Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC)
A short factsheet on the OAIC: its establishing Act, its dual privacy-regulation and freedom-of-information-review functions, and what it can and cannot order.
Learning outcomes
- State the OAIC's establishing Act and its two functions: privacy regulation and freedom-of-information review.
- Explain the OAIC's powers under the Privacy Act, including determinations and civil penalty proceedings for serious interferences with privacy.
- Distinguish the OAIC's FOI-review role from the ART's general merits review function.
Act: Australian Information Commissioner Act 2010 (Cth).1
Established: 2010, when the Act commenced, consolidating what had previously been separate privacy and FOI oversight functions into a single office.
Purpose: The OAIC performs two distinct functions under one roof: it is the Commonwealth privacy regulator under the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth), and it independently reviews Commonwealth agencies' decisions on freedom-of-information requests under the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Cth).
Privacy function
The OAIC investigates privacy complaints, can conduct its own-motion investigations into suspected interferences with privacy, and can make determinations. For serious or repeated interferences with privacy, the Information Commissioner can apply to the Federal Court for civil penalty orders — a real, court-enforced consequence, not merely a recommendation.
Freedom-of-information review function
Where an agency refuses an FOI request (in whole or part), an applicant can seek OAIC review before going to the Administrative Review Tribunal. The OAIC's FOI review can affirm, vary or set aside the agency's decision — a genuine merits-review-style power, but confined to FOI decisions specifically, not a general jurisdiction over Commonwealth administrative decisions generally.
How it relates to the other Commonwealth bodies
The OAIC's FOI review function overlaps in kind, but not in scope, with the Administrative Review Tribunal's general merits review jurisdiction — a dissatisfied FOI applicant can typically choose OAIC review or go straight to the ART, but the OAIC is FOI-specific. Where a complaint concerns discrimination rather than privacy, the relevant body is instead the Australian Human Rights Commission.
Self-check
- Have I distinguished the OAIC's privacy-regulation function from its separate FOI-review function?
- Have I identified that serious privacy breaches can lead to Federal Court civil penalty proceedings, not just an OAIC recommendation?
- Have I distinguished OAIC's FOI-specific review from the ART's general merits review jurisdiction?