IGIS Annual Report 1996-97

PERFORMANCE CRITERIA

62. The effectiveness of my Office may be assessed against a range of performance criteria, namely:

 

 

Timeliness of Inquiries

63. Since becoming Inspector-General in April 1995, I have accorded high priority to dealing with complaints and conducting inquiries as quickly as the circumstances of each case permit.

64. I have devoted considerable effort and resources to this task because I believe that public and political confidence in my Office is inextricably linked to the timeliness with which referrals from Ministers and complaints from members of the public are investigated and brought to finality.

65. The capacity of my Office to deal with an average case load will vary from year to year depending on the complexity, rather than number, of cases which I am required to investigate. Statistical comparisons can therefore be misleading and need to be approached with some caution.

66. Having said that, I recognise that overall trends have some value as a broad indicator of the productivity of the Office in dealing with its case load, and offer the following observations.

67. At the commencement of the 1996-97 reporting period, six complaints remained open (see Annex 1 to this report). Eighteen new complaints/referrals were also received in the reporting period (see Annex 2 to this report).

68. Thirteen of the new complaints were made by members of the public, one was made by a current employee of an agency, two came from current/former human sources (ie. agents), one matter was referred to me by a Minister and I initiated one own motion inquiry.

69. Of these 18 new cases, only four remained open at the conclusion of the reporting period and the six cases carried over from the previous year were finalised. Three of the unresolved cases are of recent origin (ie. referred to my Office in May and June 1997), while the other case had been open for seven months but was expected to be closed very shortly.

70. In the five years to 1995-96 the average length of time taken for a complaint to be dealt with by my Office was approximately 250 days (ie. measured from the date of initial receipt to the date that the outcome is notified to the complainant - see Table 1).

71. This figure is significantly skewed by the exceptional outcome for 1994-95, when the average duration per case was 487 days. The outcome achieved in that year reflects the fact that quite a number of long running cases were finally resolved, and that a significant proportion of the resources of the Office, which would otherwise have been devoted to handling complaints were diverted to assisting and then responding to the ASIS Commission of Inquiry.

72. If it is accepted that 1994-95 was an abnormal year, and that the figures for that year should be discounted or set aside as atypical, the underlying length of time taken by my Office to bring complaints to finality has been around 170-190 days per case.

73. During 1996-97, the average time was reduced to 91 days. This is a much more satisfactory figure and represents a standard I will aim to maintain in future years.

TABLE 1

 

 


74. A partial explanation for the improved timeliness of my Office in handling complaints lies in the mix of cases dealt with. In 1996-97 a number of less complex cases which could be dealt with expeditiously was received. Balanced against this were several other cases which were quite complex in nature and required more detailed investigation and sensitive handling.

75. In my last report I stated that I believed that with my existing resources it is reasonable to consider that an inquiry of moderate complexity should be capable of resolution within about four months. I still hold to this view.

 

Nature of Complaints and Acceptance of Inspector-General's Conclusions/Recommendations

76. Since February 1987, ASIO has attracted 90% of the complaints/referrals made to my Office, ASIS has been the focus of 7% of complaints, while DSD, DIO and ONA combined, account for the remainder - see Table 2.

77. There have only been slight variations in the distribution of complaints between agencies over the last five years.

TABLE 2


78. Table 3 illustrates the distribution of complaints, by agency, on a year by year basis, over the last five years. The distribution accords with the long term distribution shown above.
 

TABLE 3


79. Table 4 illustrates the various sources from which I received complaints/referrals in the reporting period. The largest source of complaints was again, from members of the public.

80. Two current/former human sources also lodged complaints with me during the reporting period. Prior to 1996-97, only four individuals in this category had lodged complaints with my Office. I do not attach any significance to the apparent increase of complaints from this source.

81. In 1996-97, I received one employment related complaint, one Ministerial referral and conducted one own motion inquiry. This accords with normal activity in each of these categories.

TABLE 4

 

Acceptance of Recommendations

82. I am pleased to advise that in the reporting period there has been full acceptance of inquiry outcomes by the agencies I reported upon, and all formal recommendations made to the Ministers have been accepted.

