thestealingofemily.co.uk

Asking OVIC to Review IBAC’s FOI Failures

Published by

Martin Newbold

on

T: 1300 006 842 | ovic.vic.gov.au | LinkedIn 

PO Box 24274, Melbourne Victoria 3001

Subject: Request for Review Complaint – IBAC’s Failure to Provide FOI Documents (Operation Dunham)

Dear Shantelle Ryan | Assistant Commissioner, Public Access Operations and Compliance she/her/her

I am writing to formally request a review of the Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission (IBAC)’s handling of my Freedom of Information Request (FOIR), reference CASE-20246844, submitted on 6 December 2024. IBAC has failed to provide full access to the requested documents, including relevant information likely to be in the public domain. Additionally, IBAC’s response does not acknowledge or reference key records, including evidence related to Matthew Dunkley’s misconduct and any tapped phone recordings associated with Operation Dunham.

Grounds for Review

  1. Failure to Provide Requested Documents:
    • IBAC has not disclosed relevant information under my FOIR, nor have they provided a valid justification for withholding it. The response received on 5 February 2025 (Ref: CD/25/5885) did not include key materials required for my case.  
  2. Omission of Publicly Available Information:
    • IBAC’s response fails to reference known public domain information related to Operation Dunham, including tapped phone recordings and misconduct records. Under FOI law, IBAC is required to point to any relevant public records, even if they are exempt from release under my request.
  3. IBAC’s Non-Compliance with FOI Obligations:
    • IBAC has not adequately identified or justified withholding all records relating to Matthew Dunkley’s conduct. Their response does not provide reasons for excluding key materials from disclosure, which is a failure under Victoria’s FOI Act.
    • Unclear Fee Requirements:
      • On 5 February 2025, IBAC provided information on how to make an FOI request but did not clearly state the required fee or method of payment for the requested documents. Despite multiple communications, I have not been informed of how to pay for these records. At no point have I been told where the fee should be submitted or how it could be processed.
    • Referral Issue:
      • In completing the Freedom of Information complaint form submitted on 27 March 2025, 04:15, I was informed that my complaint would be referred to an official in public office. However, it is not evident that any such referral has been made, nor have I received confirmation or updates on any actions taken in this regard.

Relevant Legal Considerations

  • Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Vic): IBAC is obligated to facilitate requests in a manner that ensures public transparency and accountability.
  • Victorian Data Protection Laws: Any refusal or omission in handling FOI requests must comply with legal data processing requirements.
  • International Data-Sharing Obligations: Intelligence-sharing between Australia and the UK (under the Five Eyes Agreement) should be considered in cases involving potential cross-jurisdictional criminal activity.
  • Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Vic): IBAC is obligated to facilitate requests in a manner that ensures public transparency and accountability.
  • Victorian Data Protection Laws: Any refusal or omission in handling FOI requests must comply with legal data processing requirements.
  • International Data-Sharing Obligations: Intelligence-sharing between Australia and the UK (under the Five Eyes Agreement) should be considered in cases involving potential cross-jurisdictional criminal activity.

Requested Actions

I respectfully request that OVIC:

  1. Conduct an independent review of IBAC’s decision regarding my FOI request.
  2. Require IBAC to disclose all non-exempt documents related to my request.
  3. Ensure IBAC acknowledges and references public domain records related to Operation Dunham.
  4. Provide a detailed explanation if any information continues to be withheld.

Supporting Information

Prior Complaints & Correspondence:

  • Formal Complaint to IBAC (24 December 2024, Ref: IBAC F243411550406): Request for disclosure of evidence relating to Matthew Dunkley, and allegations of misconduct and criminal activity requiring investigation.
  • OVIC Formal Complaint (11 February 2025, Ref: CD/25/5885): Addressing procedural irregularities and breaches of data protection.

