 |
This report provides observations on themes or issues we identified from the garnishee action complaints received by our office. |
|
The discussion and recommendations in this report draw from the analysis of Strand I funding decisions in 2006, but are otherwise framed in terms that apply more generally to the policies and procedures of the AFC. |
|
Report on investigation of complaint-handling systems in airports for the Australian Customs Service, Australian Federal Police, Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service, Department of Immigration and Citizenship and the Office of Transport Safety.
Agency responses to the report and the self-audit checklist that we provided to agencies are also provided. |
|
This investigation into the management of complaints about unacceptable behaviour made by Australian Defence Force members was initiated to determine whether the Department of Defence complaint-handling policy and practices are effective, and identify any areas requiring improvement. |
|
Report on own motion investigation to review MARA’s complaint-handling process with a view to ascertaining whether MARA’s commitment to resolving complaints is reflected in its systems and processes; the resolution of complaints is in accordance with best practice; and whether there are opportunities for improvement. |
|
This review was undertaken because the AFP considered it timely to assess the operations of the City Watchhouse. The review was triggered in part by concerns raised by recent complaints from persons who had been held in police custody in the Watchhouse. |
|
In 2005 and 2006, the Australian Government referred 247 immigration detention cases to the Commonwealth Ombudsman for investigation. This report deals with 45 cases in which a data recording error occurred at some stage during the detention of a person under the Migration Act 1958, during the period 2002 to 2005. |
|
In 2005 and 2006, the Australian Government referred the cases of 247 people who had been detained by the Department of Immigration and Citizenship to the Commonwealth Ombudsman for investigation. This report deals with 70 cases categorised as detention process issues. |
|
In 2005 and 2006 the Australian Government referred 247 immigration detention cases to the Commonwealth Ombudsman for investigation. This report deals with notification issues and cases affected by the Federal Court decision in Srey. |
|
In 2005 and 2006 the Australian Government referred 247 immigration detention cases to the Commonwealth Ombudsman for investigation. This report addresses the detention of 33 people whose matters were classified as ‘other legal issues’. |
|
In 2005 and 2006 the Australian Government referred 247 immigration detention cases to the Ombudsman for investigation. Eight published reports contain the results of those investigations. The purpose of this new report is to draw together ten lessons from the referred immigration reports that are relevant to all areas of government. |
|
The Ombudsman initiated this project to review issues relating to the Ombudsman’s jurisdiciton and the complaint-handling processes of courts and tribunals. Individual responses of each court and tribunal |
|
This is an abridged version of report 13|2007. The full report has not been made publicly available due to the amount of personal detail it contains. |
|
Based on the difficulty decision makers appeared to be experiencing in applying the aspect of social security law relating to people who can be said to be 'members of a couple', the Ombudsman decided to undertake an investigation on an own motion basis into the policy guidelines for assessing marriage-like relationships under the legislation. |
|
30 December 2006 to 30 June 2007 |
|
The Ombudsman initiated an own motion investigation to examine notification of decisions and review rights that are provided to unsuccessful visa applicants. The investigation assessed the quality of DIAC's notification letters and whether they accorded with the requirements of the Migration Act. |
|
The Ombudsman's investigation identified seven primary areas of inconsistency. The report discusses Centrelink's processing practices in the context of their consistency with the social security law and policy guidelines, as well as their impact on customers. |
|
This is an abridged version of report 17|2007. The full report has not been made publicly available to preserve the privacy of the complainant. |
|
Report on an investigation of two complaints about Comcare identifying a rehabilitation authority for former Australian Government employees. |
