Scrutiny update
On 26 November 2025 the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights tabled its Report 7 of 2025, 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.
Australian Centre for Disease Control Bill 2025 and Australian Centre for Disease Control (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2025
- The committee sought further information from the minister to assess the compatibility of various measures involving the collection, use and disclosure of personal information with the rights to privacy and an effective remedy. While some of the committee’s concerns have been addressed, the committee retains human rights concerns with respect to other measures.
- In particular, regarding authorising the collection, use and disclosure of information in various circumstances, the committee considers that it is not clear that there are adequate safeguards to ensure that any interference with the right to privacy is proportionate and an individual may not have access to an effective remedy for any violation of their right to privacy. Regarding the power to make data-sharing declarations for serious threats to public health, the committee considers that it is not clear whether there are adequate safeguards, as the detail of the measure and its potential limitation on the right to privacy will be contained in a future exempt legislative instrument. As such it is not possible to conclude whether the measure would constitute a permissible limit on the right to privacy in practice. The committee draws these concerns to the attention of the minister and the Parliament.
Environment Protection Reform Bill 2025 and National Environmental Protection Agency Bill 2025
- The Environment Protection Reform Bill 2025 seeks to provide broad ministerial discretionary exemptions for proposed actions that are in the national interest. Depending on the actions approved, this could engage and limit multiple human rights, including the right to culture, the right to privacy, the right to life, the right to equality and non-discrimination, the right to an adequate standard of living, the rights of the child and the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment.
- The National Environmental Protection Agency Bill 2025 seeks to establish the National Environmental Protection Agency (NEPA) and confer on the CEO of the NEPA various functions and powers which may engage and limit a number of human rights. The committee draws these concerns to the attention of the minister and the Parliament.
Freedom of Information Amendment Bill 2025
- The committee is seeking further information from the minister to assess the compatibility of multiple measures in the bill with the right to access information, a component of the right to freedom of expression.
Regulatory Reform Omnibus Bill 2025
- The committee had previously concluded its consideration of the human rights compatibility of this bill in Report 6 of 2025. The Minister for Finance advised the committee that the government will consider a foundational review of the Acts that are sought to be amended by this bill for their compatibility with the right to privacy. The committee welcomes this advice and the minister’s explanation of the safeguards that Services Australia has in place for disclosure of information.
Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Technical Changes No. 2) Bill 2025
- While the committee notes that the validation of income apportionment may promote the general welfare, the committee considers that it is unclear whether adequate safeguards accompany the measure such that it is likely to constitute a proportionate limit on the right to social security in all circumstances. The committee considers that the remedies available are limited and their effectiveness will depend on the ability of vulnerable individuals to be adequately informed of the legal implications of the Income Apportionment Resolution Scheme. The committee has made a recommendation to amend the bill and update the statement of compatibility.
- The committee considers that it is unclear whether benefit restriction notices pursue a legitimate objective, are rationally connected to the stated objective or accompanied by adequate safeguards to ensure any limitation on the right to social security is proportionate. The committee considers that in the absence of access to review or the ability to seek backpay or compensation, there do not appear to be effective remedies available for any limitation on the right to social security. Further, the committee notes that if the cancellation of social security payments were to be considered a criminal punishment, criminal process rights should be afforded. The committee is seeking further information from the minister to assess the compatibility of this measure with these rights.
Telecommunications and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025
- In relation to the power of an agency to access stored communications under authorisations for developing and testing interception capabilities, the committee considers that it is difficult to fully assess the sufficiency of safeguards and the impact of this measure on the right to privacy, and if an individual’s right to privacy was violated it does not appear likely there is an effective remedy. As the bill has now passed, the committee makes no further comment in relation to this measure.
- In providing for a prescribed communications provider to copy stored communications under an interception International Production Order, the committee considers that it is not possible to conclude that the measure is compatible with the right to privacy and, were an individual’s privacy violated under an interception authorisation, it is unclear there would be an effective remedy. The committee recommends that the government consider the committee’s comments in its reforms to the electronic surveillance framework.
- The committee considers that, if an individual’s human rights were violated in the course of a controlled operation, it appears unlikely that a person would have access to an effective remedy in all circumstances. As the bill has now passed, the committee makes no further comment in relation to this measure.
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection (Murujuga) Declaration 2025
- The committee considers that the instrument, insofar as it creates an offence to move, damage, deface or otherwise disturb an Aboriginal site or object in the Murujuga, protects and preserves this area from injury or desecration and promotes multiple human rights. However, the committee considers that by excluding damage or disturbance caused by, or as a result of, industrial gaseous emissions – a key threat to the petroglyphs in the Murujuga – this measure may in effect facilitate injury to or desecration of Aboriginal sites or objects in the Murujuga and thereby limit the rights to culture and privacy. The committee considers that it is not clear the measure is compatible with these rights and recommends that the statement of compatibility be updated.
Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Rules 2025
- The committee considers that there is a risk that the sharing and disclosure of personal information that is enabled by this instrument may not always be a proportionate limit on the right to privacy. The committee further considers that there may be a risk that disclosing certain information to foreign governments and entities may expose a person to a risk of the death penalty or to torture or other cruel treatment and may therefore be incompatible with the right to life and the prohibition against torture and other cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment or punishment. The committee draws its previous human rights concerns and recommendations, as set out in Report 9 of 2024, to the minister and the Parliament.
Australian Border Force (Alcohol and Drug Tests) Rules 2025
- The committee considers there to be a risk that requiring workers to undergo alcohol and drug tests and retaining information relating to the outcome of these tests may constitute an impermissible limit on the rights to privacy and work. The measure may also have a disproportionate effect on workers with certain attributes or medical conditions who may be more likely to be required to take prohibited drugs, and the measure may therefore result in unlawful discrimination in certain circumstances.
Social Security (Administration) (Enhanced Income Management Regime - Qualified Portion of Payments) Determination 2025 and Social Security (Administration) (Income Management - Crediting of Accounts) Rules 2025
- The committee notes that these instruments form part of the broader enhanced income management regime and the income management regime. There is a risk that these compulsory income management regimes impermissibly limit multiple human rights. The committee draws its 2024 inquiry into compulsory income management and recommendations to the attention of the minister and the Parliament.
Social Security (Special Benefit - Class of Visas) Determination 2025
- The committee considers there to be a risk that applying mutual obligation requirements and the newly arrived resident’s waiting period to certain classes of visas for social security payments may not constitute a permissible limitation on multiple human rights, including the right to social security. The committee draws its concerns to the attention of the minister and the Parliament.