Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 02 Hansard (Tuesday, 2 March 2004) . . Page.. 532 ..

already under way based on other causes of action, additional arguments about the interpretation of the law and human rights guarantees.

The Human Rights Bill will give rise to actions based on human rights grounds that did not previously exist. For example, a challenge could be brought, under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1989, to an administrative decision, subject to review under the act. The question will be: was the action or decision lawful and consistent with human rights? Failure to interpret the law by reference to human rights may result in an error of law, be otherwise contrary to law or be a failure to take account of a relevant consideration. In addition to its power to grant remedies under section 17 of the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1989, the Supreme Court could also grant a declaration of incompatibility.

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal can review the merits of a decision and, if the decision was based on an incorrect interpretation of the law, the tribunal can remake the decision. The bill also provides for prelegislative scrutiny by requiring that I, as Attorney-General, must scrutinise legislation and form an opinion on whether government bills comply with the bill. Although the Attorney-General must form an opinion on each bill, the ultimate policy responsibility remains with the relevant minister.

Each department will be responsible for ensuring that human rights legislation is taken into account early in the development of new laws. My department is working to develop scrutiny guidelines for the human rights legislation and other important areas of constitutional and public law to assist all departments with this task.

Before closing, I will say a few words about implementation. The legislation is not just about enforcing rights in the courts and strengthening Assembly procedures; it is about cultural change in the public service and the wider community, and that will take time. I expect the public service to do more than tick off against the list of human rights when making a decision. This is about understanding the human rights framework and integrating a rights perspective into decision making and policy development in a clearly defined way. Each department will take responsibility for reviewing its legislation and policies to ensure that they are in compliance with the act. That process began during our consideration of the consultative committee’s recommendations.

The Department of Justice and Community Safety is making arrangements for an education program for public officials and will establish a departmental website to house information about the act for the general public and the staff of government departments. My officers are also liasing with the National Judicial College on the conduct of judicial seminars. The Human Rights Commissioner will be responsible for community education. I hope to make an announcement about that appointment in the near future.

Monitoring and evaluation is important to the long-term success of any project. As part of that process the government is supporting an application by Professor Charlesworth to the Australian Research Council for a three-year project to monitor the implementation and impact of the legislation. We hope that project will provide valuable information for our own review of the legislation.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .