A senior public servant was removed from her role as acting chief executive of a government agency after it was revealed she had used cocaine once “a number of years” before joining the public service.
The appointment was confirmed in an email from the former chief executive, which also announced his own departure from the organisation. In the weeks that followed, it emerged that the staff member had been under investigation over allegations of cocaine use.
The organisation confirmed it received allegations in June last year from an anonymous ProtonMail account. This included a claim about an old photo that was allegedly circulating on social media.
The organisation’s integrity team reached out to the email account for more information but received no response. It then proceeded to investigate the allegations using the information it had available.
“This investigation found no evidence to substantiate the existence of this photo. The deputy chief executive did disclose that a number of years prior to starting in the public service, that on one occasion she did try drugs.”
The chief executive announced in an email that a different woman had been appointed as acting chief executive.
The email made no reference to the deputy chief executive, who never took on the interim role at any point after the chief executive announced his departure.
The Public Service Commission and the organisation have declined to comment on whether the cocaine use was the reason she did not get the job.
The new interim chief executive said any questions about the decision-making process should be directed to the Public Service Commission (PSC) or the former chief executive.
Leading employment lawyer Barbara Buckett said that while she could not comment on any specific appointment, the issue was “complex and multifaceted.”
“On the one hand, it involves the intersection of the employment rights of the potential candidate not to fail an appointment due to a past indiscretion where they have already been employed in the service at a high level without issue and the public law requirements designed to maintain public confidence in its public service and those who serve in it.”
In her view, there could be circumstances in which someone with a history of drug use may still be suitable for a chief executive role.
“As every appointment will depend on the circumstances of the previous connection with drug use and whether it undermines suitability and that confidence to oversee the public entity concerned.”
“This process typically must involve consideration of broad factors which must obviously involve leadership capacity, integrity, risk management and the maintenance of department and public trust.”
She also noted that public sector chief executive roles come with a high threshold for expected behaviour, integrity, and conduct.
“It needs to give the public confidence that it scrutinised the appointment within those guidelines.”
“However, the person concerned would also have employment rights. Those concerns would relate to the relevancy of the issue to the role and a right to be fairly assessed against the risk any appointment might pose to carry out that role.”