Malcolm Turnbull says the Human Rights Commission did a “great deal of harm” to its credibility by bringing a case against three Queensland university students and it should think carefully about whether it has undermined respect for the Racial Discrimination Act.
He said the commission ought to now reflect on whether it has been managing the administration of the act properly and must “urgently review” the way it manages cases.
Speaking on ABC radio on Monday, Turnbull said the Human Rights Commission had done itself no favours by initiating a drawn-out prosecution of three Queensland University of Technology students over comments on Facebook.
Last week the federal court threw out a lawsuit brought under the act by an Indigenous staff member, Cindy Prior, against students Alex Wood, Calum Thwaites and Jackson Powell, under section 18C.
The case relates to an encounter in 2013 when Wood was asked to leave a computer lab known as the Oodgeroo unit, reserved for Indigenous students.
Wood complained on a Facebook group page that he had been kicked out of the room, writing: “Just got kicked out of the unsigned indigenous computer room. QUT stopping segregation with segregation?”
Two other students commented on the Facebook post. Powell wrote “I wonder where the white supremacist lab is” while Thwaites allegedly wrote “ITT Niggers”. Thwaites has always strongly denied this claim.
Last week the federal circuit court judge Michael Jarrett ruled the lawsuit should not proceed.
“For the reasons I have expressed above, in my view Ms Prior does not enjoy reasonable prospects of successfully prosecuting her proceedings against each of Mr Wood, Mr Powell and Mr Thwaites,” Jarrett wrote in conclusion. “Her proceedings against each of them must be dismissed.”
Prior was suing for $250,000 in damages but the three students had applied not to have the case proceed.
Turnbull said on Monday that the Human Rights Commission should now think “very soberly and carefully” about its administration of the act, because the case should never have gone to court.
“This was not a case that was determined on the margin, it was not a close case, it was not a well-argued case that fell down on the balance of probabilities,” he said. “This is a case where a judge has said, ‘You’ve got no prospect of success. Out you go.’
“It is a time for the Human Rights Commission to reflect on whether they have been managing the administration of the act in a way that is likely to encourage support for its objectives.
Turnbull said there was now “considerable merit” in holding a parliamentary committee to consider changing section 18C.
Section 18C prohibits speech – made in public – that is reasonably likely to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate someone, made on the grounds of someone’s race, colour, national or ethnic origin.
He said he had sympathy for the argument that the words “offend” and “insult” ought to be removed from the act because they were too restrictive on free speech.
But he said any attempt to change the act would need to have strong public support.
“You’re obviously trying to get the balance between ensuring that we maintain the courteous discourse and debate that again, mutual respect that underpins our strong multicultural society and on the other hand freedom of speech which is of critical importance in a democracy,” he said.
The prime minister has reportedly been calling Coalition MPs before a party room meeting on Tuesday to canvass their views on the need to change section 18C.
Conservatives inside the Coalition have renewed their push for an overhaul of the act since the election.
The Liberal frontbencher Josh Frydenberg said on Sunday if the government took steps to amend the act it would have to take the public with it.
