Breadcrumbs

Protected Disclosures Policy


Responsibility for policy: In-House Legal Counsel
Approving authority: Vice-Chancellor
Last reviewed: January 2016
Next review date: March 2020

Print Version

Application

  1. This policy applies to current and former staff, current and former students, and current and former members of the University of Waikato Council, University Committees, Boards and Trust Boards.

Purpose

  1. The purpose of this policy is to set out
    1. the processes by which serious wrongdoing in the University should be reported, with reference where applicable to the Protected Disclosures Act 2000 and
    2. rights and responsibilities associated with protected disclosures.

Scope

  1. The processes in this policy are intended only for situations involving allegations of serious wrongdoing (as defined in clause 6 of this policy) where the University's usual reporting or complaints processes, e.g. a grievance under the Staff Code of Conduct or complaint under the Student Complaints Procedures, are not appropriate.
  2. This policy is separate from, and additional to, any rights and obligations that an individual may have under the Protected Disclosures Act 2000.

Related documents

  1. The following documents set out further information relevant to this policy:

Definitions

  1. In this policy:

    protected disclosure has the meaning defined in the Protected Disclosures Act 2000

  2. serious wrongdoing has the meaning defined in the Protected Disclosures Act 2000 and includes serious wrongdoing of any of the following types:

    1. an unlawful, corrupt, or irregular use of funds or resources of the University of Waikato
    2. an act, omission or course of conduct that constitutes a serious risk to public health, public safety or the environment
    3. an act, omission or course of conduct that constitutes a serious risk to the maintenance of law, including the prevention, investigation, and detection of offences and the right to a fair trial
    4. an act, omission or course of conduct that constitutes an offence
    5. an act, omission or course of conduct by a public official that is oppressive, improperly discriminatory or grossly negligent, or that constitutes gross mismanagement

    Internal Authority means any of the following:

    • the Chancellor
    • the Vice-Chancellor
    • the In-House Legal Counsel

    External Authority means one of the various officials and organisations included in the definition of "appropriate authority" in the Protected Disclosures Act 2000.

Processes and responsibilities

  1. A current staff member who has information about serious wrongdoing, believes the information is likely to be true and wishes to make a protected disclosure rather than using any other University reporting or complaints process, is encouraged to make the disclosure to his or her line manager in the first instance.
  2. A line manager to whom a protected disclosure is made must refer the disclosure to an Internal Authority.
  3. A current staff member who prefers to make a disclosure to someone other than his or her line manager for any reason may make a protected disclosure through either of the following mechanisms:
    1. reporting it directly to an Internal Authority, or
    2. reporting it by email to uniconcerns@nwm.co.nz, which is an external email address independently hosted and monitored by the University's lawyers, Norris Ward McKinnon.
  4. A person to whom this policy applies who is not a current staff member may make a protected disclosure through either of the mechanisms outlined in clause 9 of this policy.
  5. A protected disclosure reported to uniconcerns@nwm.co.nz will be received by Norris Ward McKinnon; a member of Norris Ward McKinnon will ensure that the person making the disclosure is aware of the University's Protected Disclosures Policy and associated processes, with a view to ensuring that the matter is addressed in accordance with this policy and the Protected Disclosures Act 2000.
  6. A person may make a disclosure directly to an External Authority if the person making the disclosure believes on reasonable grounds that:
    1. the Vice-Chancellor or Chancellor is or may be involved in the serious wrong-doing alleged in the disclosure, or
    2. immediate reference to an External Authority is justified by reason of the urgency of the matter which the disclosure relates, or some other exceptional circumstance, or
    3. there has been no action or recommended action on the matter to which the disclosure relates within 20 working days after the date on which the disclosure was made.

