence of the second paragraph.
- The following paragraph headed with Should you have difficult reading the email attached I have set it out hereunder. I can forward the email by fax if it does not arrive in a manner that can be read is also missing as is the information below
"Gentlepeople" Thank you for your good work, in relation to the matter of Mrs Challita.
I've prepared a draft letter (attached) which contains the material that Magda has prepared in response to Mrs Challita's letter of 22 August 2003. I have made some minor amendments to this material and would be grateful if you could read through to make sure I haven't mucked anything up.
I have taken the liberty of presuming that you do not want to investigate a complaint about essentially the same issues but there still seems to be two outstanding points.
One is Mrs Challita's desire to again look at the test papers. I have decided to just ignore that for the moment unless you counsel me otherwise.
The second is somewhat of a surprise. On 4 August 2003 the Minister wrote to Mrs Challita advising that he in turn had 'advised Mr Chris Carroll. R/Director of Student Assessment and School Accountability, that your formal complaints should be dealt with in accordance with the Departments Responding to Suggestion and Complaints and Allegations" Procedures." And then that "Mr Carroll will proceed to set the process in place and will contact you in due course to advise you of progress." Mrs Challita says that she has never been contacted by Chris Carroll. Can you tel me what the position is with this and what transpired then and the Ministers letter of 19 December 2003??? Regards John
It should be noted that the FOI unit was selective in the information and emails that they presented and the email from me sent Tuesday 8 January 08, 2008 - 12:34 PM was not included. Dates seem to have disappeared and that there have been significant important and relevant omissions and/or deletions as well as breaches in aggreements.
I wonder whether anybody else believes that my interpretation of the agreement was incorrect and there isn't something sinister going on?
You have so totally lost touch with reality and are so paranoid and self-absorbed that only on-going medical professional support and medication of some appropriate kind would assist you at this point.
This is very sad. Much like watching Britney Spears publicly melting down, but without the redemptive qualities of youthfulness or beauty.
Jolanda. And you base that on what Nina?
Posted by: Nina | February 09, 2008 at 08:22 PM