Print this page
Key points
INQUIRIES
- Four full inquiries and nine preliminary inquiries were completed during 2008/09.
- I completed an own-motion inquiry in September 2008 into the integrity of Defence Intelligence Organisation (DIO) assessment activities. My conclusions were generally positive, including a finding that there was no evidence of improper pressure on DIO in relation to its input to the Defence White Paper process. The inquiry report included two recommendations and emphasised the importance of analytic skills training. These comments and recommendations were accepted by Defence and suitable follow-up action taken.
- I also completed an own-motion inquiry in November 2008 into the purported actions of the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) in 2003, with respect to Mr Izhar Ul-Haque. In November 2007 it had been asserted, in the context of a failed terrorism prosecution against Mr Ul-Haque, that two ASIO officers had kidnapped and falsely imprisoned Mr Ul-Haque. After careful examination I concluded that there was no basis for referring this allegation to relevant New South Wales law enforcement or prosecutorial authorities. However, there were lessons for ASIO in what had occurred and I made seven recommendations. ASIO accepted all of these recommendations and is still in the process of implementing them.
- Another own-motion inquiry I conducted was into the widely publicised allegation in March 2009 that an officer or officers of the Defence Signals Directorate (DSD) had improperly accessed the information technology facilities used by the then Minister for Defence, as part of a covert investigation into the Minister’s activities and associations. This inquiry necessarily involved intensive IT forensic examination. At the conclusion of my inquiry in June 2009, I reached a firm view that the allegation in respect of DSD personnel was incorrect.
- The fourth full inquiry completed during 2008-09 involved a sensitive personnel matter in ASIO. Details of the inquiry are contained in a classified annex to this report (which is not available to the public). I made five recommendations. ASIO accepted and is implementing each of the recommendations.
- Eleven preliminary inquiries were commenced in 2008-09, two of which were triggered by complaints received late in June 2009. Eight of these preliminary inquiries were completed by 30 June 2009 (as was one preliminary inquiry carried over from 2007-08).
- Seven of the eleven preliminary inquiries concerned ASIO (on a variety of issues) and four concerned DSD (all four were personnel related).
- There were no complaints or other triggers which necessitated inquiries in relation to the Australian Secret Intelligence Service (ASIS), the Defence Imagery and Geospatial Organisation (DIGO) or the Office of National Assessments (ONA) in 2008-09.
COMPLAINTS
- The total number of complaints received by the office in 2008-09 was slightly less than in 2007-08. The reason for this decline was a reduction in the number of complaints alleging delay by ASIO in making security assessments for visa purposes. There were 153 new immigration related complaints in 2008-09, compared to 193 in 2007-08.
INSPECTIONS
- An increase in office staffing meant that we were able to expand the office’s inspection program. I see an important part of this office’s inspection program being to monitor agency use of relatively new powers and capabilities, to gauge whether these are being used professionally and with suitable controls. No substantive concerns arose from such review work in 2008-09.
- ASIO did not use any questioning warrants or questioning and detention warrants in 2008-09.
- Compliance by ASIS with legislative and other requirements for training in and the use of weapons or other techniques for self defence was of a high standard.
- Compliance by ASIS and DSD with privacy rules issued under the Intelligence Services Act 2001 (ISA) was of a high standard and reflects a mature appreciation in those agencies of the ISA and its requirements. DIGO is developing a sound appreciation and DIO has continued to enhance its compliance with its privacy guidelines. There was some room for improvement by ONA in the administration of its privacy guidelines and this was addressed.
- ASIO deliberations on and record keeping in respect of investigatory approvals and obtaining special powers warrants were generally very sound. I was not as happy with some ASIO records on decision making about the exchange of information with foreign liaisons. This requires improvement.
COMMUNICATION AND LIAISON
- My staff and I provided advice and information on ethical conduct, accountability and related issues at 44 agency seminars and training sessions, addressing approximately 1500 new and existing agency staff.
- I also addressed a number of audiences outside of the Australian Intelligence Community (AIC), including the 2009 Supreme and Federal Court Judges’ Conference in Hobart.
- I participated in the 6th International Intelligence Review Agencies Conference (IIRAC) in Auckland in October 2008. Australia will host the 7th such conference in 2010, and preparations for this have commenced.
- I also met regularly with each of the AIC agency heads and with senior staff in the agencies to discuss relevant developments and issues.
LEGISLATION
- I was pleased that the Government announced, in December 2008, that it had accepted a proposal that the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security Act 1986 (IGIS Act) should be amended to allow the Prime Minister to approve an inquiry, under the IGIS Act, into intelligence and security issues in Commonwealth departments and agencies which extend beyond, or which are outside of, the six AIC agencies. The opportunity will also be taken to refine a number of other provisions in the IGIS Act.
- Proposed amendments to the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (FOI Act) and the Archives Act 1983, if enacted, will see the Inspector-General being available to give expert evidence to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) in matters where a national security exemption from release has been claimed by a department or agency under FOI or Archives legislation.
- I welcomed the Government’s introduction into the Parliament, in June 2009, of a Bill to create a position of National Security Legislation Monitor (NLSM). There are a number of criminal law issues on which the proposed NLSM could provide valuable review and commentary. My office will, on suitable occasions, be able to provide the NLSM with general comment on how AIC legislation has operated in practice.
THE OFFICE
- The Office of the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security (OIGIS) expanded to 12 staff during 2008-09.
- Additional external resources were obtained, when necessary, to assist with some of the more complex inquiry and inspection activities of the office. For example, the Australian Government Solicitor (AGS) provided advice on a range of complex legal issues, the Australian Federal Police (AFP) provided a senior information technology forensics examiner for the DSD inquiry mentioned earlier (for which I was very grateful), while I engaged a former IGIS to undertake reviews of some sensitive records.
- There is currently a proposal in the public domain to reduce the open access period for archived records from 20 to 30 years. If this proposal is legislated, given that OIGIS commenced operating on 1 February 1987, it will bring forward the time when OIGIS will have to process requests for access to OIGIS records under the Archives Act 1983, with a resultant impact on the resources needed by the office.
- I gave evidence to the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit during its inquiry into the effects of the ongoing efficiency dividend on smaller public agencies. The requirement to find savings and productivity improvements to fund salary increases under new enterprise agreements, will place pressure on the OIGIS budget in the medium term.
- I believe that OIGIS provides very good value to the taxpayer when regard is had to the number of inquiries conducted, complaints handled, and inspection activities undertaken. This is particularly evident when compared to the cost of ad hoc inquiries and royal commissions.
- In 2008-09 the office website http://www.igis.gov.au was redesigned to provide more information and to be more user-friendly. The website now includes an on-line complaint facility for individuals who wish to lodge a complaint electronically (where there are no obvious security concerns in doing so)
- The Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) provided an unqualified report on the OIGIS financial statements for 2008-09.