Public Awareness & Documentation:

  • Operation Dunham FOI: A Complaint to OVIC (Published 11 February 2025): This article highlights ongoing concerns regarding IBAC’s failure to comply with FOI obligations and its broader implications for public transparency and justice.
  • Delays in Processing: Due to the ongoing delays in processing, I have been forced to write a drama series about the obfuscation and the situation, shedding light on the background and drama surrounding IBAC’s failure to act. (URL: YouTube Link)

Timeline of Events:

Public Awareness & Documentation:

  • Operation Dunham FOI: A Complaint to OVIC (Published 11 February 2025): This article highlights ongoing concerns regarding IBAC’s failure to comply with FOI obligations and its broader implications for public transparency and justice.
  • Delays in Processing: Due to the ongoing delays in processing, I have been forced to write a drama series about the obfuscation and the situation, shedding light on the background and drama surrounding IBAC’s failure to act. (URL: YouTube Link)

Contextual Information:

The situation at hand seems to be tied to a pattern of inadequate or delayed responses, with critical data and evidence being withheld, despite IBAC’s claim that I already have conclusive information.

I respectfully request that OVIC:

  1. Conduct an independent review of IBAC’s decision regarding my FOI request.
  2. Require IBAC to disclose all non-exempt documents related to my request.
  3. Ensure IBAC acknowledges and references public domain records related to Operation Dunham.
  4. Provide a detailed explanation if any information continues to be withheld.
  5. Provide clarity regarding the FOI fee payment process, specifying the exact channels through which payment can be made.

Supporting Information

Prior Complaints & Correspondence:

  • Formal Complaint to IBAC (24 December 2024, Ref: IBAC F243411550406): Request for disclosure of evidence relating to Matthew Dunkley, and allegations of misconduct and criminal activity requiring investigation.
  • OVIC Formal Complaint (11 February 2025, Ref: CD/25/5885): Addressing procedural irregularities and breaches of data protection.
  • Communication Dates:
    • 5 February 2025: IBAC response to my FOIR (Ref: CD/25/5885), outlining the request process.
    • 11 February 2025: Formal complaint to OVIC regarding IBAC’s delayed response and missing documents.
    • 13 February 2025: A follow-up to OVIC requesting an investigation into IBAC’s failure to disclose information.

Public Awareness & Documentation:

  • Operation Dunham FOI: A Complaint to OVIC (Published 11 February 2025): This article highlights ongoing concerns regarding IBAC’s failure to comply with FOI obligations and its broader implications for public transparency and justice.
  • Delays in Processing: Due to the ongoing delays in processing, I have been forced to write a drama series about the obfuscation and the situation, shedding light on the background and drama surrounding IBAC’s failure to act. (URL: YouTube Link)

Timeline of Events:

Next Steps:

Please confirm receipt of this request and provide guidance on the next steps in the review process.

Outline. exactly what payment is required and through what conduit porta it can be provided.

Provide the referral and response to the official as indicated in your complaint procedure under disclosure to public official,

Thank you for your time and consideration. I look forward to your response.

Yours sincerely,
Martin Newbold

@followers @highlight

Subscribe to get access

Read more of this content when you subscribe today.

Subscribe

Leave a comment

Previous Post
Next Post

ACT NOW:

Help us turn this into a Drama:
https://www.justgiving.com/crowdfunding/stealing-of-emily

Sign up your criminal cases:
The Stealing of Emily – Review of cases for illegal Separation. | Crowdsignal.com (survey.fm)

Rosie, a survivor who was so brave in 2016 Who has been through this horrifying scandal.

👉To access and complete the new survey , please visit: PFAN Parent and Carer Survey.👈

Please Choose ‘User’ fields to add additional information.

HOW TO REPORT TRAFFICKING TO THE UNITED NATIONS

Recent posts

Updates

Gods children are not for sale

Class action needed 500 plus cases to bring Truth justice and accountability for our children in the corrupt care system. Anyone who remembers the England Post Office Horizon scandal will know we need 500+ names to get A class, collective or group action is a claim in which the court awards permission to an individual or individuals to bring similarly placed claims in a single case. Collective actions are an efficient way of dealing where there are a huge number of claimants suing a large corporation or social services under a similar set of facts.

  • This is why we all stood strong and fought for all our children.
  • Now the only consideration must be to They came for our Children and they are FINISHED.
  • We do not want a Generation without Mothers and Fathers.

thestealingofemily.co.uk

About

A passionate site carrying news stories about the surrounding matters of child abuse abduction which has accounted for more that 500,000 children abused in our care system taken far away from their parents more than 200 miles.

Topics

Follow Us

Blog at WordPress.com.