-
On this page
Message from FOI Commissioner Toni Pirani
Welcome to our April ICON alert.
Since our last ICON alert, the 2025 Federal Election has taken place, and a new Administrative Arrangements Order (AAO) was made on 13 May 2025, allocating executive responsibility among ministers. Although there has not been a change of government, there have been significant changes to ministers’ responsibilities and some changes to ministers’ titles.
For FOI applicants who made their FOI requests to ministers before the new AAO, our recently updated version of Part 2 of the FOI Guidelines explains how ministers may discharge their duty to preserve an FOI applicant’s right to have their FOI request determined when ministers change. Agencies are reminded that they should support ministers in discharging that duty, as explained under the 2 new headings in Part 2, 'Responsibilities of outgoing ministers', and 'Responsibilities of incoming ministers'.
Today marks the start of Open Gov Week, running from 19 to 23 May. Organised by the Open Government Partnership (OGP), Open Gov Week is a global event to raise awareness of open government. Open Gov Week encourages people in government and civil society to come together – including through the Open Gov Challenge – to share ideas on making communities stronger and more open, participatory, inclusive and accountable.
The OAIC will mark Open Gov Week in a range of ways, including Commissioner Liz Tydd’s participation in a webinar on Thursday on agencies’ use of messaging apps and the implications for open government, organised by the Office of the Information Commissioner (WA) and the State Records Office (WA). General Manager Rocelle Ago is travelling to Bangkok today to contribute to a workshop on transparency and access to information organised by the OECD Innovative, Digital and Open Government Division (INDIGO) Network. She will then travel to Jakarta in Indonesia to attend the annual OECD INDIGO Network meeting, where she will present on the use of digital tools and innovative technology to improve access to information.
In other news, on 2 April 2025, the Association of Information Access Commissioners (AIAC) met in Brisbane to discuss risks, challenges and opportunities affecting the public’s right of access to government-held information. AIAC members call upon public sector leaders to demonstrate stewardship by committing to information governance and integrity. They also call upon those leaders to acknowledge the benefits of new and emerging technologies while ensuring information and data created by those technologies is presented and able to be accessed. The OAIC published the AIAC members’ full call upon public sector leaders on 11 April 2025.
In everyday business, we have also published our FOI caseload reports for Q3 (January to March 2025). The data provides statistical information about the OAIC’s freedom of information regulatory work, including a summary of the OAIC’s FOI, IC review, and FOI complaints caseloads, and IC review and FOI complaint focus areas. Our dashboard of Australian Government FOI statistics contains FOI agency statistics up to Q2 (October to December 2025) and will be updated for Q3 in the coming days.
We continue to promote our new ‘About the OAIC’ resource, which we published on our Translations web page in March this year. The resource is published in 13 different languages, and covers the role of the OAIC, as well as freedom of information and privacy, and how the OAIC can help.
Revisions to FOI Guidelines
On 12 May 2025 the OAIC opened consultation on Part 3 of the FOI Guidelines – Processing and deciding FOI requests.
We have published a consultation draft of Part 3 along with a summary of the key changes in that draft on our webpage Consultation on Part 3 — Processing and deciding FOI requests. The closing date for submissions is 10 June 2025.
The OAIC has published a full list of the Information Commissioner’s recent revisions to Part 2 of the FOI Guidelines (1 April 2025) on the webpage Summary of version changes to s 93A guidelines.
Strategies to improve access to information operations
We have developed a self-assessment tool to help agencies understand the effectiveness of their information access systems, and the extent to which they comply with the FOI Act. The self-assessment tool is complemented by a table providing short strategies to remediate any gaps identified in completing the self-assessment tool.
Proactive release
Disclosure of information through ‘administrative access’ can be advantageous to both agencies and applicants – offering resource benefits to the agency and quicker processing times for applicants compared to processing requests under the FOI Act.
In identifying information that may suit administrative access, there are various factors to consider – see our administrative access resource.
Agencies should consider establishing a formal administrative access arrangement for employees to request their own personnel records. The FOI Act provides that, if an agency has established procedures for employees to request their own personnel records, those employees (which include former employees) cannot make an FOI request for their personnel records unless they have already made a request under those established administrative access procedures (s 15A of the FOI Act).
Supporting tools and systems
Agencies should consider using ‘smartforms’ to receive FOI requests. Smartforms may directly map FOI requests into case management systems, and provide agencies an opportunity to request relevant contact and representative details and information that will assist the agency to more rapidly assess and identify the documents being sought and relevant business areas to be consulted.
