• Go to start of text • Viewing preferences • Privacy, legal & copyright
Print this page
We recommend that you reduce printer margins for this report. This can be done in Page Setup...under the File menu
Find Download

 

Home
Personal behaviour
Reporting suspected breaches of the Code of ConductManaging suspected breaches of the Code of ConductReviews related to Code of Conduct matters

Reviews related to Code of Conduct matters

The Regulations provide non-SES employees with a review right in relation to a determination that they breached the Code and/or the sanction imposed for a breach (other than termination decisions). An application for such a review is lodged directly with the Merit Protection Commissioner.

Table 6.7: Reviews related to Code breaches or sanctions, 2001–02 to 2004–05
  2001–02 2002–03 2003–04 2004–05
Number received 43(a) 43 58 41
Percentage of finalised cases where the original decision was confirmed 64% 34% 43% 46%

Note: (a) This figure now excludes a matter dealt with under the Public Employment (Consequential and Transitional) Amendment Act 1999.

Source: Merit Protection Commissioner

In 2004–05, the Merit Protection Commissioner received 41 applications for review compared to 58 in 2003–04. This represents a review rate of around 8% of finalised investigations where employees were found to have breached the Code.

During 2004–05, the Merit Protection Commissioner made a formal recommendation to an agency head in 26 cases. In 12 (46%) of these, the Merit Protection Commissioner recommended the decision be confirmed. In a further 12 cases the Merit Protection Commissioner recommended that the agency head vary the decision and in the remaining two cases he recommended setting aside the decision. Only three reviews included a recommendation to vary the sanction imposed. No systemic issues were identified through these reviews.

The data indicates that the percentage of cases in which original decisions are set aside can vary greatly from year to year. This reflects both the small number of reviews and the diverse nature of the different cases.

go to top of the page