Responsibilities of Internal Authorities

  1. An Internal Authority has a responsibility to arrange for the investigation of a protected disclosure referred to him or her under this policy, and must ensure that every effort is made to complete an investigation within 20 working days of the disclosure.
  2. An Internal Authority will not arrange for the investigation of a disclosure that is frivolous, vexatious, trivial or made in bad faith. If an Internal Authority believes a disclosure to be frivolous, vexatious, trivial or made in bad faith, the Internal Authority must inform the person making the disclosure of
    1. the Internal Authority's belief and intention not to arrange for the investigation of the disclosure, and
    2. the person's right to make the disclosure to an External Authority, if he or she wishes to do so.
  3. If a protected disclosure involves fraud or corruption, the Internal Authority must conduct the investigation in accordance with the University's Fraud and Corruption Response Plan.
  4. Where a protected disclosure involves a matter other than fraud or corruption, the Internal Authority has the discretion to establish the process for investigating it.
  5. The Internal Authority is responsible for advising the person who made the disclosure about the likely timeframe of the investigation and, when the time comes, if appropriate, the outcome
  6. In carrying out any investigation, and subject to clause 22 of this policy, the Internal Authority is entitled to use any information or material included in the disclosure that he or she considers relevant and necessary to the proper carrying out of the investigation.
  7. If serious wrongdoing or any other conduct contrary to the best interests of the University is found to have been committed, the Internal Authority will refer the matter to be dealt with by an appropriate process. Examples of processes that may follow any investigation are:
    1. action under the Staff Code of Conduct if it involves a current staff member
    2. action under the Student Discipline Regulations if it involves a current student
    3. referring the matter to the Police if it appears that a crime may have been committed.
  8. If serious wrongdoing is found to have been committed by a person to whom this policy applies other than a current student or staff member, any action or process to deal with the wrongdoing must be decided in consultation with the Vice-Chancellor and, if the Vice-Chancellor agrees, the Chancellor.

Protections for, and obligations of, those who make protected disclosures

  1. The University recognises that making disclosures of serious wrongdoing can be stressful, and encourages those who wish to do so to seek access to confidential counselling services through the Employee Assistance Programme in the case of current staff, or through the Student Counselling Service in the case of current students.
  2. An Internal Authority must make all reasonable efforts to protect the identity of a person making a disclosure under this policy, unless that person gives consent in writing that his or her identity may be disclosed.
  3. The Protected Disclosures Act 2000 sets out additional protections that will be extended in some cases to those making a disclosure; these include:
    1. immunity from civil and criminal proceedings for making the disclosure, provided that the disclosure is made in good faith and is not frivolous, vexatious or trivial
    2. immunity from disciplinary action for making the disclosure, provided that the disclosure is made in good faith and is not frivolous, vexatious or trivial
    3. the right of a staff member making a disclosure to raise a personal grievance against the University if he or she is subject to retaliation or unjustified disadvantage.
  4. The University is unable to guarantee that a student making a disclosure under this policy will be extended the protections outlined in clause 23 of this policy; if appropriate, however, the University will use its best endeavours to ensure that students who in good faith make a disclosure under this policy are immune from civil and criminal proceedings and are not subject to retaliation or unjustified disadvantage.
  5. A person who makes a protected disclosure under this policy must engage with the University in good faith and, to the fullest extent permitted by law, must treat the matter, including the outcome of an investigation, as confidential to the parties concerned; reasons for this include:
    1. to avoid undermining and damaging the protected disclosures process
    2. to avoid biasing anyone who may need to be interviewed
    3. to avoid unnecessary interruptions to the operations of the University
    4. to help prevent harassment of anyone involved in the process
    5. to help ensure a truly unprejudiced process.

Responsibility for monitoring compliance

  1. The In-House Legal Counsel is responsible for monitoring compliance with this policy and reporting any breaches to the Vice-Chancellor.

Breaches

  1. A current staff member or student who makes a protected disclosure contrary to this policy, or a line manager who does not respond to disclosures in accordance with this policy, may be subject to disciplinary action under the Staff  Code of Conduct or the Student Discipline Regulations; examples of situations where a disclosure will not be protected under this policy are if:
    1. the person making the disclosure knows the disclosure is false
    2. the person making the disclosure is acting in bad faith.
  2. If a breach of this policy is found to have been committed by a person to whom this policy applies other than a current student or staff member, any action or process to deal with the breach must be decided on consultation with the Vice-Chancellor and, if the Vice-Chancellor agrees, the Chancellor.

Did you find this information useful? Yes | No