Here Makita's job as a sobering up shelter worker in the Northern Territory town of Tennant Creek was everything to him.
The Maori Cook Islander worked as a carer at the Indigenous-owned Barkly Region Alcohol And Drug Advisory Group (BRADAAG), admitting drunk people for a meal, shower and bed for the night for 21 years.
His friends said his long tenure in the job helping Indigenous people gave him high standing in the Cook Islands village where some of his family still lived and he regularly sent money to them.
The 44-year-old killed himself in 2019 three months after receiving a letter from BRADAAG telling him he was being suspended from the job and could be dismissed.
"That organisation, BRADAAG, was his whole life, they just simply took it all away from him," Mr Makita's friend, Tennant Creek construction business owner Jean Civitarese said.
She acted as his official support person in the disciplinary process Mr Makita went through at BRADAAG.
BRADAAG has denied there was anything improper about the disciplinary process Mr Makita went through.
Its suspension letter listed five allegations against Mr Makita spanning from January to March 2019.
It alleged he had tried to refuse a client access to the shelter, accusing him of wanting to come in to "humbug".
Among the allegations, BRADAAG said Mr Makita:
- told a staff member to clean spit off the wall of the sobering up shelter in an "abrasive manner"
- was rude to a manager about her request to make a client a meal
- asked a staff member who wanted help filling in a form whether she knew how to speak English, and
- was rude to his manager when asking about a diploma course he was studying.
"There were five allegations, and to me, having dealt with hundreds of my own staff over the years, they just seemed so trivial," Mrs Civitarese said.
"And I believed that they were issues that the CEO or HR should have dealt with, at the time of the incidences."
Adverse findings made before employee was interviewed
Three weeks after informing Mr Makita of the allegations, BRADAAG's then CEO Pauline Reynolds Lewis sent him another letter telling him "adverse findings" had been made on four of the complaints after an investigation.
She asked him to respond in writing within five days to show cause why he should not be dismissed, and attend an interview with her on the sixth day "to be informed of the outcome of the disciplinary process".
"That show cause letter he got after they had conducted their investigation [but] they'd never afforded an opportunity for Makita to respond," Mrs Civitarese said.
Mr Makita then sought help from the Australian Services Union.
The union wrote to BRADAAG on April 8, 2019, asking for more time to explain the allegations to Mr Makita and help him write a response and to organise a Maori interpreter for the interview.
The union wrote: "Findings have been made and a show cause meeting scheduled before Mr Makita has provided any response."
BRADAAG CEO Ms Reynolds Lewis delayed the interview by a little over a week and arranged for another staff member, Suman KC, to carry it out because she was going on leave.
Ms Reynolds Lewis told the union the process would not conclude until after she had returned from leave on May 13.
In response the union said it was concerned Mr Makita would "unnecessarily remain on suspension" due to Ms Reynold Lewis leave, and asked for an alternate decision-maker to be appointed so the matter could be resolved sooner.
Ms Reynolds Lewis replied that: "BRADAAG does not wish to cause Mr Makita any unnecessary adverse impact during the suspension…and he has access to the [Employee Assistance Program]".
Ms Reynolds Lewis told the union she would take the language barrier and Mr Makita's written literacy skills into account "in setting an appropriate time frame for his response."
Ms Civitarese helped Mr Makita write a response denying that he refused a client entry to the shelter and that he had been intentionally rude to colleagues.
Mental health in your inbox
Get a selection of the best mental health content from across the ABC by subscribing to our monthly newsletter
Concerning text messages to friend
As the process continued, Ms Civitarese, other friends and his union became increasingly concerned about Mr Makita's mental health.
His friend Yvon Magnery, BRADAAG's former director, said he received a series of text messages and phone calls from Mr Makita in March and April telling him that the suspension was making him depressed.
"Am not sleeping, and eating, and am crying a lot. Yvon they stood me down on the 19th of this month. Yvon help me," Mr Makita wrote in the messages provided to the ABC.
In April he messaged: "Hi Yvon am not good any more".
"Am still stood down from work [since] from March until Pauline back from holiday next month," he messaged.
"Yvon am so low now Yvon I don't know what to do."
Mr Magnery said Mr Makita's job was "his life".
"He gave his life to BRADAAG. You can see by his messages how horrible his situation had become, he was at the end of his tether, he was crumbling down," he said.
"[Mr Makita] became depressed as a result of all of the pressure he was under from BRADAAG — not from anywhere else."
Union warned of suicide risk
The day before the interview with BRADAAG's investigator, on April 16, the union wrote to BRADAAG's CEO and its lawyer warning Mr Makita was at risk of suicide.
"Mr Makita is extremely distressed and confused as the result of the sudden, unclear and now lengthy suspension and investigation into his workplace conduct," the email said.
"The ASU is obliged to notify BRADAAG that Mr Makita is suicidal because of the way in which he has been treated by BRADAAG."
The union argued Mr Makita had been denied procedural fairness because "there have been no warnings, no incident reports, and no notice of any of these issues now tabled together as allegations capable of sanction up to and including dismissal".
"This management approach is improper, harsh and fails to resolve perceived conduct issues/misunderstandings at the appropriate time.
"The ASU urges a swift and new approach in the interests of Mr Makita's health and procedural fairness."
