FORMAL LETTER — WHO WARNED MATTHEW DUNKLEY? WHO AUTHORISED HIS EXIT?

Submission regarding outstanding matters — adverse inferences. The documentary record concerning the outstanding IBAC matters, the communications surrounding Operation Dunham, and the records I have requested remains unresolved. I have now placed the relevant correspondence and supporting documents on the public record, including the questions concerning the handling of the investigation, the requested records, and the unexplained gaps in the documentary trail. This publication is intended to preserve the evidence and make clear which matters remain unanswered; it does not purport to determine guilt or wrongdoing where those matters have not been established by a competent authority.

Email as sent:

Date: 7 September 2026

Sent via: Email + Registered Post

Reference: CASE-20246844 / F243411550406 / FOIA 2026-0609-F / 2025-1058-F

To:

Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission (IBAC)
Victoria, Australia
GPO Box 2423
MELBOURNE VIC 3001

ibac@ibac.vic.gov.au

Cc:

Integrity Oversight Victoria
GPO Box 4590
MELBOURNE VIC 3001

enquiries@integrityoversight.vic.gov.au

Subject: OPERATION DUNHAM — Matthew Dunkley. Pre-investigation warning, unauthorised departure, and withheld records. Notification under Section 71 of the IBAC Act.

1. INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE

This is a formal information request and complaint. It concerns Matthew Dunkley, formerly Regional Director, Department of Education and Training, Victoria — and the investigation known as Operation Dunham.

The facts set out below are drawn from public records, IBAC’s own hearings, Freedom of Information results, and verified maritime data. They establish a clear pattern: Dunkley knew he was under investigation before it became public; evidence was destroyed; he left Australia before charges were laid without a documented exit route; and records confirming who warned him, who authorised his departure, and what high-level connections facilitated it are being deliberately withheld.

This matter now concerns IBAC’s own handling and conduct, thereby engaging Section 71 of the IBAC Act and requiring immediate notification to Integrity Oversight Victoria.

2. THE FACT OF THE WARNING — HE WAS TIPPED OFF

Matthew Dunkley knew the investigation was underway before it became public. His own words on the IBAC-intercepted call — played publicly at hearings — prove it:

“As soon as you knew the empire was gone … you told me you fucking destroyed all the evidence.”

“As soon as you knew” means SOMEONE TOLD HIM. Someone with access to confidential IBAC or government information warned him. Once warned:

Evidence was shredded and dumped in a Bunnings Warehouse bin — BEFORE IBAC’s raid became public. John Allman (Acting Deputy Secretary) admitted this under oath.
Dunkley was quietly removed from his Integrity Committee role — before public suspension.
No arrest warrant was issued. No passport was flagged. No border alert was activated — despite the intercepted admission of evidence destruction.
He departed Australia BEFORE charges were laid. Suspension announced 15 March 2016; confirmed back in United Kingdom by 1 December 2016.
No airline manifest, no customs exit record, no public paper trail exists to explain his departure.

He did not leave by chance. He left because SOMEONE WARNED him — and SOMEONE IN AUTHORITY cleared his safe passage out.

3. THE CONFIRMED CONNECTIONS — FOIA, TIMELINE, AND YACHT

3.1 The 1997 Meeting — Confirmed by FOIA Search

FOIA References: 2026‑0609‑F / 2025‑1058‑F — Control No. CCG0000122359

United States National Archives / Clinton Presidential Library search results CONFIRM records exist:

“Dunkley and Blair — 1 hit / 5 pages” — New York, May 1997.

This was a meeting between Tony Blair, President Bill Clinton, and Matthew Dunkley concerning education policy and children’s services alignment. The records exist. They are being withheld in full.

3.2 The Mandelson–Epstein–Blair Network — Official Record

May 2002: Peter Mandelson personally arranged a meeting between Prime Minister Tony Blair and Jeffrey Epstein at 10 Downing Street. Email correspondence confirmed by UK Cabinet Office, March 2026.
Mandelson publicly described Epstein as “my best pal.” Accepted payments totalling approximately £55,000 plus travel expenses from Epstein.
February 2026: Mandelson arrested on suspicion of passing confidential government information to Epstein. Released pending further investigation.

