Dear Federal Court of Australia,

In an article published in the Australian on 10 February 2022 entitled “Top judge warned of registrar overhaul”, the authors note that a registrar who was being considered for a Senior Executive Band 1 position was denied that position to avoid the Australian Public Service Commissioner’s representative vetoing a decision to promote the registrar to the Senior Executive Service.

Justice Greenwood is on the record stating that advice provided to him by his Principal Registrar that “the APSC has a veto on appointment is wrong.”

Pursuant to the FOI Act, I request access to any documents that show that it is lawful to re-evaluate the classification of a group of duties to be performed in an Agency in order to avoid the Australian Pubic Service Commissioner’s (or representative's) power to veto appointments stemming from a selection process, which Justice Greenwood suggests is a non-existent power.

Yours faithfully,

Ray B1

External FOI, Federal Court of Australia

1 Attachment

OFFICIAL
Dear Ray B1

Please find attached correspondence from the Federal Court of Australia.

Kind regards

FOI Officer
Federal Court of Australia

show quoted sections

Dear Mr Muscat,

I look forward to the Federal Court's response, particularly because Ms Giorgina Strangio, the head of the Integrity, Performance and Employment Policy section of the Australian Public Service Commission, has stated that the Australian Public Service Commission has no documents that show that it is lawful to re-evaluate the classification of a group of duties to be performed in an Agency in order to avoid the Australian Public Service Commissioner’s (or representative's) power to veto appointments stemming from a selection process: https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/8....

That does beg the question how it is that Mr Soden, the former Chief Executive and Principal Registrar of the Federal Court, advised a Justice Greenwood that the Commissioner's representative had such a power. There is also the question of Ms Lagos' involvement in the circumstances.

Yours sincerely,

Ray B1

External FOI, Federal Court of Australia

1 Attachment

OFFICIAL
Dear Ray B1

Please find attached correspondence from the Federal Court of Australia.

Kind regards

FOI Officer
Federal Court of Australia

Ray B1 left an annotation ()

My request was worded as follows:

I request access to any documents that show that it is lawful to re-evaluate the classification of a group of duties to be performed in an Agency in order to avoid the Australian Pubic Service Commissioner’s (or representative's) power to veto appointments stemming from a selection process, which Justice Greenwood suggests is a non-existent power.

The response that Claire Hammerton Cole provided on behalf of the Federal Court was:

Extensive searches were undertaken by staff of the Court to identify any documents falling within the scope of your request. These searches included discussions with senior employees in the human resources and operations branches of the Court, searches of the Court's human resources and recruitment inboxes, searches of the Court's intranet pages, searches of the Court's national network drive, and searches of the Court's electronic documents, records management and information systems. As a result of the searches undertaken, no documents could be found that fell within the scope of your request ... I must refuse access to the documents requested under subsection 24A(1) of the FOI Act

Dear Ms Hammerton Cole,

I acknowledge your refusal decision under s 24A of the FOI Act.

Thank you for confirming that the Federal Court of Australia does not have any documents that show that it is lawful to re-evaluate the classification of a group of duties to be performed in an Agency in order to avoid the Australian Public Service Commissioner’s (or representative's) power to veto appointments stemming from a selection process, which Justice Greenwood of the Federal Court of Australia suggests is a non-existent power.

It is plain that Warwick Soden, the Federal Court's former Chief Executive and Principal Registrar, misled Justice Greenwood.

Yours sincerely,

Ray B1