Agencies should also consider making a plan to manage receiving an increased number of FOI requests. Practical strategies to include in a plan for an increase in FOI requests are set out in the OAIC resource Managing increased volume of FOI requests.
IC review practice update
IC review practice update webinar
The second webinar in our series of webinars for FOI practitioners in 2025 will be held at 10:30 – 11 am on 27 May 2025.
The webinar will provide an update on the OAIC’s IC review practice. It will discuss the OAIC’s approach to case management and decision-making in the context of recent IC decisions, as well as decisions by the Administrative Review Tribunal and Federal Court of Australia. The webinar will also discuss s 55G decisions, and case management and decision-making in IC reviews involving third parties.
If you have any questions relevant to the webinar, please send them to foidr@oaic.gov.au with ‘IC review practice webinar questions’ in the subject field.
Procedure Direction for IC reviews
The Direction as to certain procedures to be followed by agencies and ministers in Information Commissioner reviews was reissued on 1 July 2024.
As outlined in the Procedure Direction, notices we issue to respondents are now issued to both the respondent and the IC review applicant at the same time. Respondents and applicants are required to share their submissions with the other party at the same time as they provide them to the OAIC.
If agencies wish to seek an extension, they should ask us and tell us the reason in advance of the due date. The OAIC’s Information Commissioner Reviews: Quick guide to use of directions and information gathering powers sets out next steps if an agency or minister does not respond to a notice issued by the OAIC by the due date.
To ensure that notices are issued to the relevant persons (ordinarily at the SES Band 1 level or above), please ensure you advise the OAIC of the correct personnel.
IC review decisions – spotlight on practical refusals
Information Commissioner decisions made under s 55K of the FOI Act are published on AUSTLII. In this edition, we highlight recent IC review decisions involving the practical refusal ground. Review of practical refusal decisions is also one of the OAIC’s IC review focus areas for 2024-25.
'AVQ' and Department of Health and Aged Care (Freedom of information) [2025] AICmr 85 (9 May 2025)
This decision primarily discusses whether a practical refusal reason exists in relation to a deemed decision. It provides an example of a circumstance in which processing a broadly worded request for information or documents could lead to a substantial and unreasonable diversion of an agency’s resources in circumstances where the agency has made targeted suggestions about scope to the applicant (which the applicant did not accept).
'AVN' and Department of Home Affairs (Freedom of information) [2025] AICmr 83 (7 May 2025)
This decision discusses whether a practical refusal reason exists (ss 24, 24AA, and 24AB) in relation to the applicant’s request for certain information relating to their employment with the Australian Border Force. It finds that the Department has not met its onus to demonstrate that a practical refusal reason exists; in particular, the Department did not meet the consultation requirements of s 24AB and did not justify that the request was substantial in failing to provide estimates that appropriately reflected the scope of the request.
Community First Development and National Indigenous Australians Agency (Freedom of information) [2025] AICmr 78 (29 April 2025)
This decision sets aside the access refusal decision of the National Indigenous Australians Agency (NIAA) in circumstances where the NIAA has proposed a revised request that it would be able to process and the applicant has agreed to revise their request as proposed.
Other recent IC review decisions
Paul Hayes and Commonwealth Ombudsman (Freedom of information) [2025] AICmr 80 (2 May 2025)
This decision discusses the application of s 47E(d) to a Public Interest Disclosure (PID) Investigation Report prepared by the Ombudsman under the Public Interest Disclosure Act 2013 (Cth). It is an example of a circumstance in which the public interest in preserving the ability of an oversight agency to effectively and efficiently carry out its functions outweighs the public interest factors favouring disclosure.
‘AVL’ and Australian Taxation Office (Freedom of information) [2025] AICmr 77 (24 April 2025)
This decision discusses the application of ss 24A and 17 of the FOI Act to an access request by a staff member for documents related to personnel and a recruitment process. It is primarily of interest to the parties in relation to the specific documents sought but may also have broader application in similar circumstances.
‘AVI’ and Australian Federal Police (Freedom of information) [2025] AICmr 73 (17 April 2025)
This decision discusses a request by a person for access to certain documents related to them held by the Australian Federal Police. It is primarily of interest to the parties but may also be relevant to similar circumstances involving requests for personal information to law enforcement agencies.
