The right to free speech and the right to openly participate in political debate are rights which must be available to all residents of NSW whether or not they are employed by the Department of Education. NSWCCL is concerned that the proposed changes to the Code of Conduct by the NSW Department of Education (the Department) has the potential to reduce the civil liberties of Departmental Employees through a restriction on their rights to communicate through personal social media channels.
In this submission the NSWCCL has chosen to concentrate on question 2 in the discussion paper:
2. Where should the department set standards in respect to recognising an employee’s choice to engage with social media but ensuring the reputation of the department and public sector?
In the opinion of the NSWCCL any standards regarding the use of social media by Departmental employees should ensure their right to free speech including the right to participate in political discourse, by not going further than absolutely necessary in limiting such rights.
The proposed social media guidelines should be restricted to matters where an employee is conducting illegal behaviour, such as committing criminal offences, through their speech. No further burden on free speech is necessary for the public interest, nor justified in this context.
NSWCCL submission to the Joint Select Committee Inquiry into the Anti-Discrimination Amendment Bill 2020 - 22 August 2020
The NSW Council for Civil Liberties [NSWCCL] considers it is very important to respond in some detail to this Joint Select Committee’s inquiry into the Anti-Discrimination Amendment (Religious Freedoms and Equality) Bill 2020 [the Bill].
The issues encompassed by this Bill – religious freedoms and protection from discrimination on the grounds of religion - are of great significance in a democracy such as ours. They are also extremely complex and potentially deeply contentious issues. Legislation on human rights must always be carefully considered and balanced, and this is especially so in relation to religious rights and protections. If all rights are not considered in a fair and balanced way the outcome is likely to be discriminatory and harmful to some groups and individuals and to over-privilege the rights of others.
INQUIRY INTO THE EXEMPTION OF DELEGATED LEGISLATION FROM PARLIAMENTARY OVERSIGHT
The New South Wales Council for Civil Liberties welcomes the opportunity to make submissions to the Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Delegated Legislation with respect to its Inquiry concerning the exemption of delegated legislation from parliamentary oversight.
Recommendation 1: The Committee’s role should be expanded so that it can analyse legislative instruments which are not subject to parliamentary disallowance, disapproval or affirmative resolution of the Senate, and to scrutinise the justification for the existence of delegated legislation of that substance and form in the first place.
Recommendation 2: All delegated legislation should be subject to parliamentary disallowance in normal times, with the Legislation Act 2003 (Cth) amended to reflect this.
Recommendation 3: Delegated legislation may only be exempt from parliamentary disallowance in exceptional or emergency situations, with clear criteria established in the Legislation Act 2003 (Cth) in relation to sunset periods for such legislation and the use of Henry VIII clauses.
Recommendation 4: An investigation be initiated by either this Committee or some other authority to determine, pending an authoritative statement by the High Court of Australia, whether the practice of exempting legislative instruments from parliamentary disallowance amounts to an unconstitutional abdication of legislative power, as has been suggested by leading constitutional commentators.
Recommendation 5: Parliament should use all means possible to continue sitting, even during emergencies, in order to provide its scrutiny and supervisory functions over delegated legislation. Parliament should investigate further the possibility of meeting virtually by electronic means and have regard to the arguments of constitutional experts such as Professor Twomey in this process.13 This recommendation echoes previous public statements made by NSWCCL.
Recommendation 6: As PIAC recommends, implement recommendation 18 of the 2019 inquiry into delegated legislation, recommending that legislative instruments, subject to limited exceptions, commence 28 days after registration.
Recommendation 7: As PIAC recommends, implement recommendation 16 of the 2019 inquiry into delegated legislation, recommending that the Office of Parliamentary Counsel modify the Federal Register of Legislation to enable instruments which are exempt from disallowance to be readily identified.
NSWCCL Statement to the 2020 ECOSOC High Level Segment for NGOs 26th April 2020
The New South Wales Council for Civil Liberties (NSWCCL) recognises that the human rights and civil liberties of all people cannot be fully realised unless, and until, the global community meets the targets set by the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). However we recognise that development, particularly economic, need not necessarily take place in a way that is human rights based.
