NSW Defamation from from University Head - What to Do?

[Australian Student]

This involves NSW Work Health and Safety Legislation -- or rather the misuse of it.

I was a graduate student studying at the University of New South Wales when I lost my supervisor. The head of my school didn’t like me, and consequently told potential supervisors and others that I could not approach faculty members in the school because I was "prevented" from doing so by the University’s health and safety policy.

I was told this in an official university communication. The implication was that I was a danger and a health and safety risk to the community, and that there was consequently some sort of official pronouncement made preventing me from speaking to anybody at the school. This, of course, put a real damper on my social life, as well as my ability to find a supervisor to finish my thesis, which I subsequently had to abandon.

Of course this was absolute nonsense, but I am an international student, and at the time I knew absolutely nothing about Australian law involving health and safety. I was confused and intimidated. I thought there really might be some official restriction. It has taken me several years to figure out that this was absolute hogswill and that there was nothing preventing me from speaking to anybody. By saying that the health and safety policy prevented me from speaking to anybody was, as far as I am concerned, a case of malicious defamation.

While I imagine I can hire an attorney for defamation, I also think that I can follow this up as a misuse of official government legislation. Essentially, the administrators were saying that Australian law pertaining to Workplace Health and Safety precluded anybody from speaking to me.

Besides giving a defamation lawyer $30,000, what are my other options to pursue a complaint about it? Public Interest Disclosure?

 

[Clancy]

Well let's read between the lines... The head of the school doesn't like you 'because' you had an argument.

If you were abusive or threatening during the argument, then she is actually entitled to do what she did under Australian law.

 

[Australian Student]

Well lets read between the lines.... the head of the school doesn't like you 'because' you had an argument.
If you were abusive or threatening during the argument, then she is actually entitled to do what she did under Australian law.

I guess that's true, Clancy -- that is if there was some sort of official process in which I was certifiably deemed abusive or threatening, and therefore enacting the OH&S policy.

However, I do not believe that Australian law permits university administrators to unilaterally decree that people cannot talk to someone because of a restriction of the University's OH&S policy, if no such restriction exists, and no such conduct justifying such a restriction has ever been recorded.

If I am not mistaken, the only Australian law pertaining to such behavior would be in the defamation realm of things.

 

[Serge Gorval]

Defamation may be difficult to prove in your case. There may be discriminatory action as opposed to breaches of WHS laws. Was anything actually done? Were police involved, etc?

 

[Australian Student]

defamation may be difficult to prove in your case, there may be discriminatory action as opposed to breaches of WHS laws. was anything actually done ? were police involved etc ?

My PhD candidature was discontinued, career ruined ; )

In terms of anything actually done, you mean any behavior that would have warranted some sort of restriction? No, absolutely nothing.

 

[Clancy]

My PhD candidature was discontinued, career ruined ; )

In terms of anything actually done, you mean any behavior that would have warranted some sort of restriction? No, absolutely nothing.

Well then it comes down to whatever are the specific allegations behind their actions and you challenging those allegations if they are false.

What I suspect, is the allegations are false by way of 'embellishment' of the truth, correct?

Ever watched the movie anger management? The airplane incident... That is a classic example of embellishment of the truth to put someone in trouble.

 

[Australian Student]

Well then it comes down to whatever are the specific allegations behind their actions and you challenging those allegations if they are false.

What i suspect, is the allegations are false by way of 'embellishment' of the truth, correct?

Ever watched the movie anger management? The airplane incident.... that is a classic example of embellishment of the truth to put someone in trouble.

Embellishment of the truth is something that many in our culture have become expert in. In this case, they got sloppy. They forgot that even an embellishment has to have some basis in reality. There was nothing. Let me say that again. Nothing, nothing nothing. Only people with an agenda and an HR handbook to pluck the right language from. No one is even suggesting there was anything at this point.

Please let me know if you would like me to say "nothing nothing nothing" a few more times, Clancy. I would be glad to.

 

[Clancy]

Embellishment of the truth is something that many in our culture have become expert in. In this case, they got sloppy. They forgot that even an embellishment has to has some basis in reality. There was nothing. Let me say that again. Nothing, nothing nothing. No one is even suggesting there was anything at this point.

Well what was their allegation?

 

[Australian Student]

Well what was their allegation?

Their allegations were that there were allegations but they did not specify what allegations had been alleged.

Yes, I wrote that correctly. They used circular language.

 

[Clancy]

Here is a guide to due process and campus justice - Its American but, should give you some ideas on where to start.

FIRE's Guide to Due Process and Campus Justice — Full Text - FIRE