‘I’ll sue you for millions’: Inside the scandal plaguing the North Australian Aboriginal Justice Agency

Fraudulent signatures, taxpayer-purchased Range Rovers, drug use, bullying. Those are some of the allegations at the centre of a scandal circling Australia’s largest Indigenous legal organisation.

North Australian Aboriginal Justice Agency chair Colleen Rosas. Picture: Che Chorley

“I’m going to get a f..king reference from the Prime Minister,” ousted North Australian Aboriginal Justice Agency chief executive Priscilla Atkins screamed down the phone line.

It’s a conversation NAAJA chair Colleen Rosas recalls in ­detail. She says Ms Atkins called her, hysterical, and yelled: “You have accused me of criminal activity. I am going to f..king sue you for millions.”

The phone conversation came after Ms Rosas accused Ms Atkins of forging her signature on a contract extension document, securing her position as chief executive – and its $350,000 salary – for another five years.

Ms Atkins denies doing so, and says she never raised her voice at Ms Rosas.

The two women, along with chief financial officer Madhur Evans, are at the centre of serious allegations of corruption, bullying, fraud and deception within NAAJA, the country’s largest and best-resourced Indigenous legal organisation.

Some allegations include:

• Ms Atkins used company funds to acquire clothes, artworks, flights and cars – including a $129,000 Range Rover;

• Ms Evans secretly paid $20,000 directly into Ms Rosas’s bank account, in breach of the agency’s funding agreement;

• Ms Rosas requested her pay be given to her on a credit card so as not to alert the tax office and threaten her Centrelink pension;

• The NAAJA board was paid “huge” amounts of money, despite claims the attorney-general approved their pay for only eight days a year;

• Ms Rosas appointed her nephew as acting CEO, and a friend as head of HR – a position that was not publicly advertised;

• Ms Rosas told employees Ms Atkins was using cocaine;

Ousted NAAJA chief executive Priscilla Atkins. Picture: (A)manda Parkinson

• Ms Evans left her mobile phone in offices to record unsuspecting colleagues and logged on to Ms Atkins’s computer after hours without permission. When a cleaner saw Ms Evans on the computer, the cleaner was fired;

• Ms Evans is paid a phone ­allowance but also has a NAAJA-paid mobile.

Each woman denies the allegations made against her.

The NT Independent Commission Against Corruption is investigating the allegations, and both state and the federal ­attorneys-general are considering intervening to prevent the organisation, which receives about $20m in taxpayer funds every year, from going under.

Meanwhile, Ms Atkins has sued the agency for unfair dismissal, in a matter that will be heard at trial in the Federal Court.

Sources believe NAAJA will spend up to $1m on the trial, after it recruited global firm King & Wood Mallesons to represent them.

NAAJA is mainly funded by the federal government, and conducts the lion’s share of Indigenous legal cases in the NT, where crime has increased by double digits in the past year. The organisation employs 200 workers in Darwin, Palmerston, Katherine, Alice Springs and Tennant Creek.

In a sworn affidavit to the Federal Court, Ms Rosas claims she first became aware Ms Atkins had forged her signature on a ­contract-extension document in a June 2022 board meeting.

“Ms Atkins’s salary seemed much higher to me than I recollected. Further, I had no memory of any involvement in its ­approval. I was troubled by this, so I decided to seek out a copy of Ms Atkins’s contract of employment,” the affidavit, obtained by The Australian, reads. “Over the next few months I repeatedly asked Ms Atkins in conversation (to) provide me with a copy of her contact. Although she kept ­assuring me she would, by October 2022 she still had not done so.”

On October 18, Ms Rosas asked NAAJA executive services co-ordinator Kerry Keightley to provide her with a copy of Ms ­Atkins’s most recent contract. The document stipulated her employment had been extended for five years on a salary of $357,235 per annum.

“The contact extension letter had two signatures on it – one purporting to be Ms Atkins’s signature and one purporting to be mine,” Ms Rosas’s affidavit reads.

“I have no recollection of signing that document and I don’t believe that I did so.”

Ms Atkins denies forging Ms Rosas signature, and says the baseless accusation was a way for the board to force her out of her position as CEO. The substance of her Fair Work complaint before the Federal Court is that she was sacked for alleging Ms Evans engaged in misconduct.

On November 7, Ms Atkins sent an email to Ms Rosas and mother-daughter board members Carol Smith and Marilyn Smith detailing complaints against Ms Evans. Those allegations included that Ms Evans, in her ­capacity as CFO, made discreet payments directly to Ms Rosas, bullied other employees, recorded interactions with her colleagues without their permission, logged into Ms Atkins’s work computer after hours without her permission, disclosed confidential company information and failed to use her work-issued credit card in accordance with policy.

One week after she sent the email, Ms Atkins called Ms Rosas, having learnt that the latter believed she had forged her signature on her contract extension form.

