Court registry administration – operational accountability and recordkeeping

7 October 2026
Carl Crafar
Chief Operating Officer – Operations & Service Delivery
Ministry of Justice
[email protected]

Subject: Court registry administration – operational accountability and recordkeeping
Dear Mr Crafar,
I am writing concerning the administrative operation of Ministry of Justice court registries and, in particular, the accountability pathway when recurring administrative failures are reported but remain unresolved.
I am not asking you to intervene in judicial decisions or individual cases. My concern is the administration supporting the courts: whether documents are received and actioned, records are accurate, notices are issued, applications and complaints are properly escalated, and identified failures are corrected.
The Prime Minister’s Office has referred me principally to the Ministry of Justice in relation to these matters. I therefore ask you, as Chief Operating Officer – Operations & Service Delivery, to identify in straightforward terms who is administratively responsible for ensuring these functions operate correctly, from registry level through to senior executive responsibility.
There is a second issue which requires clarification. Some matters we are examining raise the possibility that material instructions, decisions, escalations or explanations may have been communicated orally rather than recorded in writing. The absence of an email or written memorandum does not necessarily mean that no official information exists, and it also raises the separate question of whether an appropriate administrative record should have been created.
Could you please confirm:
what Ministry policy or standard governs the recording of material oral decisions, directions, communications and complaint escalations concerning court administration;
whether searches for relevant official information extend, where appropriate, to information known by officials in their official capacity but not recorded in a document;
what controls ensure significant administrative activity is properly recorded and capable of later verification;
who is responsible for addressing a failure to create or maintain an appropriate administrative record; and
who ultimately receives and acts upon reports of systemic registry failures where the complaint concerns the administration itself.
These are serious questions, but they are asked for a straightforward purpose: to establish who is responsible for the administration, what record should exist, and where accountability rests when the administration itself is the subject of concern.
I would appreciate a clear response identifying the relevant offices or positions and the appropriate escalation pathway.
Kind regards,
Tracy Lynch
isayso.net – We Review the Crown