The chairperson of one of the largest Aboriginal legal aid services in Australia has denied auditing the organisation’s former chief executive in a bid to “damage” her, amid a federal court battle.
Key points:
- NAAJA chairperson Colleen Rosas was questioned on Thursday
- She denied Ms Atkins was audited to ‘damage’ her following forgery allegations
- A police investigation is underway into the alleged forgery, the court heard
Former chief executive of the Northern Australian Aboriginal Justice Agency (NAAJA), Priscilla Atkins, is suing the organisation over allegations she was wrongfully dismissed in February.
Ms Atkins has claimed she was dismissed after she made a corruption complaint to NAAJA’s board about the organisation’s chief financial officer Madhur Evans.
NAAJA has claimed that part of the reason Ms Atkins was dismissed was because its chairperson, Colleen Rosas, alleged that a digital copy of her signature was forged to extend Ms Atkins’s contract as chief executive on a salary of $350,000 a year.
Ms Rosas gave evidence on Thursday, on the fourth day of a two-week trial into Ms Atkins’s dismissal in the Federal Court in Darwin.
Under cross-examination, Ms Atkins’s barrister Malcolm Harding SC suggested Ms Rosas forewarned Ms Evans of a complaint raised by Ms Atkins, before she was asked to formally respond.
Ms Atkins had accused Ms Evans of misusing company credit cards, the court heard.
After the complaint was raised, the court heard Ms Rosas allowed Ms Evans to respond via email, with Ms Evans claiming in correspondence that Ms Atkins’s complaint was “designed to push [her] out”.
Mr Harding suggested the same opportunity should have been afforded to Ms Atkins when complaints were raised about her.
Instead, the court heard Ms Atkins was investigated by audit firm Binder Dijker Otte (BDO).
“The BDO report was prepared to damage Ms Atkins before the board,” Mr Harding said to Ms Rosas.
“No. I don’t agree with that,” she replied.
Ms Evans is yet to give evidence in the trial.
Investigation into alleged signature forgery
Ms Atkins previously told the court the contract to extend her employment was signed by Ms Rosas in June 2020, while Ms Rosas said she had never signed the contract.
The court heard an IT investigation took place into whether or not the signature on the contract was forged, and found no evidence of forgery.
Ms Atkins was suspended from November 28, 2022, and banned from NAAJA’s office while the investigation took place.
Mr Harding asked Ms Rosas why Ms Atkins wasn’t reinstated when the investigation concluded on December 10, 2022.
“Would it be fair to say Ms Rosas that as at the 10th of December the contract extension issue rose no higher that an allegation by you?” he asked.
“Yes, at the 10th of December [2022] that was the only thing,” Ms Rosas replied.
Ms Rosas told the court she didn’t want to contact Ms Atkins at that time as she was on leave and had previously accused Ms Rosas of bullying her.
The BDO audit started two weeks later, but the court heard the allegation of a forged signature was not listed as one of its “priority items”.
Ms Rosas also told the court that there were a number of other investigations into the alleged forgery underway, including a police investigation.
The case will resume next week before Judge Natalie Charelsworth.