Annual Report 1999 - 2000
Statement
from the President
Structure of the Commission a changing environment
The year of this report saw several significant changes and developments within the Commission. Some were anticipated; some had been delayed; some were more welcome than others all led to a full and active twelve month period.
For some time now the Commission has been hindered by the slow progress of structural reform. A wide-ranging review of the Commission which began under the former Labor government and concluded under the Coalition government was necessitated and precipitated by the finding of the High Court in the Brandy v HREOC, 23 February 1995 case that the Commission did not have the proper power to make binding decisions in its hearing processes. The implications of this finding have been the subject of extensive comment in earlier reports to which the reader is referred for background information.
Legislative changes affecting the Commission have been executed in two separate processes. The vital outcome for the purpose of this report is that legislative amendment required to formally transfer the Legislative changes affecting the Commission have been hearing powers of the Commission to a more appropriate body with the powers to make binding orders on matters of discrimination finally passed through the Parliament last year. In October 1999 the Human Rights Legislation Amendment Act No 1 (HRLAA1) received royal assent. The details of this legislation and its impact on the Commission's processes are outlined in the report from our Legal Section. The essential change affecting the hearing processes has been the transfer of the power to hear complaints of unlawful discrimination from the Commission to the Federal Court or to the Federal Magistrates' Court. This change came into effect in April of this year.
Far from stripping the `teeth' of Commission effectiveness, its loss is freeing the Commission to focus its resources and capacities on to conciliation, education and inquiries for which the Commission is especially well-equipped and ready.
The Commission's management structures have also changed significantly over the years. In the early nineties, the Human Rights Commissioner was also the chief executive of the organisation. From the mid to late nineties, management was conducted on a collegiate basis shared between the President and the Commissioners. With the passage of HRLAA1 through the Parliament, some significant management changes have been put into effect, in particular: the vesting of executive authority of the Commission in the office of the President; the transfer of all complaint-handling powers from the Race, Sex and Disability Discrimination Commissioners to the President and the creation of the role of amicus curiae for all Commissioners in court proceedings under the amending legislation that are before the Federal Court.
Further changes are anticipated. The Human Rights Legislation Amendment Bill No 2 (HRLAA2) proposes the creation of three Deputy Presidents of the Commission to replace the current five specialist Commissioner functions - Race, Sex, Social Justice, Human Rights and Disability. While this change may be met with some public anxiety that areas of concern might take a less prominent place in the Commission's agenda, a significant advantage will be to enable new areas of concern, such as the rights of the child, to acquire greater attention as required by circumstances.
At the time of writing, the conclusion of the term of the Human Rights Commissioner is imminent and the position of Disability Discrimination Commissioner and the Race Discrimination Commissioner are unfilled. These responsibilities have been assumed on an acting basis by the Sex Discrimination Commissioner and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner respectively.
HRLAA2 has been before Parliament for some time now and it is still uncertain as to when these structural changes may be expected.
Work of the Commission - programs, policy and projects
As this reports attests, HREOC's work is wide-ranging. In the past twelve months the Commission's activities have ranged from public advocacy through the media to intensive research on policy issues; from the conduct of national inquiries and other specialist inquiries and open consultations to the investigation and conciliation of individual complaints of discrimination; and from the conduct of locally-based and directed information and education programs to the implementation of complex technical assistance cooperation projects in China, South Africa and elsewhere.
With the transfer of the hearing functions to the Federal Court and the new Federal Magistrates' Court, the Commission's Complaints and Legal Sections have worked closely and cooperatively with these Courts to ensure a smooth transition of responsibility and with legal service providers and other complaints-based bodies to ensure the public is as well informed as possible of the new arrangements.
I have been delighted to take up my new statutory role in complaints and I am very impressed with the high levels of conciliated outcomes achieved by the Commission through the efforts of dedicated staff.
One of the core responsibilities of a national human rights institution is the promotion of human rights principles through education and other information programs. The past twelve months have seen a much greater emphasis placed on this area of the Commission's work, through specific information initiatives with peak community sector organisations and a creative, interactive Youth Challenge program conducted in schools. They have opened up opportunities for the Commission to work with State Equal Opportunity Commissions in presenting the Youth Challenge program to school students. An audit of the Commission's website, praised its excellence in content and as an educational resource. The Commission is taking advantage of new electronic technology with the establishment of listserve communications and other tools.
Both programs are on-going, receiving encouraging, indeed enthusiastic responses. It has also opened up opportunities for the Commission to work with State Equal Opportunity Commissions in presenting the program to state educational institutions. An audit of the Commission's website, indicated the need to make some changes in presentation and navigation. These changes are well underway and they will enable greater accessibility to even more community and education sectors.
Within the portfolio areas, Sex Discrimination Commissioner Susan Halliday has continued her focus on pregnancy discrimination, working with employers, educators, unions and the broader community. HREOC's last annual report provided a detailed review of the Commissioner's national inquiry into pregnancy and work, entitled Pregnant and Productive: it's a right not a privilege to work while pregnant. At the time of writing, the Federal Government had still not responded to the inquiry. Debate continues on pay equity issues, in particular those related to industrial frameworks and casualisation.
Ms Halliday has worked tirelessly in the area of education and advocacy, making positive use of the many media, conference, speech delivery and other opportunities to promote the messages of anti-discrimination, equity and fairness in the work and other environments. Ms Halliday is also Acting Disability Discrimination Commissioner. In this role she has been very well supported by Mr Graeme Innes who was appointed Deputy Disability Discrimination Commissioner. A major focus in the last twelve months has been on the public inquiry of complaints lodged under the Disability Discrimination Act. This highly successful process offers, where appropriate, a unique opportunity for cross-industry, government and community interaction and understanding resulting in outcomes that have a significant impact on eliminating systemic discrimination. The other major focus this year has been the conduct of an inquiry, at the request of the Attorney-General, onThe Accessibility of E-commerce and New Technologies to Older People and People with a Disability. I am delighted to report that a Working Group, made up of representatives from community and industry groups, and assisted by the Australian Bankers' Association, has been established to progress the findings of the inquiry's report.
