australian human rights commission case studies

• Business User
• IT Professional
• Microsoft 365
• Microsoft Copilot
• Microsoft Copilot for Microsoft 365
• Microsoft Copilot for Sales
• Microsoft Copilot for Small and Medium Business
• Microsoft Adoption Score
• Microsoft Dynamics 365
• Microsoft Lists
• Microsoft Loop
• Microsoft Mesh
• Microsoft Planner
• Microsoft Power Platform
• Microsoft Search
• Classic Microsoft Teams
• New Microsoft Teams
• Microsoft Teams Premium
• Microsoft Teams Phone
• Microsoft Security
• Microsoft Syntex
• Microsoft Viva
• Outlook mobile
• SharePoint Premium
• Champion Management Platform
• Extensibility Look Book Gallery
• Microsoft 365 Archive
• Microsoft 365 Backup
• Microsoft 365 Learning Pathways
• Microsoft Intelligent Document Processing
• Microsoft Teams App Templates
• New Employee Onboarding Solution Accelerator
• Partner Solution Gallery
• Sample Solution Gallery
• SharePoint eSignature
• SharePoint look book
• Accessibility
• Adoption guides
• Azure Adoption Framework
• Case Studies
• Employee experience
• FastTrack for Microsoft 365
• Frontline workers
• Guidance for virtual events
• Microsoft 365 Roadmap
• Meetings and webinars in Microsoft Teams
• Modern Collaboration Architecture (MOCA)
• Podcasts & Shows
• Remote learning in education
• Skype for Business to Microsoft Teams upgrade
• Streamline end user training
• AI learning hub
• Become a Service Adoption Specialist
• Coffee in the Cloud tutorials
• Developer training
• End user training
• IT Pro training
• Microsoft 365 Champion Program
• Microsoft Learn
• Modern Work Customer Hub (Microsoft Copilot customer training)
• Office Quick Start guides
• Community Events
• Community Tenant
• Global Community Initiative
• Microsoft Community Hub
• Student Ambassador Community
• Release notes

Home / Case Studies / Australian Human Rights Commission

AHRC implements a fully automated EDRMS on SharePoint using AI and machine learning

Published on October 8, 2021

Australian Human Rights Commission

Recordpoint.

RecordPoint is a global leader and developer of cloud-based information management and compliance services. The business helps regulated companies and government agencies reduce risk, increase operational efficiency, and drive collaboration.

The Australian Human Rights Commission (the Commission) is Australia’s national human rights institution, an independent statutory organization in the Attorney-General’s portfolio that promotes and protects human rights. Although a small agency, AHRC has a reputation for early strategic adoption of new technologies. In recent years AHRC has been a leader in government with their migration to Microsoft Office 365 and Azure.  

According to the National Archives of Australia (NAA), the Commission is the current thought leader of records management in the Australian Government. Through a corporate partnership with RecordPoint, the Commission implemented an electronic document and records management system (EDRMS) on SharePoint with RecordPoint Records365, utilizing RecordPoint’s AI and machine learning technologies to classify records without the need for staff input.  

Prior to this new EDRMS solution, in production since February 2019, the Commission was drowning in a sea of duplicates, tangled in nested folders and perplexed by lost documents. Funding shortfalls and other challenges saw the Commission unable to implement an EDRMS solution that was viable.  

Researching options, the Commission headed by Ron McLay, Chief Information Officer and Ryan McConville, Information Manager, incorporated the Department of Finance’s study into the failings of the traditional EDRMS. In particular, the report suggested that records management should be automated, rather than a being a manual task for public servants. Inspired by the report, the Commission set out to implement a fully automated EDRMS, using artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning. This would form the basis of RADICAL – Record And Document Innovation & Capture – Artificial Learning.  

An EDRMS implementation with AI addresses key problems faced in running an effective EDRMS. AI reduces the scope for human error, while increasing the volume, accuracy and consistency of records classification. The simple user interface has driven high user uptake and is seen by staff as a useful tool rather than a burden.  

