In the decision, Deputy President Ives made it clear that:
The Applicant’s explanation to the effect that as, in his view, the material that he passed to the [union] concerned or affected him and that he was, as a consequence, somehow relieved of any obligations relating to the maintenance of confidentiality is, at the least, misconceived and in no measure does it mitigate liability for his actions.
From time-to-time I'm approached with suggestions that there are management documents that I might like to see—
If it isn't public, hasn't been sent to me, hasn't been sent to a member, and it's clearly confidential, then I don't want see it. There are other ways and I don't want anyone's neck stuck out.
The matter of Godwin Grech and the email didn't motivate me to address this topic. That situation also offers a cautionary tale to those who receive such material.
It wasn't too long ago that public universities were, relatively, open books. That time seems to have passed. More and more matters seem to be decided behind closed doors. That, in turn (Freedom of Information and Right to Information Acts notwithstanding), has led to a view that unless disclosure is specifically authorised, then it's prohibited. That, however, is a topic for another day.
Beware of the person who can't be bothered by details.
—William Feather (1908 - 1976)
