Dean Smith (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Competition, Charities and Treasury) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on behalf of opposition senators to put the opposition's position on the Australian Human Rights Commission Legislation Amendment (Selection and Appointment) Bill 2022 on the record.

The coalition has a strong history of supporting the Australian Human Rights Commission and human rights work both in Australia and overseas whilst in government. It was under the coalition government that Australia was elected to the Human Rights Council, Australia's autonomous sanction laws were expanded through the Autonomous Sanctions Amendment (Magnitsky-style and Other Thematic Sanctions) Bill 2021 and the Autonomous Sanctions Amendment (Magnitsky-style and Other Thematic Sanctions) Regulations 2021, and Australia sought an independent review into the origins of the COVID-19 virus by the World Health Organization which a record 145 countries co-sponsored.

This bill responds to a technical process issue raised by the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions Sub-Committee on Accreditation in the relation to aspects of the appointment processes for the Australian Human Rights Commission and the potential length of tenure of commissioners. The Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions reviews and accredits the NHRIS, based on the United Nations General Assembly principles relating to the status of national institutions, also known as the Paris Principles. The Australian Human Rights Commission has held A status accreditation since 1999, when the accreditation regime was put in place.

While supporting the bill, it is important to acknowledge that these accreditation processes are not perfect, are focused on process issues rather than practical human rights outcomes, and are designed for developing countries without a strong history of independent institutions. By way of example, Sweden's NHRI, the discrimination ombudsman, was downgraded to B status in 2011. The subcommittee determined its mandate was too narrow as it focused on equal rights but didn't consider nondiscrimination. The subcommittee was also concerned because, like Australia, the government appoints and can remove the ombudsman, so Sweden, despite its strong human rights record, has a B status NHRI.

Again, by way of example, Belgium's NHRI, the Interfederal Centre for Equal Opportunities, was also given B status accreditation in 2018. Once again, the subcommittee was concerned its mandate was too narrow as it didn't cover the full range of human rights and was only responsible for combating racism and discrimination. This was despite the fact it acknowledged that, while in practice its mandate was interpreted broadly, it didn't have clear legislative backing for a broad human rights approach. Concerningly, despite the panic over A status, if we were to look more closely at what the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions classes as A-status organisations, we would find those in countries such as Benin, the Russian Federation, Uganda, Ethiopia, Rwanda, Ghana. I would hardly say a country like Belgium or Sweden has grave human rights concerns, yet, under this accreditation process, they are worse than countries with significant human rights concerns.

In March 2022, in the same review Australia was threatened with a downgrade, some other countries which seemed to excite the same criticism as Australia had received from the global alliance nevertheless had their A status confirmed. For instance, Benin was accredited for the first time. Benin was given A status, despite the subcommittee expressing concern that its appointments weren't independent or transparent.

While coalition senators are not opposing this bill, we do stand by the high-quality appointments to the Human Rights Commission that the coalition did make while in government. I particularly want to observe, note and thank them for their service and the contribution they have made to the discussion on the protection of human rights in our country. All of these people are and have been distinguished Australians who have made particular contributions to safeguarding and advancing human rights in this country and beyond its shores. As a liberal democracy with a commitment to human rights, which I might add is shared across this parliament, Australia delivered on key priorities during the coalition's period in office. On the council, Australia spoke out: against Russia's attack on Ukraine and its people; against the Chinese Communist Party's human rights violations; against the deteriorating human rights situations in North Korea, Afghanistan, Ethiopia and Myanmar; against the erosion of human rights in Hong Kong; against the erosion of democratic institutions in Venezuela; and against the humanitarian toll of the conflicts in both Yemen and Syria.

Notwithstanding the clear issues with the accreditation process, the opposition does not oppose this legislation that seeks to address these process matters. It will enjoy our support, and we look forward to continuing to work very, very closely with like-minded countries across the world supporting human rights and the institutions that deliver these outcomes.