The government hasn’t done enough to ensure the delivery of justice and that immense harm are not caused to me and my family.

I never foresaw that after just four weeks at Ashley Youth Detention Centre I would be reporting to my superiors, repeatedly, occurrences of child sexual abuse that had not seen prior intervention.

Brokenheartedly, I sought workers compensation. Soon after, my workers compensation claim was referred to the office of Solicitor General, who has had carriage of it since.

What ensued is a litany of failures by arms of the state overseen by the Attorney-General.

Despite being on leave, and distressed and confused by the initial response to my reports, I continued to act on my ethical obligations to ensure reported matters from AYDC reached someone who would intervene until ultimately, I shared all that I could, in a meeting with then Tasmanian premier, Peter Gutwein. The announcement to close Ashley was made the day after I met with Mr Gutwein.

After mounting pressure, a Commission of Inquiry into Government Responses to Child Sexual Abuse was announced. I have since provided more than 6000 documents to them. I have spent hundreds of hours explaining the systems, processes, and practices I observed and documented at AYDC.

My payments have been cut off three times, the first time being the day after I met Mr Gutwein.

Each time, I had to seek legal intervention and experience the stress and trauma of being left without income without knowing if my benefits would be reinstated.

My claim has now been weaponised against me for years. I have participated in three gruelling psychiatric evaluations with three different psychiatrists, and a fourth additional one demanded by the state.

The reports are all similar, and supportive of myself. However, the OSG has claimed privilege over all three of their reports which means that they cannot be relied upon in my legal matter.

The fourth evaluation which my lawyers advised me was necessary given the OSG’s refusal to formally exchange their previous three reports, is consistent with the other three.

I was notified by the OSG that I was being asked to attend a fifth psychiatric evaluation, to be conducted over two days, mere days before giving evidence publicly. I was already at breaking point from juggling the competing demands of compiling evidence while fielding mounting attacks and technical arguments from the OSG.

After intervention by a third party and my lawyers, the OSG agreed to delay those appointments.

Two days after I gave evidence, the OSG contacted my lawyer saying that they were pressing on with the demand for their fourth evaluation. My lawyers had my psychologist contact me because they were aware of the risk the news would put me at.

I decided to write to the Attorney-General, as a state servant being mistreated by the OSG, in a final effort to seek intervention in what were widely viewed as unprecedented circumstances.

I wrote, “As the Attorney-General, and first law Officer of the State, you are also best placed to ensure State Solicitors act humanely and appropriately… it ought to be of extreme concern to you that [an external body] have intervened twice regarding conduct by the State in regard to me … I am sure Premier Rockliff will support you in doing so, as he has repeatedly expressed gratitude and support for State Servants who spoke up, as well as reassuring us we will be protected … Three major case studies in AYDC hearings were examined as a result of my reporting and insistence on these matters being handled appropriately …

I attached a lengthy document detailing specific breaches of the ‘Model Litigant Guidelines’ that had occurred in the handling of my claim by the OSG. The response to the email and attachment, was that an ‘Independent’ review would occur.

I immediately asked to know the proposed Terms of Reference and who would be undertaking the review.

I was ignored, and soon after received an email from the Attorney-General stating,

“I understand that you have been advised that the independent review of your worker’s compensation claim has been completed and that the independent reviewer found that it is being managed appropriately and in compliance with Model Litigant Guidelines. I also understand that you have been advised that as the review is protected by privilege its contents will not be divulged.”

As it stands, all evidence points to my case being managed inappropriately. A series of events and interventions led to my case being removed from the OSG. The review’s findings, appear to be at complete odds with what we know to be true.

We were then informed, that a new department secretary would be the “Instructor” to the OSG and that my department would no longer instruct it.

Shock and disbelief ensued on numerous fronts.

Does this mean that the Department of Communities has been privy to the most confidential and sensitive allegations that have made regarding it as part of my workers compensation case? Does this mean that Department of Communities instructions to the OSG have shaped the opposition to my workers compensation case, including the timing of a request for a psychiatric evaluation days before I was to testify before the Commission of Inquiry about that very department?

My lawyer and another relevant body immediately asked for clarity. Two weeks had passed, and we had not received an answer.

I followed up last week with the Attorney-General stating,

“I, respectfully, request specific, detailed, and explicit responses to my legal representatives’ queries regarding the Instruction (to date, presently and moving forwards) in my matter. I also request, specific details about the ‘Independent Review’ of my complaint regarding Model Litigant Guidelines and the consistent breaches of them. You are the responsible Minister, and the Attorney-General – so I trust you will ensure detailed, honest responses are provided within 72 hours. This is a disgrace.”

My lawyers received a letter from the OSG on September 26, 2022 which highlighted that they had knowingly been receiving instructions from an unnamed person under an arrangement between the Department of Health and the Department of Communities, with general responsibility being held by the Secretary of Department of Communities.

The Attorney-General and the office of Solicitor General continue to demonstrate a fundamental lack of understanding of the importance of trauma informed practices, and of the need to lead the changes required to ensure the COI is the beginning of meaningful and lasting change.

Having experienced their failure to carry out their role appropriately at every stage in this process, effectively harming me, I can have no faith that they will.

We all have the right, to hold the office of Attorney-General to the highest standards of professional conduct – and to be confident they will hold the office of Solicitor General to the same.

Therefore, I respectfully call upon the Attorney-General to acknowledge the gross abrogation of their duties and immediately rectify their failures to administer justice in this matter.

Alysha is a former Ashley Youth Detention Centre worker, who has asked to be referred to by her first name only.