“On the morning of 15 November, 2022, I received multiple phone calls from Ms Atkins. In all of these phone calls, she) was yelling at me and gave me the impression of being hysterical,” Ms Rosas’s affidavit reads. “Ms Atkins swore at me many times in these phone calls. In these phone calls, (she) mentioned she knew about an issue to do with me disputing my signature on the contact extension and said things to the effect of: ‘You have accused me of criminal activity’; ‘I’m going to get a fucking reference from the Prime Minister’; and ‘I ­am going to fucking sue you for millions’ ”

That afternoon, Ms Rosas chaired an “urgent virtual board meeting” after Ms Atkins said she was taking a period of extended leave. One week later, the board agreed to suspend Ms Atkins on full pay while the NAAJA investigated the validity of Ms Rosas’s signature on Ms Atkins’s employment document.

During Ms Atkins’s suspension, the NAAJA board engaged external auditors BDO to conduct an “independent special audit” into her conduct as CEO.

“More specifically, BDO was engaged to review, analyse and report back to the NAAJA board on any irregular or inappropriate actions within specified areas of the CEO’s role, responsibilities and accountabilities in corporate governance of the organisation over the period January 2017 to January 2023,” Ms Rosas’s affidavit reads.

The findings of the BDO report were as follow:

• Ms Atkins personally purchased nine vehicles over a four-year period by way of a “novated lease” arrangement that was not approved by the board. The cars included two Range Rover Sports ($88,253 and $129,118), two Jeeps ($22,500 and $8736) and VW Amarok ($28,700);

• Ms Atkins attempted to cash out her annual leave entitlements to pay NAAJA back the money she had used for the cars. She cashed out more annual leave then she was entitled to;

• Ms Atkins charged personal expenses to her corporate card, including four iPads and a $1320 artwork;

• Ms Atkins failed to reimburse NAAJA for personal expenses charged to her credit card;

• Instances where the approver signature on credit card reconciliation did not match any of the approved approver signatures;

• At least 37 months of credit card reconciliations were not approved by the board as required.

Ms Atkins denies the alle­gations made against her in the BDO report.

Ms Atkins’s employment was terminated after the tabling of the report. Police were notified of the allegations, and Ms Rosas has since met three times with representatives from Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus’s office and the office of NT Attorney-General Chansey Paech, who has also been referred to the NT ICAC for allegedly failing to declare a potential conflict of interest with the organisation servicing Alice Springs town camps.

A temporary injunction filed as part of Ms Atkins’s Federal Court unfair dismissal claim means her employment has not yet been terminated, pending resolution of the case.

Ms Atkins says since her employment was suspended, she has been continually harassed, including “current workers being advised she was on cocaine”.

In March this year, Ms Atkins wrote to Namatjira MP William Yan detailing claims of “improper conduct, abuse of power and corruption by the NAAJA chairperson, board and CFO”.

The email, obtained by The Australian, included dozens of allegations against Ms Evans and Ms Rosas, and urged Mr Yan to employ external investigators to look into her claim.

Mr Yan forwarded her email to the Acting NAAJA CEO.

Ms Atkins alleged the NAAJA board made “huge” payments to board directors instead of the permitted $300 a day, without consulting the Attorney-General’s office as required. She also accused Ms Evans of being complicit in Ms Rosas’s scheme to avoid tax office scrutiny, and protect her Centrelink pension.

“NAAJA has approval to pay 8 days per year per director sitting fees,” the emails says. “At the NAAJA board meeting on 25 & 26 August, 2022, the NAAJA board agreed to pay the chairperson an annual salary of $15,000 per year.

“NAAJA has never paid an annual salary to any NAAJA chairperson or NAAJA director. At the NAAJA board meeting on 10th and 11th November, 2022, the NAAJA board agreed to increase the chairperson annual salary to $20,000 per year plus sitting fees.

“The chairperson is on a ­Centre­link pension and was meeting with the CEO after the 25th & 26th NAAJA board meeting requesting this payment be made without the ATO being aware so it did not impact her ­pension. The chairperson requested I give her a credit card to the value of $15,000 so Centrelink would not find out about the NAAJA fee. The CEO informed the chairperson we couldn’t and that it would need to be taxed.

“This annual salary for the chairperson has not been approved by the funding bodies. The CFO paid $20,000 into the chairperson bank account in December 2022 tax-free. The NAAJA board conduct constitutions (sic) reasonable ground for dismissal for inappropriately appointing the chair under a salaried position, failure to manage an actual conflict of interest, breach of public trust and illegal performance of official functions.”

Ms Rosas has denied allegations made in the email. The NAAJA has denied allegations that Ms Evans and Ms Rosas engaged in deceptive conduct.

As part of her latest affidavit to the court, Ms Atkins has included reference letters from NT Supreme Court judge Jenny Block, NT Chief Justice Michael Grant and barrister Phillip Boulten SC.

The matter is scheduled for trial from October 23.