An appeal is being prepared to ask for McDevitt’s letter to Privileges Committee to be released.
It was mentioned previously that the best course of action to get this document released is to show exactly how he misled the Senate. That is what is happening.
This is what ASADA have written on the subject:
The advice also referred to Senate standing order 37 and Senate procedural order of continuing effect No. 4 which provides that “The Senate confirms that any disclosure of evidence or documents submitted to a committee, …without the approval of the committee or of the Senate, may be treated by the Senate as a contempt.”
ASADA’s decision to exempt the document under section 46 of the FOI Act was based on the fact that the Senate committee, had not published it through Hansard or other senate publications and despite an FOI request the committee had decided not to publish it.
I note your submissions of 10 May 2017, which state:
The rationale used to refuse the release of this correspondence, which in fact clears a government employee from misleading the Senate, is perplexing given the importance of this issue and the public interest in this anti doping case. Disclosure would promote accountability and transparency.
However, the s 46 exemption does not require consideration of public interest factors. That is, the public interest is an irrelevant consideration when deciding whether or not a documents is exempt under s 46.
In my preliminary view as case officer, that disclosure of the document would infringe the privileges of the Senate. Therefore, the document is exempt under s 46 of the FOI Act.