The Australian National University has been accused of mishandling public interest disclosures as the parliament considers legislation to strengthen the public sector whistleblowing framework.
Three submissions to the Senate committee inquiry into the Public Interest Disclosure Amendment (Review) Bill 2022 allege serious instances of misuse of funds and corruption and were scathing of the university's investigations into disclosures.
But the university's general counsel Philip Harrison said the claims were unsubstantiated and that independent investigators have found no disclosable conduct.
Professor Dirk Van Rooy and Inge Saris said in their submission they were aware of several public interest disclosures between 2014 and 2018 which related to alleged negligence, maladministration, misuse of public funds, corruption and abuse of position.
"There were (and continue to be) serious concerns about the ANU wasting large amounts of (tax payers) money, whilst damaging people's lives and careers by not having the correct checks and balances in place," they wrote.
They claim several public interest disclosures related to a lack of accountability and transparency within the university which created opportunities for fraud and corruption.
Prof Van Rooy and Ms Saris said the issues raised were never properly investigated and that the public interest disclosure act relies too heavily on self-regulation.
Former Music School head Prof Peter Tregear wrote in his submission he created three public interest disclosures between 2016 and 2018 relating to his time at the university.
Prof Tregear said the university was slow to investigate disclosures and the decisions from appointed public officers or third-party consultants were "characterised by actual bias".
Prof Tregear made complaints to the Commonwealth Ombudsman, a body which can review decision of government agencies, about the handling of his public interest disclosures, however the ombudsman closed its investigation after the university failed to provide further information as to how decisions were reached.
The Canberra Times viewed a copy of a letter from the ombudsman to Prof Tregear from September 2020 which said: "Although the investigation appears to have been reasonably comprehensive, based on the information we reviewed, we formed the view that the investigation report did not adequately explain the basis for some of the investigator's findings.
"As the ANU did not provide us with the additional information we requested, it was difficult for us to be satisfied that the investigator's findings were reasonably open."
The ombudsman wrote to the university about its observations about procedural fairness in its investigations but the university did not respond.
A third inquiry submission by Joyce Noronha-Barrett referred to a public interest disclosure she made in 2015.
"The PID involving a substantial sum of public monies expended by my employer to cover wrongdoing related to workplace bullying and unfair dismissal," she said.
The Canberra Times has confirmed the employer she referred to was the Australian National University.
Dr Noronha-Barrett said the university did not have to investigate further after they deemed the disclosure to be vexatious.
"Court settlements and deeds of release should not be used by public service agencies to stop PID investigations," she said.
In a response to the inquiry, Mr Philip said Prof Van Rooy and Ms Saris's submission made "broad and unsubstantiated assertions" and was not made by people who had submitted public interest disclosures themselves.
"In those circumstances, and insofar as ANU may respond, the university's position is that it has investigated and reported on all public interest disclosures allocated to it where investigation was justified," Mr Philip said.
"In all instances those investigations and reports were undertaken in accordance with the act."
Mr Philip said the university was unable to comment on Prof Tregear's dealings with the Commonwealth Ombudsman because it was not privy to the correspondence.
In response to further questions from The Canberra Times regarding the allegations made in the three submissions and the university's lack of response to the Ombudsman, an ANU spokesman said it does not comment on individual staffing matters, including complaints and investigations.
"All investigations conducted by or for the University are undertaken in accordance with applicable law and the University's policies and procedures," the spokesman said.
"When appropriate, investigations are undertaken by independent, third-party expert investigators to ensure procedural fairness.
"The university notes that any allegations to the contrary are unsubstantiated and without evidence. ANU categorically rejects such accusations."
