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

On behalf of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights, I present the committee's report entitled Human rights scrutiny report: report 3 of 2026.

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

by leave—In this report, the committee considered eight new bills and 195 new legislative instruments, and commented on one bill and six instruments. The committee has sought further information from the Attorney-General in relation to the human rights compatibility of the Royal Commissions Legislation Amendment (Protections for Providing Information) Bill 2026, which finally passed both houses on 12 March 2026.

This bill facilitates the provision of intelligence information to a royal commission in circumstances where disclosure of such information would have otherwise been prevented by Commonwealth secrecy provisions. A royal commission can communicate this information to other agencies in certain circumstances. Information given to a royal commission under these measures is not admissible as evidence against the person disclosing it in secrecy proceedings in court. These measures apply specifically to the Royal Commission on Antisemitism and Social Cohesion but could be expanded to other royal commissions in the future.

Because intelligence information is highly likely to contain personal information, these measures engage and limit the right to privacy. These measures pursue the important objective of supporting a royal commission to receive information and documents that are relevant to its terms of reference. This is particularly important where a royal commission's terms of reference are aimed at investigating and preventing arbitrary loss of life, as is the case with the antisemitism royal commission.

The committee is seeking further information as to whether the limitation on the right to privacy is proportionate, including the effectiveness of safeguards that regulate the sharing of intelligence information. The committee is also concerned that a derivative-use immunity has not been provided in relation to the disclosure of intelligence information, and is seeking further information in relation to this matter.

I also note that this bill passed both houses within seven sitting days of introduction. This expedited process meant that the committee was unable to examine this bill prior to its passage. The committee considers that parliamentarians ought to have the benefit of this committee's human rights advice prior to passing legislation. This is important to ensure that the legislation we pass in this place is more robust and has greater insights from a human rights perspective.

In this report, the committee also commended the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Regulations 2025. Among other things, the regulations restrict lawyers' access to security information for proceedings relating to a remedy for a compulsory questioning warrant. The committee considers that while this measure pursues the legitimate objective of national security, there is a risk that it may not be proportionate limitation on the right to a fair hearing and it may restrict a person's access to an effective remedy for violations of their rights resulting from compulsory questioning warrants.

I encourage all members to consider the committee's report closely. These are important findings that we have provided, and we are ensuring that we are improving the scrutiny of legislation in this place. With these comments, I commend the committee's scrutiny report 3 of 2026 to the House.

See this speech in context