3.3 The Maritime Timeline — Perfect Match

Lady Mona K (formerly Lady Ghislaine, IMO 1002378) — built for Emad Khashoggi, nephew of Adnan Khashoggi (documented early financial client of Jeffrey Epstein). Named after Ghislaine Maxwell.
Vessel confirmed in Australian waters pre–March 2016.
4 October 2016: publicly listed for sale.
October–December 2016: tracked to Golfe‑Juan, France — Mediterranean.
Dunkley suspended 15 March 2016 → confirmed in UK by 1 December 2016. The eight‑month gap matches exactly the voyage time of an ocean‑going yacht transiting from Australian waters to the Mediterranean. No commercial flight requires eight months.

4. THE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS — DEMAND FOR WRITTEN ANSWERS

Pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Vic) and your statutory obligations, I require full, written, and unredacted answers to the following:

🔴 WHO WARNED HIM?

Who specifically informed Matthew Dunkley that IBAC was investigating him — BEFORE his suspension was announced on 15 March 2016? Provide the person’s full name, job title, and the exact date and time of the warning.

🔴 WHO AUTHORISED HIS EXIT?

Why was no arrest warrant issued, no passport flagged, and no border alert activated — despite the intercepted audio recording in which Dunkley admits knowing evidence had been destroyed? Which person made that decision? Provide their name, role, and written decision.
Produce the full exit record showing when and how Matthew Dunkley left Australia. If by air — produce the airline manifest, boarding pass record, and international departure stamp record. If by sea — produce the vessel name, departure port, clearance date, and passenger manifest.

🔴 WHAT IS BEING WITHHELD AND WHY?

Release the unredacted audio recording or full verbatim transcript of the intercepted conversation commonly referred to as the “Bunny’s Bar / Allman call” — March 2016.
Release the full written decision closing Operation Dunham against Matthew Dunkley — including who signed it, the legal basis, and the date it was authorised.
Release all communications between Victorian Government / IBAC officers and any person or office in the United Kingdom — including No. 10 Downing Street, Cabinet Office, or Peter Mandelson — between 1 January 2016 and 31 December 2016 that reference Matthew Dunkley.
Release the 1997 meeting records confirmed to exist under FOIA search — reference CCG0000122359. If withheld in full, provide the exact statutory section relied upon, the public interest balancing certificate, and the date of internal review.

5. LEGAL PRINCIPLE — ADVERSE INFERENCE APPLIES

IBAC itself accepted — in the Emma complaints matter before the Victorian Inspectorate — that “absence of records does not automatically prove that nothing happened.” The Inspectorate agreed conclusions cannot be inferred merely from silence or missing information.

That principle cuts BOTH ways. If absence of proof is not proof of innocence — then equally:

Refusal to produce confirmed‑existing records, failure to answer clearly stated questions, and silence concerning who warned and authorised Dunkley’s exit — taken together — may reasonably give rise to the MOST SERIOUS ADVERSE INFERENCE.

The inference is this: Someone with confidential information tipped him off. Someone with authority cleared his exit. Someone with high‑level connections arranged his maritime departure. And IBAC is protecting those persons by withholding the proof.

6. SECTION 71 — THIS IS NOW A COMPLAINT ABOUT IBAC ITSELF

Please note: this letter is no longer merely a request concerning Matthew Dunkley. It is now a formal complaint concerning IBAC’s own conduct — unreasonable delay, failure to disclose confirmed‑existing records, characterising legitimate follow‑up as “excessive correspondence” while answering nothing, and potential complicity in concealing who tipped off and authorised the departure of a corruption suspect.

Accordingly, Section 71 of the IBAC Act is ENGAGED. You are under a statutory obligation to notify Integrity Oversight Victoria of this complaint without delay. In the Emma matter, IBAC was specifically criticised for delaying compliance with this obligation.

I require written confirmation within 14 days that this complaint has been formally notified to Integrity Oversight Victoria under Section 71 of the IBAC Act. Failure to provide that confirmation will itself be the subject of a further complaint.

7. CLOSING

Matthew Dunkley was warned. Evidence was destroyed. He left before charges. No paper trail exists. The 1997 meeting records are confirmed to exist but withheld. The wiretap is confirmed but withheld. The exit route is undocumented. The yacht timeline matches perfectly. The high‑level connections are on public record.

I do not require you to prove guilt. I require you to answer ONE question: WHO WARNED HIM AND WHO AUTHORISED HIS EXIT?

Silence is not an answer. Redaction is not an answer. “Complaint closed” is not an answer — when the questions were NEVER answered in the first place.

DISLOSE THE RECORDS. NAME THE PERSONS. COMPLY WITH

September 11, 2026

thestealingofemily.co.uk