The Commission avoided customization and add-ons for RecordPoint and SharePoint, focusing on configuration instead. A common problem agencies have experienced is in the customization and use of third-party add-ins to suit existing or outdated business processes. This often resulted in systems that were difficult to use, inefficient and unreliable, and hard to upgrade with user uptake suffering accordingly.  

Harnessing the native functionality of RecordPoint and SharePoint translated to improved business processes. The Commission also incorporated simple navigation for easy browsing of records, supported by a powerful search feature in Records365. The RADICAL solution has been in production since February 2019 and is currently in staging for deployment across the organization  

The Commission’s approach was ‘configuration over customization’ as recommended by the DTA, focused on human-centered design. Staff were consulted extensively on current needs and pain points. When possible, native Records365 and SharePoint functionality was preserved, limiting the need for end user training and burdensome change management.  

When planning RADICAL, a key goal was to remove records management decisions from staff and allow them to focus on their core work. RADICAL needed to provide ‘transparent records management’ and limit the potential for inaccurate or inconsistent classification.  

Traditionally, the classification process has been performed manually by records officers. The manual element of classification can be time consuming, can lead to inaccuracy and can be disruptive to staff. Previous methodologies to automate records classification uses rules trees that classify records based on their metadata and saved location. However, rules trees need to be built and maintained by experienced records officers and rely on end users to apply accurate metadata and save to specific locations.  

Leveraging AI in this process solves many of these problems by combining a minimal rules tree with a machine learning model. If a record cannot be categorized by a rule, the machine learning model classifies the record based on its contents. This system eliminates the need to maintain complex rules trees, the reliance on metadata and record location.  

The RADICAL project team worked with RecordPoint’s AI developers to create a statistical model that can classify records against AFDA Express and the Commission’s agency-specific records disposal authority.  

The statistical model is developed by taking a set of records that have been manually classified and applying Natural Language Processing techniques to normalize the document content into vectors. The model is then trained using algorithms.  

After an initial training period, the RADICAL statistical model can categorize individual records with an accuracy of 80%. The Commission expects this accuracy will increase over time. RADICAL also re-categorizes records each time they are edited, ensuring the classification is always current.  

Although the machine learning model will initially work in conjunction with a rules tree, as the accuracy of the model increases the rules will be gradually removed and the Commission will rely solely on machine learning to manage their corporate records.  

The implementation phase involved:  

• performing a detailed analysis of existing systems and record holdings  
• developing a new information governance framework and agency-specific records disposal authority  
• developing and implementing a records migration strategy  
• extensive collaboration and testing with the RecordPoint AI developers  
• developing and testing of the SharePoint platform that Records365 manages  
• working with a specialist change management facilitator  
• training end users and providing ongoing support on go live  
• implementing an agreed security model  
• gaining agency-wide approval for the system including the business rules and for use of the machine learning algorithms  
• training the machine learning algorithms  
• implementing and rolling out the system  

As most Australian Government agencies share the same records management requirements, the Commission feels that the machine learning model provided by RecordPoint and used by RADICAL is a ‘genuine game-changer’ and will allow other agencies to experience equivalent ‘gains in efficiency, productivity and cost reductions.’ The Commission sees themselves as trailblazers in government for the use of AI in records management and are excited to share their experiences as the current thought leaders of Australian Government records management.  

RADICAL provides multiple, tangible benefits to the Commission such as:  

• automated records management that is accurate, consistent and compliant  
• compliance with DC2020  
• document versioning, which reduces duplication  
• enhanced collaboration and sharing  
• streamlined handling of Freedom of Information (FOI) requests  
• Power BI reports for senior executives  
• reduction in staff time spent on records management  
• effective and efficient records search and retrieval  
• real-time video transcription  
• automated image cataloguing  

RADICAL has had a positive impact on the Commission and its stakeholders by:  

• delivering upon the objective of ‘transparent records management’  
• increasing the accuracy and compliance of information management practices by reducing the scope for human error  
• reducing the time and costs associated with responding to FOI requests through improved search and retrieval  
• gradually reducing physical storage costs, currently averaging $17,000AUD per annum  
• reducing digital storage costs  
• increasing collaboration between Commission business units through shared document libraries and the establishment of an ‘open by default’ information access policy, where access to records is restricted only to protect personal privacy or sensitive information  
• improving business processes through electronic workflows, document versioning and automated metadata tagging  
• minimizing the impact of potential data breaches through regular scheduled records disposal  

Initial estimates by the Commission suggest that staff using RADICAL are seeing at least a 5% increase in productivity. Additionally, the accuracy of capture and classification by the algorithms is improving, and by estimates ‘it already exceeds the accuracy of our manual classification.’  

