Scrutiny update
On 7 May 2026, the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights tabled out of session its Report 5 of 2026, which provides an analysis of the human rights compatibility of recently introduced bills and legislative instruments.
This update provides a summary of the legislation commented on in this report. Where the committee is seeking further information, this indicates it has not yet formed a concluded view, as further information is required to assess the relevant human rights implications. This summary is not intended to be a substitute for the views of the committee as set out in the committee's scrutiny reports.
- This committee is seeking further information to assess the compatibility of various measures relating to Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission powers and operations with multiple rights, including children’s rights, criminal process rights and the rights to an effective remedy, fair trial, freedom of assembly, freedom of association, freedom of expression, privacy, and work.
- The bill would expand telecommunication interception warrant powers in the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979 and warrant and other powers in the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 to apply to tobacco offences. The committee has raised concerns regarding the compatibility of these measures with the right to privacy and recommended that the government undertake a foundational review of the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979 and the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 for compatibility with human rights.
- The bill facilitates the provision of intelligence information, including personal information, to Royal Commissions. To the extent that this measure engages and limits the right to privacy, the committee considers that the limitation is likely proportionate. However, concerns remain that the lack of a derivative use immunity may limit the right not to incriminate oneself.
- The bills would repeal secrecy provisions and remove criminal liability for secrecy provisions across Commonwealth law, amend secrecy provisions in the Criminal Code, and defer the sunsetting of specific secrecy provisions. The committee draws to the attention of the Attorney-General and the Parliament the potential limitation on the right to privacy while noting that the measures may assist to protect the right to freedom of expression.
- Insofar as this instrument prescribes the reporting requirements in relation to the Australian Immunisation Register, the committee reiterates its previous concerns regarding the compatibility of the Australian Immunisation Register with the right to privacy.
- The committee is seeking further information from the minister to assess the compatibility of setting directions for the issue and use of firearms and personal defence equipment by Customs officers in the exercise of their statutory powers with the rights to life and security of person.
- The committee considers that removing mandatory grounds of refusal for extradition requests from Denmark, Iceland, Japan and the Republic of Fiji may not be compatible with the prohibition on expulsion of aliens without due process and reiterates its broader concerns regarding the incompatibility of the extradition process with multiple human rights.
- The instrument has the effect of banning Iranian citizens from entering Australia on a Subclass 600 (Visitor) Visa while the instrument is in force. The committee reiterates its concerns about the compatibility of the enabling legislation with children’s rights and the rights to equality and non discrimination, freedom of movement, liberty, and protection of the family, and potentially Australia’s non refoulement obligations.
- The committee reiterates its previous concerns regarding the compatibility of exempting only persons from certain English speaking countries from English language proficiency requirements for registration as a migration agent with the right to equality and non discrimination.
- To the extent that this instrument may further circumscribe the types of online platforms children aged under 16 are banned from accessing, the committee considers this may assist with the proportionality of this measure with the rights of the child. However, the practical effect of this instrument is unclear and if it were to expand the types of platforms considered to be an ‘age-restricted social medial platform’, it may further limit human rights.
- By setting out requirements and matters the secretary must take into account in determining whether a person has actively participated in a program of support for the purposes of determining whether the person qualifies for the disability support pension, the committee notes that the instrument may limit the rights of persons with disability, social security, equality and non discrimination and adequate standard of living.