83. As far as I am aware, I believe that there has been broad acceptance of the outcomes by most complainants, although several are known to be dissatisfied with my conclusions.

 

Level of Assurance

84. Since becoming Inspector-General I consider that I have developed a good understanding of the culture and operating practices of each of the agencies. I am confident that all agencies are very conscious of the need to operate within the law, in accord with Ministerial guidelines, and with due regard to propriety and human rights.

85. From time to time errors and omissions are detected, both by the agencies themselves and as a result of external inquiries and the monitoring program conducted by my Office. My experience is that the agencies have responded quickly and positively to these lapses and where warranted, have been very diligent in reviewing and modifying internal operating policies and practices.

86. I consider the internal operating procedures of the agencies to be comprehensive and well developed. Where problems have been identified they have generally been associated with a lack of adherence to detailed procedures.

87. The three collection agencies (ASIO, ASIS and DSD) have the greatest potential to interfere with the rights of Australian citizens. Each of these agencies, during the year, consulted with my Office in the course of reviewing certain internal operating procedures. I was able to make some suggestions which were adopted in all cases. This is a good example of the current willingness of the agencies to seek outside support and is a confirmation of their desire to be above reproach in terms of the lawfulness and probity of their activities.

88. As reported elsewhere in this report, 1996-97 saw changes to the leadership of ASIO, DIO and ONA. The current heads of the agencies each appear to be providing positive leadership to their staff in terms of setting the right tone and directions within their organisations.

89. As in previous years, in 1996-97 I attended several courses and meetings run by ASIO where the Director-General of Security and his senior staff have stated unambiguously that the Organization has an overriding obligation to conduct its activities in accordance with the law.

90. Similarly, the Director-General of ASIS, has shown a high regard for complying with Australian law as it affects the activities of his agency, and has sought my counsel on several occasions.

91. The Director DSD continues to show sensitivity to the need to avoid intrusion into the private affairs of Australians. During the year he sought my Office's involvement in monitoring certain activities to provide independent corroboration that the agency had operated strictly in accordance with the law and Ministerial directives.

92. These instances, and there were others, helped to reassure me that while human errors will occur from time to time, the management arrangements and work based cultures of the agencies are continually being reinforced to ensure that the agencies operate appropriately within their approved charters, and that the grounds for criticism are kept to an absolute minimum.

 

Extent to which there has been change within the Agencies as a result of my Office's activities

93. A number of recommendations were made aimed at improving the internal procedures of the agencies in the course of the year, in some cases, as a result of inquiries I conducted, or in others when the Office responded to requests for assistance or advice from the agencies. During the year, the agencies accepted all of the recommendations or suggestions emanating from the inquiries I concluded.

 

Statistical Trends

94. Since 1986-87, my Office has dealt with an average of 21 complaints/referrals per annum. In the current year, my Office dealt with 18 cases. Table 5 shows a steady growth in complaints to my Office in the first five years of its existence, peaking in 1991-92. In the years since 1991-92, the number of complaints has trailed off slightly, was steady between 1994-1996 at close to the average annual number of complaints, and declined slightly in 1996-97.

95. The decline in cases dealt with since 1991-92 is partially explained by the fact that I am now receiving fewer employment related complaints because the internal grievance review procedures of ASIO were improved in the early 1990s and as a consequence my Office was precluded, under my legislation, from becoming involved in ASIO's employment related complaints. ASIS's internal procedures have also been reviewed and become better accepted.

TABLE 5


96. TABLE 6 provides data on the source of complaints/referrals to my Office since its inception. The data contained in this table reveals that 64% of the complaints were generated by members of the public, 24% came from employees or ex-employees of the agencies, 9% of cases were initiated by the Inspector-General or referred by a Minister, and 3% came from current or former human sources.
TABLE 6


97. In summary, the level of complaint to my office has slowly declined. Those complaints which I do receive are generally from the public and mostly concern the operations of ASIO. The average length of time taken to deal with complaints has been halved over the last two years.

98. Another positive to be drawn from the decline of complaints to my Office is that it suggests that current community concern about the activities of the intelligence and security community is at a low level. With fewer complaints to deal with, I have been able to devote greater time and effort to my monitoring responsibilities.