ICON alert – edition 32

Message from FOI Commissioner Alice Linacre

Hello and welcome to our latest ICON alert.

The arrival of International Access to Information Day (IAID) this month on 28 September is a welcome opportunity to recognise, celebrate and reinforce our commitment to working collectively in strengthening and administering the systems which provide access to Australian government information.

Rapid changes in technology and digital systems are transforming how government information is created, managed, accessed and distributed, and we all have a critical role in rising to these challenges.

This makes it timely that UNESCO has chosen Upholding Information Integrity in the Digital Age: The Role of Access to Information in Addressing Information Disorder as this year's IAID theme.

The dissemination of misinformation and disinformation, supercharged by AI technology, represents a real and serious threat to the integrity of information and democracy, and one of our most effective tools in this fight is proactive publication.

The OAIC's campaign, Transparency + Access = Information Integrity, serves to further highlight this critical importance of open and transparent access to information as an enabler of good governance and public trust.

With those principles in mind, I hope you will find the time to join me, Information Commissioner Elizabeth Tydd and our esteemed guests at our flagship IAID event on Monday.

Please also read on, for information on other exciting IAID events to fill your calendar, as well as to learn more about the FOI Guidelines Part 14 consultation, the Access to Information icon, vexatious applicant declarations, the new FOI stats portal, our focus on 2022 IC reviews, and the most recent IC reviews decisions.

OAIC IAID event on 21 September: 'Upholding information integrity: Combating mis- and dis-information in the Digital Age'

You are invited to join the Australian Information Commissioner Elizabeth Tydd, Freedom of Information Commissioner Alice Linacre and guests for a special hybrid event at the Museum of Australian Democracy to mark International Access to Information Day (IAID) 2026.

Date: Monday, 21 September 2026 
Time:  9:00am – 12:45pm AEST
Location: Online via a Microsoft Teams Townhall and in-person in Canberra, ACT.

Registrations close at 12pm Friday 18 September.

The program will bring together Australian Government FOI practitioners and senior leaders to explore the role of information access, discuss contemporary challenges and share practical approaches to effective FOI administration.

The OAIC invites FOI practitioners, information management professionals and relevant professionals across the public sector to join the conversation by attending, participating remotely, or by bringing together colleagues in a shared meeting space to watch collectively as a group.

IAID 2026 from 28 September to 4 October 2026

The OAIC's IAID event on 21 September is just the beginning.

International Access to Information Day is a global event held annually on 28 September, and we are continuing our celebrations and discussions throughout the week to 4 October.

To help you support and promote IAID, we’ve developed a stakeholder amplification kit, including IAID posters, social media tiles, PowerPoint template, email signature banner.

Please download the assets from our website.

We encourage you to use this kit to promote IAID and show support for uplifting information integrity.

Please also keep a close eye on the OAIC's social pages on LinkedIn, Facebook and Instagram where we we'll share more information throughout the week.

Some other events you may want to consider throughout the week from our IAID partners are also included below.

International Conference of Information Commissioners (ICIC) & International Day for Universal Access to Information (IDUAI) 2026 Sierra Leone

On 29 September 2026, Australian Freedom of Information Commissioner Alice Linacre will participate in the panel discussion 'Access to Credible Data for Open Government and Public Sector Reform'. The session will bring a critical focus to the nexus between open government and good governance on the global stage.

Speakers for this event include:

• Jeanette Van Den Bulk, Deputy Information and Privacy Commissioner, Canada
• Carina Paju, Senior Regional Coordinator for Europe and Lead for the Proactive Disclosure Coalition at Open Government Partnership, and
• Joseph Munda Bindi, Chairman, National Council for Civic Education and Development, Sierra Leone

See more info online

2026 Solomon Lecture

The Solomon Lecture is OIC's signature event celebrating IAID on 28 September 2026. It is named in honour of Dr David Solomon AM, who was the Chair of the Independent FOI Review Panel appointed by the Queensland State Government to review Queensland's Freedom of Information laws in 2007-08.

This year’s Solomon Lecture will be delivered by journalist and award-winning foreign correspondent, Professor Peter Greste whose keynote will address the theme, Fact versus Fake: Tackling information disorder in the digital age.

