OFFICIAL
DEFENCE FOI 856/25/26
STATEMENT OF REASONS UNDER THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 1982
1.
I refer to the request by Hayley (the applicant), dated and received on
30 November 2025 by the Department of Defence (Defence), for access to the
following documents under the
Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Cth) (FOI Act):
“I seek access via FOIA to the final policy, doctrine or guidelines related to the
introduction of the new ADF Command Commendation (also known as the Wearable
CO Commendation, Commanders Commendation, or any similar title used within
Defence).
Request copies of the following:
1. New Command Commendation Document(s) which outline creation, purpose,
governance, design, uniform guidance, criteria for award, or issuing procedures for
the new Command Commendation with Instructions issued to Commands regarding
eligibility, assessment, approval, recording in PMKeyS, and rules for wearing this
award. Including any document which sets out where these awards sits [sic] relative
to other commendation levels.
2. Retrospective consideration, with regards to any documents which address whether
retrospective awarding of the Command Commendation was considered, supported,
or rejected during policy development.”
Background
2.
On 24 December 2025, Defence applied to the Information Commissioner for an
extension of time to deal with the request, as 30 days was insufficient for Defence to
deal adequately with the request given its complexity. On 24 December 2025, the
Information Commissioner agreed to extend the period for Defence to deal with the
request from 30 December 2025 until 29 January 2026 under section 15AB [extension
of time for complex or voluminous requests] of the FOI Act.
FOI decision maker
3.
I am the authorised officer pursuant to section 23 of the FOI Act to make a decision on
this FOI request.
Documents identified
4.
I have identified nine (9) documents as falling within the scope of the request.
5.
The decision in relation to each document is detailed in the schedule of documents.
Exclusions
6.
Signatures and PMKeyS numbers contained in documents that fall within the scope of
the FOI request, duplicates of documents, and documents sent to or from the applicant
OFFICIAL
OFFICIAL
2
are excluded from this request. Defence has only considered final versions of
documents.
Decision
7.
I have decided to:
a. partially release eight (8) documents in accordance with section 22 [access to
edited copies with exempt or irrelevant matter deleted] of the FOI Act on the
grounds that the deleted material is considered exempt under section 47E(d)
[Public interest conditional exemptions – certain operations of agencies] of the
FOI Act;
b. refuse access to one (1) document on the grounds that it is considered exempt
under section 47E(d) [Public interest conditional exemptions – certain
operations of agencies] of the FOI Act; and
c. remove irrelevant material in accordance with section 22 of the FOI Act.
Material taken into account
8.
In making my decision, I have had regard to:
a. the terms of the request;
b. the content of the identified documents in issue;
c. relevant provisions of the FOI Act; and
d. the Guidelines published by the Office of the Australian Information
Commissioner under section 93A of the FOI Act (the Guidelines).
REASONS FOR DECISION
Section 22 – Access to edited copies with exempt or irrelevant matter deleted
9.
Section 22 of the FOI Act permits an agency to prepare and provide an edited copy of
a document where the agency has decided to refuse access to an exempt document or
that to give access to a document would disclose information that would reasonably be
regarded as irrelevant to the request for access.
10.
The identified documents being released in part contain exempt and irrelevant material
that do not relate to the request.
11.
Where whole pages are considered to be exempt in full or irrelevant to the scope of the
request, these pages have been removed from the released document pack.
12.
I am satisfied that it is reasonably practicable to remove the exempt and irrelevant
material and release the documents to you in an edited form.
OFFICIAL
OFFICIAL
3
Section 47E – Public interest conditional exemptions – certain operations of agencies
13.
Section 47E(d) of the FOI Act states:
A document is conditionally exempt if its disclosure under this Act would, or
could reasonably be expected to, do any of the following:
(d) have a substantial adverse effect on the proper and efficient conduct of
the operations of the agency.
14.
The Guidelines, at paragraph 6.115, provide that:
The predicted effect must bear on the agency’s ‘proper and efficient’
operations, that is, the agency is undertaking its operations in an expected
manner.
15.
In the case of ‘
ABK’ and Commonwealth Ombudsman [2022] AICmr 44, the
Information Commissioner (IC) found that where the direct email addresses and phone
numbers of agency staff are not publicly known, they should be conditionally exempt
under section 47E(d). The IC made this determination due to reasonable expectation
that the release of direct contact details would undermine the operation of established
channels of communication with the public. Further, the IC accepted that staff who
were contacted directly could be subject to excessive and abusive communications,
which may give rise to work health and safety concerns.
16.
