Apart from the reporting of an individual's opinion, proffered remotely some 15,000 kms away from the source of the issue, one queries the level of interest your readers would find in a matter, that was, in essence, an industrial issue, some seven years old.
The fact that Dr David Rindos passed away more than one year ago would also, I would have thought, diminished reader interest.
However, some important points need to be made for your edification.
The Rindos case ended with UWA's complete rebuttal of the Parliamentary Report. The University has conceded publicly on many occasions, since 1991, that the matter should have been handled better in its initial stages.
In the seven-year period since 1991, at no time did Dr Rindos seek redress from the University Visitor.
An inquiry by the University's governing body, the Senate, found, the matter had been appropriately handled once it reached senior management.
Since 1991, the University has put in place improved procedures and processes to manage such issues.
The Parliamentary Report mentioned in your article has been widely condemned both inside and outside the University community (for example, in an editorial in The West Australian on December 8, 1997).
The University of Western Australia has made a complete rebuttal of the Parliamentary Report, which did not say the University had been wrong in denying Dr Rindos tenure.
Despite an offer of assistance to find employment elsewhere since 1991, no other institution was attracted to Dr Rindos.
Professor Alan Robson
Acting vice-chancellor
University of Western Australia