Learn our procedures for determining breaches to the APS Code of Conduct and what happens when a breach occurs.

On this page

• 1. Background
• 2. Consideration of suspected breaches
• 3. Breach decision maker
• 4. Sanction delegate
• 5. Suspension delegate
• 6. Reassignment of duties or suspension from duty
• 7. The determination process
• 8. Variation in investigation
• 9. Sanctions
• 10. Record of determination and sanction
• 11. Additional procedural requirements for current senior executive services employees
• 12. Procedure when an ongoing employee is to move to another agency during an investigation
• 13. Eligibility for review

1. Background

1.1 The APS Code of Conduct at s 13 of the Public Service Act 1999 (Cth) sets out the standards of behaviour expected of AUSTRAC employees; that an employee whose conduct does not comply with an aspect of the APS Code of Conduct may be found to have breached the APS Code of Conduct. 

1.2 Any sanctions imposed are intended to be proportionate to the nature of the breach, to be a deterrent to the employee and others, and to demonstrate that misconduct is not tolerated in AUSTRAC. 

1.3 The standard of proof for determining whether a breach of the APS Code of Conduct has occurred is on the balance of probabilities. This means that the decision-maker must be satisfied that a breach of the APS Code of Conduct is more likely than not to have occurred. 

1.4 Procedural considerations regarding whether a breach of the APS Code of Conduct by an employee has occurred will ensure that: 

• as far as practicable, confidentiality of all parties will be maintained
• investigations will be as timely as is possible and appropriate
• appropriate record keeping will be observed, and
• employees and former employees are presumed to not be in breach until a determination has been made. 

2. Consideration of suspected breaches

2.1 As soon as practicable after a suspected breach of the APS Code of Conduct has been identified, the Chief Executive Officer or one of the following employees: 

• Chief Operating Officer
• Chief Security Officer
• National Manager, People and Business Solutions
• Director, Integrity and Personnel Security
• Director, Employee Experience 

will consider if it is appropriate for a preliminary assessment to be conducted to assess whether the suspected breach of the APS Code of Conduct should be formally investigated under these procedures. 

2.2 Once a decision is made to formally investigate the suspected breach under these procedures the Chief Executive Officer or employee detailed at 2.1, will appoint a person (‘the breach decision maker’) to make a determination under these procedures. 

2.3 These procedures do not prevent the Chief Executive Officer, or a person listed at 2.1, from appointing themselves as the breach decision maker. 

3. Breach decision maker

3.1. The role of the breach decision-maker is to determine in writing whether a breach of the APS Code of Conduct has occurred. 

3.2. The Chief Executive Officer of AUSTRAC, or their delegate, may appoint a decision maker (the ‘breach decision-maker') who is within the APS, to decide whether an APS employee of AUSTRAC or a person who was formerly an APS employee of AUSTRAC has breached the APS Code of Conduct. 

3.3. The Chief Executive Officer, or any person listed in 2.1 may appoint an internal investigator or seek the assistance of an investigator who may be external to AUSTRAC. The investigator may investigate the alleged breach, gather evidence and make a report of recommended findings to the breach decision-maker. 

3.4. These procedures do not prevent the breach decision-maker from being the sanction delegate in the same matter but appointing a breach decision-maker separate from the sanction delegate is preferable. 

3.5. The breach decision maker must be, and must appear to be, independent and unbiased. 

4. Sanction delegate

4.1. The sanction delegate will be a person who holds a delegation of the power under subsection 15(1) of the Act. The sanction delegate will determine what, if any, sanction is to be imposed on an APS employee who is found to have breached the APS Code of Conduct. 

4.2. The sanction delegate must be, and must appear to be, independent and unbiased. 

5. Suspension delegate

5.1. The suspension delegate will determine whether an employee should be suspended from duties whilst the investigation is undertaken. The suspension delegate will hold a delegation of the powers and functions under section 28 of the Act and section 14 of the Public Service Regulations 2023 (Cth) (‘PS Regulations’). 

5.2. Where suspension from duties is being considered, appointing a suspension delegate separate from the breach decision-maker is preferable. 

6. Reassignment of duties or suspension from duty

6.1. A current APS employee who is under investigation for a suspected breach of the APS Code of Conduct may be: 

• a) reassigned to alternative duties, either for a temporary period or on an ongoing basis, under section 25 of the Act; or
• b) suspended from duty by the suspension delegate under section 28 of the Act and section 14 of the PS Regulations. 

6.2. To remove any doubt, this clause also applies to SES employees. 

6.3. In reassigning duties of a current APS employee who is under investigation, the relevant delegate will: 

• a) notify the current APS employee who is under investigation of the proposal in writing; and
• b) give the person a reasonable opportunity (usually 7 calendar days) to respond before any decision to suspend or re-assign is taken. 