The 1999-2000 year has once more seen Indigenous human rights issues at the forefront of public debate. The debate has ranged from the meaning that should be given to the document of reconciliation and the walk across the Sydney Harbour Bridge, to international scrutiny of Australia's Indigenous affairs policies, a renewal of the debate on the stolen generations, and mandatory sentencing laws in the Northern Territory and Western Australia. There have also been significant High Court and Federal Court decisions on native title, and the disallowance of the first state/territory native title regime by the Senate. The Commission as a body has been proud to support the work of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner and Acting Race Discrimination Commissioner Dr Bill Jonas as he tackles these extremely complex and sensitive areas. The Social Justice Commissioner has advocated a human rights position on these and other issues throughout the year in performing his statutory obligations.
By the time this report is tabled the five-year term of Human Rights Commissioner Chris Sidoti will have concluded. The last year has possibly been the busiest of Mr Sidoti's years with the Commission as he travelled throughout rural and regional Australia conducting the National Inquiry into Regional and Remote Education. This broad-ranging inquiry was thoroughly covered in the media and its findings and processes supported by a detailed publications program, the details of which can be found later in this report. Mr Sidoti was also engaged in research and the provision of advice through reports and other publications on a broad range of human rights issues particularly those concerning the detention of unlawful arrivals. The Age Matters report highlighted the need for comprehensive national age discrimination legislation and made recommendations, among other suggestions, for Commonwealth compliance with ILO 111 and other international standards.
In the Privacy area, this past year saw the formal separation of the Office of the Privacy Commissioner from the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission to become an independent statutory office in its own right. Both offices will continue to share corporate support services and will remain co-located for the foreseeable future. The activities of the Office of the Privacy Commissioner, Malcolm Crompton, are reported on separately later in this report.
Finally, in relation to the Commission's output and productivity, while the public face of the Commission is focused on its statutory appointees, I want to acknowledge the dedication and professionalism of the Commission's staff without whom the important and often difficult work of the organisation would not succeed.
International Work of the Commission
The international work of the Commission is conducted on three levels.
The Commission has long been considered a model internationally for those countries contemplating the establishment of a national institution for the protection and promotion of human rights. It assists institutions set up processes for complaint handling and conciliation proceedings as well as establish formats of inquiries as a means of promoting human rights protection. The Commission is increasingly asked to provide advice and support at regional and international levels. The Australian Commission is the regional representative to the International Coordinating Committee of National Human Rights Institutions which meets annually to assess the standing of applicant agencies.
The Commission has hosted the Asia Pacific Forum of National Human Rights Institutions since its establishment in 1996, providing the staff for its three-person Secretariat, corporate services and extensive in-kind support to this fledging organisation. Funding for the Secretariat has been made available to the Commission by the Australian Agency for International Development (AusAID). The principal activities of the Forum and, in particular, its regional workshops program have been generously supported by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. This report contains a detailed account of the work of the Forum and its Secretariat, which, among other things, administers AusAID funded technical assistance programs with regional institutions.
In addition to an active involvement in the work of the regional body, HREOC, as the Australian national human rights institution, conducts bilateral activities generally as part of the Australian Government's development cooperation program developed by AusAID. The most substantial of these is the Australia-China Human Rights Technical Assistance Program which is an integral part of the annual Dialogue on Human Rights with the People's Republic of China, a significant technical assistance cooperation program at a regional and international level.
Projects with other national institutions have also been supported in South Africa and Indonesia.
As a national institution the Commission is privileged to participate in formal UN processes. Dr Jonas attended the meetings of the Committee on the Elimination of Racism (CERD) in Geneva; Ms Halliday attended the Beijing Plus 5 meeting in New York. The President, Human Rights Commissioner and other staff attended the formal sessions of the Commission on Human Rights at which HREOC was granted speaking rights.
The Commission has received numerous overseas delegations and has provided training support to visiting commission staff from Indonesia, the Philippines, China, Bangladesh, Uganda and elsewhere. In my view our Australian Commission has a vitally useful contribution to make to the developing expertise of national institutions at a regional level and, where we are able to add value to these programs without compromising our domestic responsibilities, we will endeavour to share our expertise with those agencies in a less advantageous situation struggling to found human rights bodies in very different environments.
The often lofty language of human rights, founded as it is in international law, treaties and conventions, can be a source of profound debate and often perceptual difference. The source of human rights lies in the individual and the personal. Its manifestation is in the relations that individuals have with each other, with communities and groups, and with government, where human rights provide the measure of a decent relationship and a recognition of the worth of all humans and the societal. The Commission strives to assist Australians to an appreciation of the commonality of universal human rights standards. We work towards a national understanding of fairness and equality for all Australians. On occasions, this brings us into conflict with one group or another governments included. That is an unavoidable part of our work, but it is also a challenge. We must acknowledge that while Australia enjoys a standard of living and opportunity more advantageous than many other countries, we cannot pretend that all Australians share these privileges. There is much work still to be done.
The Commission faces further change, and adaptation to that change, at a legislative and structural level. Even a change of name is foreshadowed by legislation before Parliament. New appointments will also be announced in the coming year. These are major challenges for any organisation.
Change is one of the constants for the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission. Challenge also. I look forward to a year of continuing achievement, engagement with the Australian community and a year of working on behalf of Australians for a better world for all.
Last updated 1 December 2001.
