[Summary]
Then there is consideration of the public interest in terms of the secrecy surrounding the AFP‟s own conduct in this case. Mr Hack was openly informed that evidence of serious AFP misconduct had already been published on the internet, yet this was never referred to in the decision document. Public interest is not AFP interest, yet the decision document appears not to recognize this fact. Instead, the document almost exclusively follows the AFP line, supporting secrecy, even where grave and disturbing issues are raised. Correct and proper context is simply not applied. Further, the document allows a number of clearly dubious devices, employed by the AFP to support censorship, to remain undisturbed and unchallenged.
4.2 SUMMARY This, demonstrably, was not a balanced hearing. The outcome, therefore, was perhaps predictable. The excessive weight given to the testimony of AFP officers was evident through the direct acceptance of, often hidden, affidavit statements, whilst reference to the input of Schapelle Corby‟s representatives was entirely absent. The serious issues identified in Section 3 of this report speak for themselves, and their implications are stark. In effect, the AAT rubber stamped AFP censorship of its own conduct and political role, and thus simultaneously brought itself into disrepute. It allowed AFP secrecy to trump the public‟s right of transparency, on the most fundamental of issues. Schapelle Corby‟s rights, as a citizen, were totally disregarded, rather than balanced against the narrow interests of the AFP. The real context of the FOI request, and the wider public interest issues it raised, were not even referred to. As mirrored across a range of government departments, in practical terms, Schapelle Corby's democratic and legal rights, under freedom of information legislation in Australia, have been revoked. The State continues to hide and censor the disturbing information, which exposes its own conduct, from both Schapelle Corby, and from the public.
Expendable.TV
Page 4 - 2