A panel discussion, facilitated by The Mandarin’s Melissa Coade, will follow the lecture, featuring:

• Tom Rogers AO, former Australian Electoral Commissioner
• Linda Waugh, Queensland Integrity Commissioner, and
• Stephanie Winson, Queensland Right to Information Commissioner.

NSW Right to Know Week 2026 event

Taking place on 29 September 2026 and facilitated by Emeritus Professor Rosalind Croucher AM, NSW Information Commissioner, the speakers will provide diverse perspectives on information integrity and public trust.

Dr Lorraine Finlay, Human Rights Commissioner, will deliver a short address on information integrity and share her insights on the challenges of misinformation and disinformation.

Dr Finlay will then join a panel discussion featuring

• Kate Boyd PSM, Secretary of The Cabinet Office NSW, and
• Associate Professor Ellen Rock, UNSW Faculty of Law & Justice.

OIC WA IAID event

The OIC WA will mark IAID with an event for agency FOI officers on 30 September 2026. The WA Information Commissioner and Information Access Deputy Commissioner will provide an update on the state of FOI in WA and discuss some of the challenges facing agencies and the OIC WA.

Information Access Series: The ideal state of Freedom of Information in Victoria

As part of IAID celebrations, OVIC is presenting ‘Part 2’ of their Information Access Series on 1 October 2026. They'll discuss recommendations from the IOC’s inquiry into the operation of the FOI Act that focus on supporting a culture of open access in Victoria.

The presentation will cover the ways in which the current FOI Act is failing, and initiatives that will help support a culture of open access, including training, information management, access by design, independent oversight and sanctions.

The presentation will also celebrate IAID and discuss the importance of access to information.

Consultation on draft updates to FOI Guidelines – Part 14 (Disclosure Log) is now closed

The OAIC's consultation of agencies and other interested stakeholders on updates to Part 14 (Disclosure Log) of the FOI Guidelines has closed on 4 September 2026.

We appreciate the time taken to consider the proposed updates, and have published the 5 submissions received on the OAIC's consultation page Consultation on Part 14 of the FOI Guidelines — Disclosure Log.

The proposed revisions update content and give effect to recommendations made in the Freedom of Information Commissioner’s report ‘Disclosure Log Desktop Review – 2026’ which was published on 7 August 2026.

Please keep an eye out in upcoming ICON alerts for the publication of our final Part 14 updates in the coming months.

Access to Information icon

We’ve recently launched the new Access to Information icon and have been thrilled to see agencies adopting it on their websites, making it even easier for the public to access government information.

You can see the icon in action right now by visiting some of the agencies below who have already implemented it on their websites:

• Administrative Review Tribunal
• Attorney-General's Department
• Department of Education
• Department of Veterans' Affairs
• Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions
• Queensland Office of the Information Commissioner

The new icon is available for all government agencies to use, so if you’re still in the planning phase, we have developed a range of implementation materials including:

• implementation guide
• style guide (PDF)
• icon design files.

We also published an amplification kit to help support internal and external communications and raise awareness of the new icon. The kit contains a poster, fact sheet, social media posts and Intranet content.

These resources are intended to support consistent adoption of the icon and improve how the public finds and accesses government-held information.

Download the amplification kit (PDF) today and send us an email at the OAIC to let us know when you've updated your website.

Spotlight on vexatious applicant declaration matters

The FOI Commissioner has recently made 2 vexatious applicant declarations or ‘VADs’:

• Australian Federal Police and ‘BBT’ (Freedom of information) [2026] AICmr 79 (2 September 2026) (‘BBT’)
• Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission and ‘BBX’ (Freedom of information) [2026] AICmr 84 (11 September 2026) (‘BBX’)

Key takeaways are:

• noting the nature and effect of the power to declare a person vexatious, and in particular, that a declaration has the practical effect of preventing an individual from exercising an important legal right conferred by the FOI Act, the content of the duty of procedural fairness in relation to an application for a vexatious applicant declaration is not insignificant. (see ‘BBT’)
• in considering whether an abuse of process has occurred on the ground of unreasonably interfering with the operations of an agency (s 89L(4)(b)):
  • deficiencies in an agency’s FOI processing are materially important (see ‘BBX’)
  • where an individual has sought IC review of several deemed decisions the OAIC may give less weight to the access actions based on the reasonableness of seeking IC review in those circumstances (see ‘BBT’)

Australian Federal Police and ‘BBT’ (Freedom of information)[2026] AICmr 79 (2 September 2026)

In summary, the AFP submitted the respondent made 72 access actions, comprising 39 FOI requests, 3 requests for internal review and 30 requests for IC review between 1 July 2024 and 17 November 2025.

