---
title: "Plan support and risk controls where detriment or a reprisal is alleged"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/practice/whistleblowing-and-public-interest-disclosures/plan-support-and-risk-controls-where-detriment-or-a-reprisal-is-alleged"
type: "task"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "A67-SB20261022-11"
practice_area: "Whistleblowing & Public Interest Disclosures"
tier: "yellow"
lawyer_review: "required"
last_reviewed: "2026-10-22"
---

# Plan support and risk controls where detriment or a reprisal is alleged

> From the de-identified account of alleged detriment, prepare a support and risk-control plan for a Commonwealth public interest disclosure.…

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/practice/whistleblowing-and-public-interest-disclosures/plan-support-and-risk-controls-where-detriment-or-a-reprisal-is-alleged  
Last reviewed: 2026-10-22

Site index for agents: https://ailawframework.com/llms.txt

## Key facts

| Fact | Value |
| --- | --- |
| Practice area | [Whistleblowing & Public Interest Disclosures](https://ailawframework.com/practice/whistleblowing-and-public-interest-disclosures.md) |
| Human involvement | Yellow: Lawyer and AI draft together |
| How AI is used | From the de-identified account of alleged detriment, prepare a support and risk-control plan for a Commonwealth public interest disclosure. Set out the s 13 reprisal test: conduct that results in detriment, or that consists of or results in a threat to cause detriment; a belief or suspicion that the second person or any other person has made, may have made, proposes to make or could make a public interest disclosure; and that belief or suspicion as the reason or part of the reason. The examples in s 13 include the discloser and a witness. Detriment includes the list in s 13(2). Paragraph (c) of that list is alteration of an employee's position to the employee's disadvantage. Section 13(3) provides that reasonable administrative action to protect the other person from detriment is not a reprisal to that extent. The plan lists support steps, who will have the discloser's identity, and which of those steps are reasonable administrative action to protect the person from detriment. The compilation outline records that the principal officer and authorised officers have a duty to protect a public official belonging to the agency from reprisals and points to ss 59(9) and 60(2). Put those section numbers on the plan for the lawyer to read. Identity handling on the same plan uses s 20 and the exceptions in s 20(3). The lawyer supplies a de-identified copy. The tool does not receive the discloser's name or details likely to identify the discloser. The tool does not write a direction to staff that will be sent. |
| What the lawyer must review | The lawyer decides the controls, whether any proposed step is itself a reprisal or is reasonable administrative action under s 13(3), and writes any direction that is sent. The lawyer reads ss 59(9) and 60(2) before the duty is described to the agency. A corporations detriment response stays on the corporations investigation plan and the s 1317ADA list. A State or Territory agency uses its own Act. The NSW and Queensland differences are in the versions. |
| Written for / versions | 1 jurisdiction versions below |

## Checking plan

**Controls checked against the reprisal test**

The tool prepares a de-identified control plan against s 13 and s 20. The lawyer decides which controls to adopt and writes any direction.

- What the AI does: From the de-identified account of alleged detriment, prepare a support and risk-control plan for a Commonwealth public interest disclosure. Set out the s 13 reprisal test: conduct that results in detriment, or that consists of or results in a threat to cause detriment; a belief or suspicion that the second person or any other person has made, may have made, proposes to make or could make a public interest disclosure; and that belief or suspicion as the reason or part of the reason. The examples in s 13 include the discloser and a witness. Detriment includes the list in s 13(2). Paragraph (c) of that list is alteration of an employee's position to the employee's disadvantage. Section 13(3) provides that reasonable administrative action to protect the other person from detriment is not a reprisal to that extent. The plan lists support steps, who will have the discloser's identity, and which of those steps are reasonable administrative action to protect the person from detriment. The compilation outline records that the principal officer and authorised officers have a duty to protect a public official belonging to the agency from reprisals and points to ss 59(9) and 60(2). Put those section numbers on the plan for the lawyer to read. Identity handling on the same plan uses s 20 and the exceptions in s 20(3). The lawyer supplies a de-identified copy. The tool does not receive the discloser's name or details likely to identify the discloser. The tool does not write a direction to staff that will be sent.
- What the lawyer does: The lawyer decides the controls, whether any proposed step is itself a reprisal or is reasonable administrative action under s 13(3), and writes any direction that is sent. The lawyer reads ss 59(9) and 60(2) before the duty is described to the agency. A corporations detriment response stays on the corporations investigation plan and the s 1317ADA list. A State or Territory agency uses its own Act. The NSW and Queensland differences are in the versions.
- Who reviews: Responsible lawyer with competence in the matter
- Basis: Practical workflow informed by the linked primary sources; the traffic light and working checks are editorial guidance, not a court classification.
- Why: The level reflects what the work is, the consequence of an error, and how much of the output the lawyer must independently re-derive.

## Checks the lawyer makes

1. Test each proposed control against s 13 and against the reasonable-administrative-action provision in s 13(3).
2. Limit who receives identifying information, and match any disclosure to an exception in s 20(3).
3. Have the lawyer read ss 59(9) and 60(2) before a protection duty is stated to the agency.
4. The lawyer writes any direction sent to staff.

## Notes

- These are suggested working checks. Confirm the required checking with the responsible lawyer before work starts; the checking approach does not establish permission to use AI.

## Sources

- [Public Interest Disclosure Act 2013 (Cth), compilation C2026C00225](https://www.legislation.gov.au/C2013A00133/latest) (checked 2026-10-22)
- [Commonwealth Ombudsman: Public interest disclosure (whistleblowing)](https://www.ombudsman.gov.au/industry-and-agency-oversight/public-interest-disclosure-whistleblowing) (checked 2026-10-22)

## Forms and precedents for this task

| Form or precedent | Kind | AI level | Summary |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| [Protection-from-detriment checklist for a corporations or public-sector disclosure](https://ailawframework.com/precedents/whistleblowing-and-public-interest-disclosures/protection-from-detriment-checklist.md) | Checklist | Yellow | A checklist of the detriment lists in Corporations Act s 1317ADA and Public Interest Disclosure Act s 13, and of the support steps to record. It does not assess a compensation claim. |

Signed-in accounts can read the full text of each one.

## Jurisdiction versions

| Jurisdiction | Level |
| --- | --- |
| [United States](https://ailawframework.com/practice/whistleblowing-and-public-interest-disclosures/plan-support-and-risk-controls-where-detriment-or-a-reprisal-is-alleged/united-states.md) | Yellow |

*Practice guidance for planning and review. Confirm current primary sources and the requirements of the actual matter. This is general information, not legal advice.*