Prof. Joel Hayward's Old Website

Joel Hayward, ZDaF, BA, MA Hons, PhD, FRSA, FRHistS

Why won't the University of Canterbury reveal any details of the proceedings to which I was subjected in 2000?

From: Dr Joel Hayward

Address: XXXXXXXXX

 

 

1 September 2003

 

 

To: Mr Alan Hayward

Registrar

University of Canterbury

Private Bag 4800

Christchurch

 

Dear Mr Hayward

 Under the stipulated terms and requirements of the Official Information Act 1982 I hereby request copies of all emails, documents, audiotapes, minutes and any other records held by the University of Canterbury and/or any agents or representatives acting on behalf of the University of Canterbury relating to the following interview sessions of the Joel Hayward Working Party:

Tuesday 25 July 2000 (all morning and afternoon interviews and any other discussions with the interviewed persons, as well as any discussions that day held between the members of the Joel Hayward Working Party);

Wednesday 26 July 2000 (interview with Dame Phyllis Guthardt, Chancellor, as well as any discussions that day held between the members of the Joel Hayward Working Party);

Tuesday 10 October 2000 (all morning and afternoon interviews and any other discussions with the interviewed persons, as well as any discussions that day held between the members of the Joel Hayward Working Party);

Friday 13 October 2000 (interview and any other discussions with Professor Daryl LeGrew and Professor John Burrows, as well as any discussions that day held between the members of the Joel Hayward Working Party).

These interviews are outlined in Appendix D of the Report by the Joel Hayward Working Party (University of Canterbury, December 2000).

I also request under the Official Information Act 1982 all emails, telephone diary notes, other diary notes, documents, audiotapes, minutes and other records relating to discussions, conversations or meetings between:

 the University of Canterbury Chancellor and/or the Vice Chancellor and/or any members of the Council and/or the Registrar

AND

The Joel Hayward Working Party

that are not specified as having occurred in the timetable called Appendix D of the Report by the Joel Hayward Working Party (University of Canterbury, December 2000).

Prompt compliance with my request will be very greatly appreciated.

Yours sincerely,

 

Dr. Joel Stuart Andrew Hayward

Canterbury responds with a veil of secrecy.

 

An application to the Office of the Ombudsman [U.S. = Public Defender] becomes necessary.

Dr Joel Hayward

Address: XXXXXXXXX

 

 

Office of the Ombudsman

Level 14
70 The Terrace
PO Box 10152

Wellington

 

 

28 September 2003

 

 

Re. Investigation and Review of refusal by University of Canterbury to make official information available to Dr Joel Hayward of Palmerston North

 

 

Dear Ombudsmen/women

 

I am hereby seeking an investigation and review—pursuant to section 28(3) of the Official Information Act 1982—of the refusal by University of Canterbury to make official information available to me, Dr Joel Hayward of Palmerston North, upon my request under the Act.

 

I enclose a copy of my original letter of request to Mr Alan Hayward, Registrar, University of Canterbury, dated 1 September 2003.

 

I enclose a copy of the letter of refusal I received from Mr Alan Hayward, Registrar, University of Canterbury, dated 19 September 2003.

 

 

Natural Justice

 

 

In my view a person cannot have certainty that he or she has been treated with "due process" if he or she cannot see, and be given opportunities to understand, let alone contest, the process itself.

 

Unfortunately I still know remarkably little about the undisclosed proceedings of the so-called Joel Hayward Working Party, established by the University of Canterbury in May 2000 to investigate the highly publicised allegation of dishonesty (of which I was exonerated) made against me, Joel Hayward, by the New Zealand Jewish Council.

 

The only information I possess or have possessed are: a few documents that the Joel Hayward Working Party formally invited me to respond to, my formal responses, a few papers supplied to me informally by Dr Vincent Orange, my memories of my appearances before the Working Party, and the final, published Report issued by the Joel Hayward Working Party in December 2000.

 

That Report is certainly not a record of the proceedings themselves, as a reading will reveal. The entire report can be found on the University of Canterbury’s website. Its URL is: http://www.canterbury.ac.nz/hayward/report.PDF

 

Thus I do not know what specific allegations were made about me, or even what statements were said in my support, by anyone else who was asked or permitted to appear before the Working Party or was asked or permitted to submit documents.

 

I do not even know what discussions took place 

 

BETWEEN the Chancellor, the Vice Chancellor, the Registrar or any other office holder

 

OR academic employed by the University of Canterbury 

 

AND the Working Party.

 

I sincerely believe that, as the Working Party bore my name (thus placing an additional and unnecessary and severe public focus upon me) and made my 1991 MA thesis its focus of investigation, I have a right to access and review this information, all the more so because the purported and widely publicised reason for the formation of the Working Party in the first place was "public accountability". (see http://www.newsroom.canterbury.ac.nz/stories/00122001.html)

 

I regret that my recent efforts to obtain information on the proceedings of the so-called Joel Hayward Working Party, expressed to the University of Canterbury in a 1 September 2003 written request under the provisions of the Official Information Act 1982, have resulted in a 100 per cent refusal from the University of Canterbury.

 

That is, I asked for a range of items that would help me, as the "accused" in what I consider a pre-determined and unfair "trial" that was widely publicised as an independent investigation, to understand the unfortunate events to which I was obliged to submit.

 

The resulting fallout, I should note, has ruined my emotional health and ended my promising academic career. I was a Senior Lecturer at Massey University. I am now unemployed.

 

The University of Canterbury has refused to make available to me ANY – that is, not even one – of the documents or sources I asked for.

 

It has not even make available to me the verbatim record of my own appearance before the Joel Hayward Working Party.

 

I think this is an unprofessional, secretive and entirely unsatisfactory response given that the proceedings were focused almost solely on me; that this focus was evident in the title of the investigative team carrying my name; and that I was found not guilt of the charge of dishonesty but still, unfairly given the Working Party’s terms of reference, castigated by the Working Party.

 

Even a convicted criminal has the right to see all evidence and testimony presented by both prosecution and defence in his or her case.

 

As it stands, I believe the Working Party tried me almost entirely "in absentia," and that the University of Canterbury is being far from transparent, open and publicly accountable.

 

I am thus, sir or ma’am, applying to the Ombudsman pursuant to Section 289(3) of the Official Information Act 1982 for an investigation and review of Canterbury’s refusal to make documents on my own "case" available to me.

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

Dr Joel Hayward