Zaneta Mascarenhas (Swan, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

On behalf of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights, I present the following reports: Human rights scrutiny report: report 8 of 2025 and Human rights scrutiny report: report 1 of 2026.

Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e).

by leave—I am pleased to present Report 8 of 2025 and Report 1 of 2026 of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights.

In these reports, the committee considered 22 new bills, 253 new legislative instruments and deferred consideration of two bills. It has commented on six bills and 14 legislative instruments, and concluded its examination of seven bills and 10 legislative instruments. The committee has sought additional information from the relevant minister in relation to the human rights compatibility of two bills and nine instruments.

In Report 8 of 2025, the committee commented on the Administrative Review Tribunal and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025. This bill seeks to expand the circumstances in which the Administrative Review Tribunal may make a decision without holding an oral hearing. This engages and may limit the right to a fair hearing.

The committee also noted that questions remain as to how much time and resources will be saved by this measure. It is accordingly unclear to the committee whether this measure is rationally connected to the objective of efficient resolution of proceedings. Further, the committee noted that should the measure disproportionately impact certain applicants, it may also engage and limit other rights, including the right to equality and nondiscrimination, and the rights of people with a disability to equality before the law.

This bill also expands the circumstances in which the tribunal would not be required to give certain information to an applicant regarding a reviewable migration decision. As this may impede a person's ability to challenge a decision and this measure would apply to the decisions that may result in expulsion or deportation of noncitizens or foreign nationals, it engages and limits the prohibition against expulsion of aliens without due process.

The committee also considered that there is a risk that this measure may not place a proportionate limitation on this right in absence of appropriate safeguards and given the extent of interference with the right that may be significant.

In Report 1 of 2026, the committee has concluded its consideration of the Customs (Place of Detention) Directions 2025. This instrument identifies places of detention that a person can be held, including a room that meets the standard specified in the instrument or otherwise an Australian Border Force vehicle.

The committee considers the right to humane treatment in detention and the right to privacy may be limited where a person is detained in a place that does not meet the standards of humane treatment or where they are subjected to the search of their person.

The committee considers that many of the safeguards that accompany the measures are discretionary and do not provide sufficient protections for vulnerable groups, such as children or people with disability.

I would like to draw particular attention to these human rights concerns as detaining a person in a vehicle during hot weather can result in death.

I recall the death of Mr Ward an Aboriginal elder in 2008 in Western Australia.

Mr Ward was being transported across the Goldfields in a prison van with faulty air conditioning. This resulted in a death in custody. While this was under state jurisdiction, it is important to understand the risks of vehicle detention.

In Report 1 of 2026, the committee also commented on the Migration (Disclosure of Information to Prescribed Bodies) Instrument 2025 and the Migration (Disclosure of information To Prescribed International Organisations) Instrument 2025. These legislative instruments prescribed the bodies and international organisations to which officers may disclose identifying information about individuals. The prescribed bodies include 107 state and territory police forces and agencies, federal intelligence agencies, foreign police forces, and foreign intelligence agencies.

The committee notes that prescribing the bodies and international organisations to which identifying information may be disclosed for specified purposes engages and limits the right to privacy and may engage and limit further rights. The committee considers that further information is required to assess the compatibility of these measures with these rights, and, as such, has sought advice from the minister.

I encourage all members to consider the committee's reports closely. With these comments. I commend the scrutiny report 8 of 2025 and scrutiny report 1 of 2026 to the House.

See this speech in context