This decision declares the respondent to be a vexatious applicant on the basis that they repeatedly engaged in access actions which involve an abuse of process as they harassed or intimidated an individual or employee of the agency, and unreasonably interfered with the agency’s operations (ss 89L(4)(a) and (b) of the FOI Act). In doing so, it gives weight to several factors, including (most notably) that the number and nature of access actions, which often named agency employees, demonstrate a grievance directed at particular AFP staff members.

Several of the IC reviews were lodged after the AFP was deemed to have made an access refusal decision in relation to the respondent’s FOI requests because a decision was not made within the statutory timeframe. The decision notes it is not unreasonable for an individual to lodge an IC review application in these circumstances.

In addition, the decision considers the common law duty of procedural fairness in the context of an application for a VAD, as well as the statutory requirement under s 89L(3) of the FOI Act to give the person an opportunity to make written or oral submissions before making a declaration in relation to that person. 

Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission and ‘BBX’ (Freedom of information) [2026] AICmr 84 (11 September 2026)

This decision declares the respondent to be a vexatious applicant on the basis that they repeatedly engaged in access actions which involve an abuse of process, on the ground of harassing or intimidating an individual or an employee of an agency (s 89L(4)(a)). In this respect, the decision finds the respondent has repeatedly made unsubstantiated, derogatory and inflammatory comments about ACIC staff, which can reasonably be regarded as harassment and/or intimidation.

However, the decision also finds that the respondent’s repeated engagement does not amount to an abuse of process on the ground of unreasonably interfering with the operations of an agency (s 89L(4)(b)). In summary, this is because the factors weighing in favour of a declaration on this ground are outweighed by other factors including the ACIC’s processing deficiencies which may have contributed to the respondent’s actions.

Coming soon: new FOI statistical returns portal

The new portal to submit FOI statistical returns to the OAIC will be live in early October, so keep an eye on your inbox for registration notifications and training resources.

The new portal will replace the existing FOI Statistical Returns portal for all agencies that provide quarterly and annual statistical returns for freedom of information matters.

What is changing?

The new portal will not change the types of data that agencies are required to submit to the OAIC.

However, it will introduce a number of new features in relation to account administration and user access, including:

• a more seamless user experience, including accessing and editing past statistical returns
• new account creation and sign-in processes for users, including new access verification processes
• the provision of an ‘administration account’ for reporting agencies that will provide greater flexibility in managing individual accounts for staff that are responsible for statistical report submissions
• enabling online submissions for agencies currently making manual statistical returns
• more clearly defined pathway for submitting statistical returns to the OAIC
• a capacity to grant third parties with ‘view-only’ profiles on the platform

Agency staff requiring access to the new portal, either as agency administrators or as officers responsible for submitting FOI statistical returns, will also need to apply to the OAIC to set up new account profiles in the new system.

What do agencies need to do?

Reporting agencies are not required to do anything at this time.

Stay tuned for an upcoming Special ICON alert which will contain advice on how to set up accounts for the new portal and the details of the timing for its launch.

The OAIC will host familiarisation sessions for FOI officers responsible for submitting statistical returns in late September and early October. A revised guide and training videos covering the process of registering, submitting and amending statistical returns will also be distributed.

2022 IC reviews

IC reviews received in 2022 are a current priority for the OAIC. The OAIC is progressing the remaining 2022 IC reviews towards decision.

Agencies and ministers should be aware that in IC reviews concerning access refusal decisions, the agency or minister bears the onus of establishing that the decision is justified or that the Information Commissioner should make a decision adverse to the applicant (s55D(1)).

