Media Release
12 March 2003
Complaint against Commissioner subject to provisions of Human Rights Act
A complaint made against the Race Relations Commissioner is barred from proceeding to the Human Rights Review Tribunal
by Section 130 of the Human Rights Act. This does not preclude the complaint from being considered as part of a disputes
resolution process.
Provisions ensuring Commissioners and other statutory officers from a number of organisations are able to carry out
their duties effectively are contained in several legislative Acts, including the Human Rights Act.
The complaint to the Human Rights Commission was made under Section 61 of the Human Rights Act by Murray McCully MP
following a speech the Commissioner gave in December last year.
The Commission sought external legal advice. This advice confirmed that the Section of the Act bars the Tribunal hearing
any complaints made against Human Rights Commissioners in relation to any statement “made in good faith in the exercise
of his or her duty as a Commissioner.” Section 130 of the Act also applies to Commission staff.
The Section does not appear to allow for this immunity to be waived either by the Race Relations Commissioner or the
Commission on his behalf.
Human Rights Chief Commissioner Rosslyn Noonan says this provision of the Act exists to ensure Commissioners can
effectively carry out the requirements of their role. The role of Human Rights Commissioners is defined by Section 5 of
the Act.
“Parallel provisions relating to statutory officers and officials can be found in a number of other Acts.” Other bodies
affected by these provisions include the Commerce Commission, the Commissioner for Children and the Office of the
Ombudsmen.
“The Commission has offered to appoint an independent mediator to consider the complaint through a dispute resolution
process. Mr McCully has declined this offer,” Ms Noonan said.
ENDS