Ms Reynolds Lewis responded that she had sent the correspondence to the investigator who would carry out the interview.
The union's assistant secretary for the NT, Scott Cowen, told the ABC: "I would have expected the employer to have suspended their investigation and focused on its primary duty of care to our member's health and wellbeing at the time.
"And then we could recommence its investigation at an appropriate time once the health issues we had raised had been addressed."
Mr Makita's friend Mrs Civitarese attended the interview on April 17 as his support person.
"From that very point, when I have sat there in front of them, they should have stopped."
More warnings about further delay
In May, Ms Civitarese encouraged Mr Makita to seek help from a GP, who prescribed an antidepressant and reeferred him to a psychologist.
On the day after Ms Reynolds Lewis returned from leave, the union inquired again about the investigation outcome.
BRADAAG replied that the investigator needed another week to finish assessing Mr Makita's interview responses "to determine whether it is necessary to re-interview the other witnesses or interview new witnesses".
On May 16, the union wrote again to Ms Reynolds Lewis and BRADAAG's lawyer warning: "Again we bring to your attention, the severe and ongoing psychological impact this investigation has had on Mr Makita."
The union emailed again on May 28 warning Mr Makita was "anxiously awaiting a response".
Then on June 5, BRADAAG and its lawyer wrote to Mr Makita and his union to advise that its investigation had concluded and he was to return to work.
In the first week of June 2019, Mr Makita made a first suicide attempt.
"Irrespective of getting that letter, his whole person had completely changed," Mrs Civitarese said.
On June 7, the union informed BRADAAG that Mr Makita would need more time to be fit return to work by June 12.
BRADAAG granted this extension.
His psychologist emailed Mrs Civitarese to say she had updated Mr Makita's mental health record following his suicide attempt.
"If he has a negative employment outcome he is likely to need an involuntary admission and be flown to Alice Springs or Darwin," the psychologist said.
On June 19, Mr Makita killed himself.
BRADAAG denies doing anything wrong
The month after Mr Makita died, Ms Civitarese asked BRADAAG's federal government funding agency to investigate the organisation.
Both the National Indigenous Australians Agency and BRADAAG's federal regulator ORIC have told the ABC they encourage anyone with any evidence about BRADAAG to contact them.
Ms Civitarese said she was so upset it took her a year to make a detailed statement of complaint to the police about Mr Makita's treatment by BRADAAG.
She said when she called to inquire after another six months she was told the case was closed. NT Police told the ABC Mr Makita's death was found to be not suspicious because it was a suicide, and would not comment further.
Last month the work health safety regulator, NT Worksafe, launched an investigation.
"NT Worksafe is aware of the allegations of bullying in the Barkly Region Alcohol and Drug Abuse Advisory Group and the alleged connections to Mr Makita's death," it said.
"An investigation has commenced to determine if there have been any breaches of the Work Health and Safety Act in relation to this incident."
The ABC asked Ms Reynolds Lewis, who left as BRADAAG's CEO at the end of last year, to respond.
She denied she acted in any way improperly or bullied Mr Makita, but refused to comment on the record.
Current CEO, Suman KC, said in a statement that BRADAAG is "aware of hearsay concerns being expressed that Mr Here Makita was bullied during his suspension process".
"No particulars or evidence has been provided to substantiate these concerns," he said.
"[Mr Makita's] suspension was an appropriate step to take to ensure the integrity of the investigation and to manage the risk of contact with staff including staff who were witnesses in the investigation.
"During the course of the investigation into Mr Makita's conduct, he was given the opportunity to respond to the allegations.
"After adverse findings were made, BRADAAG gave Mr Makita an opportunity to respond to the proposed disciplinary action before BRADAAG made a final decision.
"It is untrue for anyone to suggest Mr Makita was not afforded a fair procedure."
IR expert says 'guidance available' to employers
Independent employment law specialist Professor Mark Brady from Charles Darwin University said it can be challenging for employers to balance the need to manage employee behaviour with their legal obligations.
But he said guidelines on how to run disciplinary processes were set out in free resources offered by Australia's Fair Work Ombudsman.
He also said employers were advised to at first deal with employee problems informally.
"All of the legislation says that they first attempt to do it in an informal manner, approach the employee, and consider any reasonable adjustments before undertaking any formal processes around disciplinary action," Professor Brady said.
"[They should then] attempt to jointly devise a solution that's equitable for both of them before undertaking any formal disciplinary action."
He said employers have duty of care obligations during disciplinary processes.
"Employers have a duty under industrial relations legislation to ensure they don't take an adverse action against somebody," he said.
"An employer should have regard to the consequences of any action they take with respect to an employee particularly if they suspect there might be mental health issues.
"They need to understand [if] the employee is fit to participate in the performance management process and if the employee is labouring under a disadvantage, particularly a mental illness at the time, then they may not be in an appropriate situation for the employer to undertake that performance management process which could put undo stress upon the employee."
Professor Brady said employers should also address underperformance or poor behaviour at the time it occurs.
"The employee should be given ample opportunity to address any questions that the employer has with respect to their performance and so its incumbent upon the employer to deal with these things in a timely manner, as and when they occur, rather than allowing it to build up," he said.