Lastly, the Commission showcases that a technologically advanced solution can be implemented without significant costs. ‘We estimate that a traditional EDRMS would have cost the Commission 3 or 4 times as much as RADICAL.’  

Share this page

•  Share on Microsoft Teams
• Share on Facebook
• Share on LinkedIn

SCAM ALERT: We will never contact you requesting money. Learn more.

Aboriginal and torres strait islander social justice.

All of us can play a part in making sure that every Australian – Indigenous and non-Indigenous – has the opportunities and choices they need to lead full and healthy lives.

Meet the Commissioner

June oscar ao.

June Oscar AO is a proud Bunuba woman from the remote town of Fitzroy Crossing in Western Australia’s Kimberley region. She is a strong advocate for Indigenous Australian languages, social justice, women’s issues, and has worked tirelessly to reduce Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD).

June has held a raft of influential positions including Deputy Director of the Kimberley Land Council, chair of the Kimberley Language Resource Centre and the Kimberley Interpreting Service and Chief Investigator with WA’s Lililwan Project addressing FASD .

Latest News

Commissioner june oscar welcomes institute funding.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner June Oscar welcomed the Commonwealth’s funding of the new Wiyi Yani U Thangani Institute for First Nations Gender Justice at the Australian National University. The Institute is the first of its kind in the world and will bring...

27 March, 2024

Commission celebrates official launch of the Wiyi Yani U Thangani Institute

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner June Oscar AO has launched a dedicated Institute to elevate the voices and solutions of First Nations women and girls – the Wiyi Yani U Thangani Institute for First Nations gender justice. The Australian-first Institute, housed at the...

20 March, 2024

Commission welcomes new Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner

5 March, 2024

Top Projects

Close the Gap: Indigenous Health Campaign

Working together to achieve health and life expectation equality for Australia's Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

• Wiyi Yani U Thangani (Women's Voices)

UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

Quick links.

• Make a human rights complaint
• Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
• Submissions
• Human Rights Awards
• Uluru Statement from the Heart
• Bringing Them Home

Stories of the Stolen Generations

Many of the stories and images on this website may cause sadness or distress for visitors.  Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander visitors are advised that this website may contain images, videos and voices of people who have passed away.  The story of the Stolen Generations cannot be told without recognising the strength and resilience of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander individuals, families and communities. In cases where you feel that you need support, these organisations may be able to assist you.

Interactive Map

The interactive map allows you to explore the stories of those members of the Stolen Generations who shared their experience with the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families. You can also learn more about the places to which stolen children were removed.

About Bringing Them Home

Bringing them Home was the name given to the final report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families conducted by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (now called the Australian Human Rights Commission)

Our Stories

Written testimonies.

Many members of the Stolen Generations shared their personal stories with the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families.

Read the stories

The 689 page final report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families was tabled in Parliament on 26 May 1997. It traces the past laws, practices and policies that resulted in the forced removal of children and makes recommendations to support healing and reconciliation for the Stolen Generations, their families and the Australian public more broadly.

Read the report

Teaching Resources

Introduction to healing.

Members of the Stolen Generations and their families continue to be affected by the trauma caused by forced removal. For many people, this trauma has had lasting impacts. It is important to acknowledge that healing is an ongoing journey. Organisations such as the Healing Foundation provide support to individuals and communities to address the ongoing trauma caused by actions like the forced removal of children from their families. However, reconciliation is the responsibility of all Australians. Reconciliation requires the Australian community to recognise and respect the first peoples of this land, to acknowledge the past injustices, and the ongoing inequalities, experienced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, and to commit to working towards a more equal and respectful future.

Find support

SCAM ALERT: We will never contact you requesting money. Learn more.

The racial hatred act: case study 3.