In times of accelerated progress towards any goal, it is clear that states can sometimes all too quickly pursue acceleration at the expense of human rights and equality. This is not to say that acceleration is itself problematic. In line with the recommendations of the Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change, acceleration of sustainable development in relation to climate change (SDGS 7, 11- 15) is vital to prevent the most catastrophic climactic changes. Climate change will only entrench vulnerability and marginalisation. We strongly endorse rapid acceleration of the response to climate change, particularly within Australia.
We emphasise the importance of attaining progress towards meeting the SDG targets in a way that centres human rights obligations at the core of development. The United Nations Human Rights Council has resolved that attainment of the SDGs and implementation of human rights obligations by states should be ‘mutually reinforcing’, and a state should implement the SDGs consistently with their pre-existing human rights obligations (A/HRC/RES/37/24). This is also recognised in SDG 10 and SDG 16.
Turning to an example from Australia, the longstanding inequality between Indigenous and Non-Indigenous Australians is a deplorable stain on Australia’s history. The 2020 Closing the Gap report identifies that the child mortality rate for Indigenous Australians is slightly over double the child mortality rate for Non-Indigenous Australians (p. 15). Numeracy and literacy rates for Indigenous school students are well below national standards (p. 45). Whilst we acknowledge that some progress is being made, such progress is slow and does not comply with the spirit of the SDGs and should be accelerated alongside economic development.
To ensure that the crucial acceleration of progress responding to the SDG targets takes place in a way that advances human rights we call upon states to:
- Ensure that justice, integrity and accountability bodies within states are strengthened and properly resourced.
- Adopt domestic legislation which enshrines fundamental human rights and affords citizens with personal remedies to protect their rights.
- Ensure that the rights of marginalised and minority groups are given equal, if not greater, importance than the rights of others within society to remedy past injustices.
NSW Council for Civil Liberties Australia
NSWCCL has made a submission on the Government's second exposure draft of the Religious Discrimination Bill 2019. This follows our highly critical, but nonetheless, slightly hopeful submission on the first exposure draft of the Bill in October last year. We had been hopeful that the many problems civil liberties and human rights groups had identified in the Bill might be addressed, so that this second version would provide much needed protections against religious discrimination -particularly for minority religions - which are appropriately balanced with the rights of other groups in the Australian community.
The draft Bill's up-front objectives are spot-on: to eliminate discrimination on the grounds of religious belief; to ensure everyone has the same rights to equality before the law and that people can make statements of religious belief- all subject to reasonable restrictions. Most significantly they affirm the 'indivisibility and universality of human rights and their equal status in international law.' (Clause 3)
However the new draft Bill fails to deliver on these objectives - it dangerously expands the over-privileging of religious rights in relation to other rights, weakens existing protections available for other groups under current state and federal anti-discrimination laws. If it becomes law, this Bill will increase discrimination against and harm for many groups in the Australian community.
It seems clear that the objects of the draft Bill have been distorted by the insertion of numerous provisions for the sole reason of conceding to the demands of major religious groups for both exceptionally broad rights and protections from discrimination by others and an extraordinary range of exemptions and exceptions amounting to an extensive right to discriminate against others with legal impunity.
In summary, NSWCCL considers this second exposure draft Bill privileges religious rights to the detriment of other rights and weakens existing anti-discrimination laws much more seriously than did the first exposure draft. We are firmly of the belief that the Government must withdraw the Bill and start again with a better and more cohesive process.
NSWCCL provided a submission to the Australian Treasury on the Census and Statistics Amendment (Statistical Information) Regulations 2019 (Regs) amending the Census and Statistics Regulation 2016. This amendment makes significant and concerning changes to the regulation which we oppose on privacy grounds.
Whilst NSWCCL supports the updating of the statistical information topics for inclusion in the census we oppose mandatory collection of sensitive health information and its storage for 4 years by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS).
The amendment proposes the insertion of a new topic relating to health conditions diagnosed by a doctor or a nurse which must be answered by all respondents. The rationale is that this information will assist health service planning and delivery.