Under s 55DA of the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (FOI Act), agencies and ministers must use their best endeavours to assist the Information Commissioner in making a decision on an IC review.

If agencies and ministers maintain their current position in a 2022 IC review, and the OAIC has previously given the agency an opportunity to provide submissions, no further case management will be undertaken, and the review will proceed to decision on the basis of the material presently before the OAIC. If circumstances have changed since submissions were provided in a 2022 IC review, agencies and ministers should promptly notify the OAIC and provide updated submissions.

In responding to requests for submissions, agencies and ministers should, where applicable, address each statutory element of the exemption claims, by reference to the content, context, and circumstances of the specific material claimed to be exempt. General submissions regarding the nature of the documents or the potential consequences of disclosure may be insufficient to establish the exemption claim. Agencies should explain how the relevant statutory criteria is met in relation to the particular material and provide supporting evidence where appropriate.

As outlined in [3.24] of the Direction as to certain procedures to be followed by agencies and ministers in information Commissioner reviews, where an opportunity to make submissions is provided but no submissions are received, the review may proceed to a decision under s 55K of the FOI Act without any further opportunity to make submissions.

Recent IC review decisions

Information Commissioner decisions made under s 55K of the FOI Act are published on AustLII.

Recent decisions include:

‘BBO’ and Comcare (Freedom of information) [2026] AICmr 71 (14 August 2026)

Key Points: This decision discusses the application of ss 47C, 47E(d) and 47F of the FOI Act to documents held by Comcare about the applicant’s complaints associated with a compensation claim. In particular, the decision finds that communications between Comcare and an external services provider would reveal sensitive operational information, which would compromise frank communication between Comcare and the external services provider on sensitive matters. This would prejudice Comcare’s ability to efficiently and effectively assess claims and associated complaints, and therefore have a substantial and adverse effect on Comcare’s operations. The decision also finds disclosure of this material would be contrary to the public interest.

‘BBP’ and Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (Freedom of information) [2026] AICmr 74 (21 August 2026)

Key Points: This decision discusses whether a practical refusal reason exists and provides practical guidance on the request consultation process.  The decision recognises that there is an inherent tension between the obligations on agencies to assist an applicant to revise the scope of their request outside of the request consultation period and to issue a decision on the request within the prescribed timeframe.

In this context, agencies should consider taking early steps to comply with both obligations by providing applicants with an evidence-based request consultation notice that includes practical suggestions on how to revise scope.  A comprehensive evidence-based notice would outline the practical steps taken to process the request as well as provide relevant contextual information that may enable the applicant to understand the types of documents that the agency holds. Such a notice could include:

• what searches were conducted and why (keywords used, which teams/staff members conducted searches, which systems/locations were searched)
• what searches remain to be conducted
• the outcome of the search results (numbers of documents, nature of documents identified)
• a breakdown of estimated processing time based on a sample, and
• other relevant information such as particular complexities in processing the FOI request, contextual information to the requested documents and information that is already publicly available.

This approach would align with the objects of the FOI Act to perform and exercise the functions and powers given by the Act, as far as possible, to facilitate and promote public access to information, promptly and at the lowest reasonable cost. This practice would also serve to build trust between the agency and the applicant by increasing transparency around the agency’s FOI processes.

‘BBQ’ and Department of Health, Disability and Ageing (Freedom of information) [2026] AICmr 75 (26 August 2026)

Key Points: This decision discusses the application of the legal professional privilege exemption in s 42 of the FOI Act to documents related to a health product. It highlights established legal principles that:

• legal professional privilege extends to a copy of a non-privileged document where the dominant purpose for bringing the copy into existence was to obtain legal advice. Where a document comprises an email chain and the dominant purpose of the lead (latest in time) email is the giving or obtaining of legal advice by or from a lawyer, then the entire chain may also be privileged. This is because the email chain is, in effect, a copy of communications provided by or to the lawyer for the dominant purpose of giving or obtaining legal advice, and
• where an agency obtains legal advice and subsequently shares it on a limited basis with another agency, privilege may not be waived if the latter agency shares a common (mutual) interest in the subject matter of the legal advice.