  Introduction : media response to Pauline Hanson's maiden speech to Parliament excerpts from Pauline Hanson's maiden speech Reports/Comment: ABC Radio National's Media Report poses the question: 'Is Pauline Hanson a simple fish-and-chip shop lady or a savvy media performer?' The Media Report's Agnes Warren comments Ray Martin's back announce on A Current Affair after Pauline Hanson declined the show's interview invitation ACA Producer, David Hurley , explains why the program declared its hand on the issue ABC TV's Acting Sydney Network News Editor, John Mulhall , explains the editorial decision not to cover the Hanson speech. Reader criticisms of bias in The Sydney Morning Herald's Letters to the Editor Please note that none of the reports in the case studies have been the subject of complaints or queries under the Racial Hatred Act.

A Current Affair invited Pauline Hanson to a live studio interview with Ray Martin the day after her speech. It was one in a succession of interview invitations the show had extended to Mrs Hanson - none of which she accepted - since she first came to national prominence during the federal election. After lengthy deliberations between the show's producer, David Hurley and her advisers, including media adviser John Pasquarelli, she declined. She gave as her reason, Martin's involvement in the Council for Aboriginal Reconciliation. Ray Martin delivered back-announce after a taped story on Pauline Hanson's maiden speech to Parliament, A Current Affair, 11 September 1996 Pauline Hanson has black banned me... no pun intended. She won't talk to me because she believes I'm sympathetic towards the plight of Aboriginal people. Well, I must confess I am. Unlike Mrs Hanson, I believe they are the most disadvantaged Australians. I have no problem with Asian Australians either. Mrs Hanson is, of course, entitled to state her views. I think she's ill-informed. Her so-called solutions are simplistic and I disagree with much of what she says. But I'd welcome the opportunity to discuss those differences with her. Of the more than fifty calls received by Channel 9 following Ray Martin's editorialising about Hanson's rejection of his interview invitation, most were critical of Martin's stance, alleging bias and lack of professionalism.

Previous page | Top of this page | Main Contents | Next page

Australian Human Rights Institute

Sydney launch: '50 human rights cases that changed australia'.

The Australian Human Rights Institute (UNSW Sydney), the Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC) and Gilbert + Tobin will host the Sydney launch of  50 Human Rights Cases That Changed Australia  by  Lucy Geddes  and  Hamish McLachlan  (Federation Press, 2023).

UNSW Emeritus Professor  Andrea Durbach AM  will lead a discussion on the book with the authors and GetUp! CEO,  Larissa Baldwin-Roberts .

50 Human Rights Cases that Changed Australia  summarises and analyses 50 of Australia’s most significant and influential human rights cases from all Australian states and territories. The landmark cases include freedom of expression and First Nations land rights cases of the 1990s, earlier cases on civil liberties and criminal procedure, and more recent advances in LGBTIQA+ rights, environmental justice, and the rights of people with disabilities. 

The foreword to the book has been written by the Hon  Michael Kirby AC CMG .

Andrea Durbach  was Professor of Law at UNSW (2004 - 2020) and Director of the Australian Human Rights Centre (now Institute) until 2017. Prior to joining UNSW Law she was Executive Director of the Public Interest Advocacy Centre and a solicitor at Freehill, Hollingdale and Page. She is a Foundation Fellow of the Australian Academy of Law and in 2013, was awarded the Australian Human Rights Commission Human Rights Law Award for her promotion and advancement of human rights in Australia through the practice of law.

Larissa Baldwin-Roberts comes from a long-line of political activists and was brought up in the fight for land rights, climate justice, First Nations justice and cultural heritage, building strong relationships in communities and across civil society over decades. A proud Widjabul Wia-bul woman from the Bundjalung Nations, Larissa was appointed the CEO of GetUp! in 2022. Prior to her appointment, Larissa was GetUp!’s Chief Campaigns Officer, working primarily on First Nations justice, climate action and securing a fairer Australia. Before joining GetUp!, Larissa co-founded Seed, Australia’s first Indigenous youth climate network. 