I am satisfied that were the contact details of Defence personnel made publicly
available, it would have substantial adverse effects on the proper and efficient
operation of existing public communication channels. Further, I am satisfied of a
reasonable expectation that the information could be used inappropriately, in a manner
which adversely affects the health, wellbeing and work of Defence personnel.
Disclosure of direct contact details could, therefore, reasonably be expected to
prejudice the operations of Defence.
17.
I have also exempted from disclosure material that would reveal Defence’s internal
processes when considering amendments to its Honours and Awards systems. The
documents contain recommendations provided by various parties to assist the Defence
People Committee (DPC) in their assessment to update the Defence Commendation
Scheme. Persons involved in this matter would reasonably expect that information
relating to them would be provided in confidence for a specified purpose, and would
not be disclosed to parties not involved in the decision making process. I am of the
view that disclosure could be expected to result in a loss of the transmittal of
information, and this could reasonably be expected to lead to a substantial adverse
impact on the Department’s proper and efficient conduct.
18.
In addition, I have considered the functions of the relevant areas with Defence, and am
of the view that disclosure would impact the ability of these areas to undertake their
usual functions, including the ability to have forthright discussions about relevant
processes. This could reasonably be expected to prejudice the effectiveness of each
area’s current operations in relation to undertaking their usual functions.
OFFICIAL
OFFICIAL
4
19.
The Guidelines provide, at paragraph 6.112, that I should consider whether disclosure
of the information ‘would, or could reasonably be expected to lead to a change in the
agency’s processes that would enable those processes to be more efficient.’ Given the
nature of the information, I am satisfied that release could reasonably be expected to
lead to a change in Defence’s processes that would not lead to any efficiencies.
20.
Accordingly, I am satisfied that the information is conditionally exempt under section
47E(d) of the FOI Act.
Public interest considerations – section 47E
21.
Section 11A(5) of the FOI Act states:
The agency or Minister must give the person access to the document if it is
conditionally exempt at a particular time unless (in the circumstances)
access to the document at that time would, on balance, be contrary to the
public interest.
22.
I have considered the factors favouring disclosure as set out in section 11B(3) [factors
favouring access] of the FOI Act. The relevant factors being whether access to the
document would:
(a) promote the objects of this Act (including all the matters set out in
sections 3 and 3A);
(b) inform debate on a matter of public importance;
(c) promote effective oversight of public expenditure;
(d) allow a person to access his or her own personal information.
23.
In my view, disclosure of this information would not increase public participation in
the Defence process (section 3(2)(a) of the FOI Act), nor would it increase scrutiny or
discussion of Defence activities (section 3(2)(b) of the FOI Act).
24.
Paragraph 6.233 of the Guidelines specifies a non-exhaustive list of public interest
factors against disclosure. The factors I find particularly relevant to this request are
that release of this information could reasonably be expected to prejudice:
x the protection of an individual’s right to privacy;
x the interests of an individual or a group of individuals;
x the management function of an agency; and
x the personnel management function of an agency.
25.
While I accept there is a public interest in ensuring that Defence undertakes its
functions in a transparent and proper manner, there is also a strong public interest in
maintaining the confidentiality of the material contained in the documents, particularly
those that refer Defence’s internal processes which allow Defence to undertake its
operational activities in an expected and lawful manner.
OFFICIAL
OFFICIAL
5
26.
In addition, it is in the public interest that Defence efficiently and productively
operates with regard for the health and wellbeing of its personnel. As I have
established above, the release of direct contact details of Defence personnel can
reasonably be expected to prejudice the management and personnel management
functions of Defence. Existing communication channels and processes enable efficient
and appropriate liaison with the public. The direct contact details of Defence
personnel should, therefore, not be disclosed, as the public interest against their
disclosure outweighs the public interest in their release.
27.
I have not taken any of the factors listed in section 11B(4) [irrelevant factors] of the
FOI Act into account when making this decision.
28.
I am satisfied, based on the above particulars, the public interest factors against
disclosure outweigh the factors for disclosure, and that, on balance, it is against the
public interest to release the information to you. Accordingly, I find that the
information is exempt under section 47E of the FOI Act.
FURTHER INFORMATION
29.
Some of the documents matching the scope of this request contained a dissemination
limiting marker (DLM). Where documents have been approved for public release, the
DLM has been struck through.
Angela Digitally signed by
Angela GILBERT
GILBERT
Date: 2026.01.29
16:18:19 +11'00'
Angela Gilbert
Accredited Decision Maker
Defence People Group
Department of Defence
OFFICIAL