We oppose this proposal is given the retention of that information by the ABS.
In 2016 the Australian government reinstated a plan to retain names and addresses from the census, a move which leaves open the opportunity for a future government to access sensitive personal information. NSWCCL appreciates the need for longitudinal studies but considers these can be conducted on a sample basis. We continue to support the prior approach to the census which collected important census information but which was disassociated from the individual identification data.
As a minimum we recommend the ABS conduct an adequate, independent, publicly available, Privacy Impact Statement (PIA).
We also registered our objection to the timing of the consultation period which ended on 10th January to the Xmas/NY holiday period. This does not suggest a serious desire to generate community input to the review process.
NSWCCL has endorsed the Human Rights for NSW Alliance's submission to the Australian Human Rights Commission's national conversation on human rights in Australia - Free and Equal. The submission makes a number of recommendations and builds the case for a Human Rights Act in NSW.
NSWCCL is a founding member of Human Rights for NSW Alliance. Human Rights for NSW is an alliance of community, legal, rights-based and civil society organisations campaigning to ensure that the human rights of NSW citizens are expressed and guaranteed by law so we are all treated fairly, and with dignity, equality and respect.
This submission is endorsed by 33 member organisations, including Australian Lawyers for Human Rights, Human Rights Law Centre, Community Legal Centres NSW, Public Interest Advocacy Centre, Aboriginal Legal Service NSW/ACT and the NSW Bar Association.
Everyone in NSW deserves to be treated fairly and equally. NSWCCL supports the campaign for a Human Rights Act for NSW.
A NSW Parliamentary Committee has recommended the Legislative Council should proceed to consider the Transport Amendment (Mobile Phone Detection) Bill 2019, including any amendments in relation to the reverse onus of proof, the use of artificial intelligence and privacy.
NSWCCL agrees strongly that mobile phone use whilst driving is a serious issue which needs to be addressed to protect the safety of the community.
We do not, however, support this Bill on the basis that it unjustifiably reverses the onus of proof and fails to provide adequate protections to assure the public that the information captured by the cameras is used for the sole purpose of prosecuting mobile phone offences.
NSWCCL also has concerns about the inherent risks of using AI to identify criminal behaviour given the lack of transparency as to the underpinning algorithms driving the assessment.
We welcome the Committee’s recognition of these concerns in their report and single recommendation.
The Bill should be amended significantly to address these problems before the Legislative Council approves it.Read more
It is clearly important for Australia’s discrimination laws to work cohesively together and for no one right to be automatically privileged over another/others. The protection and balancing of human rights would be greatly assisted by the adoption of an Australian Charter of Human Rights and by a review of Australia’s state and federal human rights laws to ensure the appropriate coherence and consistency. The current Review by the Australian Law Reform Commission into The Framework of Religious Exemptions in Anti-Discrimination Legislation will contribute to this from the perspective of religious rights - but the broader exercise is necessary.
One of the major disappointments with this Bill is the failure to include much needed and explicitly promised protections for LGBTQI+ students in religious and private schools. This Bill has been hastily drawn up in advance of the report from the inquiry into The Framework of Religious Exemptions in Anti-Discrimination Legislation under way by the ALRC, but one of the most urgent and disturbing manifestations of inappropriate religious exemptions for otherwise unlawful discriminatory acts against children has deliberately not been addressed in the Bill and instead left to the ALRC review. Simultaneously the reporting date for the ALRC review has been pushed back to December 2020.
The New South Wales Council of Civil Liberties (NSWCCL) welcomes the opportunity to make submissions to the Department of Health on the Health Legislation Amendment (Data- matching) Bill 2019 (Bill) and the Health Legislation Amendment (Permitted Information Disclosure) Regulations 2019.
NSWCCL supports the integrity of the Medicare health payments system provided that appropriate safeguards are in place to protect sensitive information and the privacy of Australians is respected.
NSWCCL objects to the sharing of sensitive health information with other Commonwealth entities and opposes the Bill in its current form. NSWCCL has a number of recommendations detailed in this submission.