Department says redaction of public servants’ names from documents released under freedom of information protects them from harm

The home affairs department has argued the identities of its staff should be kept secret because they may be targeted by “keyboard commentators” and says they “have a right to use social media … without feeling the impact of their working arrangements”.

The department’s defence of its employees’ right to use social media sits uncomfortably with its long-running court battle with a former employee, Michaela Banerji, who was sacked for anonymous, tweeted criticism of Australia’s immigration policies.

The argumen was made in a submission to the information watchdog, which is examining the widespread practice of redacting public servants’ names from freedom-of-information documents.

The department argued publishing staff identities risked putting them in harm’s way, particularly online, where they might be targeted by activists, those angry at visa decisions, or “keyboard commentators”.

Social media is a dangerous space for public servants – they are being locked out of modern life | Greg Jericho Read more

“Staff have a right to use social media in their private lives without feeling the impact of their working arrangements,” the submission read. “To reduce risks staff are asked to refrain from identifying as a department employee. Nonetheless, if their details are published under FOI, it can intrude negatively into their private life, that of their family and friends, affecting their health and wellbeing.

“This has the potential to damage the reputation of the department as an employer.”

The then department of immigration and border protection sacked Banerji in 2013 over tweets critical of the federal government, its immigration policies and the treatment of asylum seekers. She was sacked for breaching the Australian public service code of conduct, which requires public servants to be apolitical “at all times”.

Banerji was tweeting from an anonymised account.

The office of the Australian information commissioner (OAIC) is currently examining the practice of redacting individual staff names from FOI documents. Such redactions have become commonplace.

Multiple departments – including the departments of veterans’ affairs, human services, and foreign affairs and trade – have warned that releasing the names of individual employees risks exposing them to intimidation, aggression, or online harassment.

High court rules public servants can be sacked for political social media posts Read more

“The release of staff details puts the staff member at risk of abuse, harassment and intimidation,” the Department of Human Services wrote. “The vast majority of interactions between staff and customers of the department are friendly and respectful. However, incidents of customer aggression do occur.”

The Department of Human Services sparked controversy in 2017 when it released confidential and private details of welfare recipient Andie Fox who had criticised its debt recovery practices. It said the release of Fox’s details was necessary to correct the public record about several inaccurate claims Fox had made in a newspaper article.

The department also used its submission to the information commissioner to argue the release of employee names and details would undermine its established methods of communication with customers, including its notoriously overloaded phone system.

“These methods have been established to avoid departmental officers being contacted directly by customers to deal with queries they are not trained or authorised to handle,” the department said in its submission.