Gillian Triggs ‘deeply regrets’ QUT case

HRC President Gillian Triggs has all but apologised to the students affected by the QUT racial hatred case.

Professor Gillian Triggs has refused to say sorry to the students. Picture: Kym Smith

Australian Human Rights Commission president Gillian Triggs has all but apologised to the students affected by the high-profile Queensland University of Technology racial hatred case, saying her organisation “deeply regrets the anxiety, reputational damage and costs” they experienced under its “lengthy processes”.

Professor Triggs has refused to say sorry to the students, who were unaware a complaint had been made against them for 14 months, despite conceding at a parliamentary committee they had “suffered” as a result of failures in the commission’s complaint handling procedures.

In an opinion piece for Guardian Australia today, Professor Triggs said the case was difficult for both the complainant Cindy Prior and the QUT students.

“The commission deeply regrets the anxiety, reputational damage and costs that resulted from the lengthy processes in that case,” she said.

“The commission has changed its processes since this case and now ensures that, where there is more than one respondent to a complaint, each respondent is notified of the complaint at the same time. We welcome the committee’s recommendation to formalise that process in legislation.”

Cindy Prior.

Ms Prior, an administration officer at QUT’s Oodgeroo Unit, lodged a complaint with the AHRC against the students under section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act after they were thrown out of a computer lab designated for Aboriginal students and made various comments on Facebook.

“Just got kicked out of the unsigned indigenous computer room. QUT (is) stopping segregation with segregation,” wrote Alex Wood.

Another student, Jackson Powell, wrote: “I wonder where the white ­supremacist computer lab is.”

Ms Prior also pursued the case in the Federal Circuit Court but that was ended earlier this month after Judge John Dowsett demanded the lawyers involved stop litigation that subjected the young men to unnecessary stress.

QUT students Alex Wood, left, and Calum Thwaites. Picture: Joseph Byford

Launching various defences of the AHRC after it was criticised by Coalition MPs for its handling of the QUT and Bill Leak cases, Professor Triggs noted the commission could not stop parties from going to court if agreement was not possible, “regardless of the merits of the complaint”.

“The Human Rights Commission’s conciliation process offers a neutral environment where those involved in alleged incidents of racism can have respectful conversations and, hopefully, resolve their differences,” she said.

Professor Triggs also repeated her claim the commission had offered Leak an opportunity to defend his divisive cartoon that became the subject of several section 18C complaints but he did not respond.

That claim, which she first made during evidence to a parliamentary committee and said would have “ended the matter precisely at that moment”, has been labelled “misleading” by Leak’s lawyer and Liberal MPs.

A joint parliamentary committee inquiring into the AHRC’s processes and the need to reform section 18C, which makes it illegal to “offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate” another person on the basis of race, has recommended a number of steps to overhaul the commission.

Professor Triggs said recommendations to raise the threshold for complaints and strengthen the powers of the commission to terminate “unmeritorious” complaints were welcome but warned against imposing a refundable lodgement fee.

“We remain concerned that some of the recommendations may unfairly restrict access to justice by the most vulnerable in our society, for example by imposing fees and costs on the conciliation process,” she said.