The Public Interest Disclosure Act 2003 is very clear here, you cannot take detrimental action against a person who has made, or intends to make a disclosure [14. (2) (a)] . Nor can they incite another person to commit that offence [14. (2) (b)] as a $24,000 fine or 2 years imprisonment is a pretty big deterrent [14 (1)]. 

Ok, so where does that leave individuals seeking to make a disclosure? Well, proceedings in tort under subsection (1) may be undertaken against the perpetrator of an act of victimisation. Proceedings may be dealt with under the Equal Opportunity Act 1984 under Section 67 of the Act. They need to be careful here, a tort is a civil wrong and the $24,000 could indeed be the cheap option for some of them. 

Right, so individuals need to be calm here and document everything, Section 8. (2) states that a proper authority may refuse to investigate or discontinue an investigation if it is considered that (a) the matter is trivial or (b) the disclosure is vexatious or frivolous and this would be their most likely strategy. Documentation is the key to their survival here, if every action is documented, it is defendable – including timelines. 

Individuals should be very careful here, a person purporting to be a disclosure of public interest information knowing it to be false or reckless also commits a crime and faces a $12,000 fine or 1 year imprisonment. So, they need to ensure they are not looking to make a misleading statement, or one that can be dismissed as frivolous or vexatious.  

Regardless, the last thing they would want is proceedings in the Equal Opportunity Commission to test this defense where all the news outlets are in attendance and this issue is played out in a public forum on the record. Of course that’s not going to happen as I am not going to take them there as despite their shortcomings, I see them as a rational negotiator.