Summary endorsed by the Board of the RACP on 11 October 2022.  

Following the 2018 Board Election, Professor John Wilson was elected as President-Elect and Professors Paul Komesaroff and Niki Ellis and Doctor Jacqueline Small elected as Member-Directors. Doctor Alice Grey was elected uncontested as the Trainee Member-Director. The successful candidates campaigned together under a “reform” ticket and are referred to in this document as the ‘Reform Candidates’.

During the Board Election, the College received several complaints from members and candidates regarding election emails sent in support of the Reform Candidates. The concerns expressed by the complainants included:

1. the large number of member recipients may have been a result of a breach of security of member details;
2. the apparent broad reach of the emails may have resulted in an unfair advantage to the Reform Candidates; and
3. a breach of the College’s policies and by-laws relating to the Board Election may have occurred.

The College engaged independent investigator, KordaMentha, on 27 April 2018 to provide independent forensic investigation services relating to the above concerns held by the College in relation to the Board Election.

As part of its investigation, KordaMentha:

1. interviewed relevant College staff and management;
2. attempted to interview the Reform Candidates and, as an alternative, provided their questions to the Reform Candidates in writing and reviewed the Reform Candidates written responses;
3. interviewed election candidates who were not part of the “reform” ticket;
4. reviewed the College’s policies and by-laws relating to the Board Election;
5. analysed the voting results of the Board Election to identify trends corresponding with the emails send in support of the Reform Candidates;
6. reviewed the email mailboxes of certain persons;
7. reviewed the storage of College member lists and the Board Election results stored on the College’s IT systems; and
8. conducted a preliminary search for malware on the College’s IT systems.

KordaMentha provided the College with an Interim Report of findings dated 10 May 2018 for consideration by the outgoing Board and the College’s legal representatives. At the College’s board meeting on 12 May 2018, the Board resolved that KordaMentha should be permitted to complete its investigations of the election complaints and areas of investigation identified in its Interim Report.

On 3 July 2018, KordaMentha provided the College with its Final Report of findings for consideration by the Board and the College’s legal representatives.

KordaMentha made certain findings and recommendations. The current RACP Board considers that, as a matter of transparency and accountability, it should report the findings and recommendations to members. However, it reiterates that the findings and recommendations below were made by KordaMentha and not the RACP or the RACP Board and do not or may not reflect the views of the RACP Board or its members. Further, the current RACP Board, being a different board to that which retained and instructed KordaMentha, cannot make any representations as to the adequacy of the processes which KordaMentha followed in conducting the investigation that resulted in its 3 July 2018 report or the factual accuracy of the descriptions of those processes in the KordaMentha report.

The principal findings and recommendations made by KordaMentha in its 3 July 2018 report were as follows:

1. The ability of KordaMentha to provide conclusive findings in respect of some of the concerns was limited by the fact that rather than participate in an interview process the Reform Candidates exercised their right to receive and respond in writing to questions put to them.
2. KordaMentha received written responses from the Reform Candidates during their investigation. Some of the Reform Candidates expressed concern that KordaMentha’s investigation may be biased because of the instructions of the previous Board. KordaMentha responded to those concerns although its response was not to the satisfaction of some of the Reform Candidates.
3. The Reform Candidates advised KordaMentha that no use of College resources or databases had occurred.
4. KordaMentha found the results of the Board Election appear to have been influenced by the Reform Candidate’s emails, both in the number of votes cast for the Reform Candidates and the total number of votes cast during the election.
5. KordaMentha did not identify evidence of improper access or use of College databases, assets or property by any candidates during the Board Election.
6. KordaMentha investigated whether the Reform Candidate emails used the same distribution list as was used by one of the Reform Candidates, Professor Wilson, for a survey he conducted (which he states was sent to approximately 21,000 members). They were unable to identify the number of members who received the Reform Candidate emails or clarify whether the same distribution list was used. KordaMentha expressed the opinion that Professor Wilson, should provide further detailed explanation regarding the obtaining, use and storage of the email addresses used for a survey conducted by him, and also explain whether the email addresses were used to assist sending election emails on behalf of the Reform Candidates.
7. Given the limited responses, KordaMentha was unable to conclude whether a breach of the College’s Constitution, its Nomination and Election Process for the Board or its College Bodies By-law had occurred.
8. Based on the information available at the time of the reports, KordaMentha was unable to conclude whether there was a breach of the College’s IT systems by a computer virus, malware or other data leak.
9. KordaMentha recommended the College seek legal advice regarding potential breaches of the Privacy Act or SPAM Act resulting from the use of member email addresses by Professor Wilson’s survey and from the accumulation of an email database used to assist the Reform Candidates’ election campaign.