6.4. In suspending a current APS employee who is under investigation, the suspension delegate will: 

a) notify the current APS employee, in writing, of AUSTRAC’s intention to suspend them, and the reasons for this proposal; and 

b) give the person reasonable opportunity to respond (usually 7 calendar days) before any decision to suspend is taken. 

6.5. An employee will usually be advised of the reasons for a proposed suspension or reassignment of duties and given an opportunity to comment before the action is taken. If circumstances necessitate the suspension or reassignment to be actioned without notifying the employee, then as soon as practicable, the employee will be given notice of the reasons for the decision and provided with an opportunity to make a submission. 

7. The determination process

7.1. The process for determining whether a person has breached the APS Code of Conduct must be carried out with as little formality, and with as much expedition, as a proper consideration of the matter allows. 

7.2. The process must be consistent with the principles of procedural fairness. 

7.3. A determination may not be made in relation to a suspected breach of the APS Code of Conduct by a person unless reasonable steps have been taken to: 

• a) Inform the person of:
  • i. the details of the suspected breach of the APS Code of Conduct (including any subsequent variation of the details); and
  • ii. where the person is an APS employee, the sanctions that may be imposed on them under section 15(1) of the Act.
• b) Give the person a reasonable opportunity (usually 7 calendar days) to make a written or oral statement in relation to the suspected breach. 

8. Variation in investigation

8.1. If during the course of an investigation it becomes evident that there is a material variation in the nature or extent of the alleged breach notified to the employee, the employee must be notified in writing of the variation and any variation in the range of sanctions that may be imposed if the employee is found to have breached the APS Code of Conduct. 

8.2. The employee must be provided with a reasonable opportunity (usually 7 calendar days) to make a further statement or provide further evidence before a determination is made. 

9. Sanctions

9.1. If a determination is made that an APS employee in AUSTRAC has breached the APS Code of Conduct, a sanction may not be imposed on the employee unless reasonable steps have been taken to: 

• a) Inform the employee of:
  • i. the determination that the APS Code of Conduct has been breached;
  • ii. the sanction or sanctions that are under consideration, in accordance with section 15(1) of the Act;
  • iii. the factors that are under consideration in determining any sanction to be imposed; and
• b) Give the employee a reasonable opportunity (usually 7 calendar days) to make a statement, either written or oral, in relation to sanctions. 

10. Record of determination and sanction

10.1. When a determination in relation to a suspected breach of the APS Code of Conduct is made, a written record must be made of: 

• a) the suspected breach;
• b) the determination;
• c) where the person is an employee of AUSTRAC, any sanctions imposed as a result of a determination that the employee breached the APS Code of Conduct; and
• d) any statement of reasons provided to the employee or former employee regarding the determination and/or sanction decision. 

11. Additional procedural requirements for current senior executive services employees

11.1. This section applies only when a current Senior Executive Service (SES) is suspected of breaching the APS Code of Conduct. 

11.2. The Chief Executive Officer of AUSTRAC as the Agency Head must comply with the requirements of section 64 of the Australian Public Service Commissioner's Directions 2022 (Cth) (‘Directions’) to consult with either the APS Commissioner, or a delegate of the Commissioner: 

• a) on the process for determining whether the employee has breached the APS Code of Conduct; and
• b) if considering imposing a sanction, before imposing the sanction. 

12. Procedure when an ongoing employee is to move to another agency during an investigation

12.1. This clause applies if: 

• a) an ongoing APS employee in AUSTRAC is suspected of having breached the APS Code of Conduct; and
• b) the employee has been informed of the matters mentioned in clause 5.3.(a); and
• c) the matter has not yet been resolved; and
• d) a decision has been made that, apart from this clause, the employee would move to another agency in accordance with section 26 of the Act (including on promotion). 

12.2. Unless the Chief Executive Officer of AUSTRAC and the new Agency Head agree otherwise, the movement (including on promotion) does not take effect until the matter is resolved. 

12.3. For the purpose of this clause, the matter is taken to be resolved when: 

• a) a determination in relation to suspected breach of the APS Code of Conduct is made in accordance with these procedures, or
• b) the Chief Executive Officer of AUSTRAC or their delegate decides that a determination is not necessary. 

See sections 42A and 46 of the Directions. 

13. Eligibility for review

13.1. The APS makes fair employment decisions with a fair system of review. Under s.33 of the PS Act, APS employees are entitled to a review of actions or decisions that relate to their APS employment, with some exceptions. The PS Regulations provide the framework for the review scheme, and the limits and exceptions that apply. APS employee review rights relating to the determination of breaches under the APS Code of Conduct and sanctions here.