Lucy Geddes  leads the Public Interest Advocacy Centre’s Asylum Seeker Rights Project and is a teaching fellow at the UNSW Faculty of Law & Justice. Previously, Lucy was Head of Legal Action Worldwide’s Sri Lanka office where her work focused on gender justice. Lucy has worked at Victoria Legal Aid, in private practice in NSW, and completed clerkships with Chief Justice Mogoeng of the Constitutional Court of South Africa and Justice Tarfusser of the International Criminal Court. 

Hamish McLachlan  is Co-Manager, Public Law at the Department of Premier and Cabinet in Victoria. He previously worked at Victoria Legal Aid on a broad range of human rights issues, including anti-discrimination law, mental health and disability law, tenancy, social security, and refugee and migration law. Most recently, he was the Managing Lawyer of VLA’s Mental Health and Disability Law Program. He previously worked as a lawyer in the human rights teams at the Victorian Government Solicitor’s Office and New Zealand’s Crown Law Office. 

• Search entire site
• Search for a course
• Browse study areas

Analytics and Data Science

• Data Science and Innovation
• Postgraduate Research Courses
• Business Research Programs
• Undergraduate Business Programs
• Entrepreneurship
• MBA Programs
• Postgraduate Business Programs

Communication

• Animation Production
• Business Consulting and Technology Implementation
• Digital and Social Media
• Media Arts and Production
• Media Business
• Media Practice and Industry
• Music and Sound Design
• Social and Political Sciences
• Strategic Communication
• Writing and Publishing
• Postgraduate Communication Research Degrees

Design, Architecture and Building

• Architecture
• Built Environment
• DAB Research
• Public Policy and Governance
• Secondary Education
• Education (Learning and Leadership)
• Learning Design
• Postgraduate Education Research Degrees
• Primary Education

Engineering

• Civil and Environmental
• Computer Systems and Software
• Engineering Management
• Mechanical and Mechatronic
• Systems and Operations
• Telecommunications
• Postgraduate Engineering courses
• Undergraduate Engineering courses
• Sport and Exercise
• Palliative Care
• Public Health
• Nursing (Undergraduate)
• Nursing (Postgraduate)
• Health (Postgraduate)
• Research and Honours
• Health Services Management
• Child and Family Health
• Women's and Children's Health

Health (GEM)

• Coursework Degrees
• Clinical Psychology
• Genetic Counselling
• Good Manufacturing Practice
• Physiotherapy
• Speech Pathology
• Research Degrees

Information Technology

• Business Analysis and Information Systems
• Computer Science, Data Analytics/Mining
• Games, Graphics and Multimedia
• IT Management and Leadership
• Networking and Security
• Software Development and Programming
• Systems Design and Analysis
• Web and Cloud Computing
• Postgraduate IT courses
• Postgraduate IT online courses
• Undergraduate Information Technology courses
• International Studies
• Criminology
• International Relations
• Postgraduate International Studies Research Degrees
• Sustainability and Environment
• Practical Legal Training
• Commercial and Business Law
• Juris Doctor
• Legal Studies
• Master of Laws
• Intellectual Property
• Migration Law and Practice
• Overseas Qualified Lawyers
• Postgraduate Law Programs
• Postgraduate Law Research
• Undergraduate Law Programs
• Life Sciences
• Mathematical and Physical Sciences
• Postgraduate Science Programs
• Science Research Programs
• Undergraduate Science Programs

Transdisciplinary Innovation

• Creative Intelligence and Innovation
• Diploma in Innovation
• Transdisciplinary Learning
• Postgraduate Research Degree

Case study: Technology and Human Rights

Brave new world: technology & human rights.

Summary of the impact

From facial recognition to genetic engineering, neural network computing to black-box algorithms, the potential for emerging technologies to change the structure of our society and our relationships to one another—for good or ill—is profound.

But the law isn’t keeping up.

In 2018, the Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) published an issues paper outlining 10 key questions and calling for submissions from stakeholders to address some of these issues.

To develop UTS’s response, the Centre for Social Justice and Inclusion provided space for academics to come together to collaborate, ensuring every UTS faculty contributed to a truly transdisciplinary submission that integrated multiple perspectives rather than relying on specialised expertise from any single discipline.

As education partner on the AHRC’s three-year technology and human rights project, UTS is actively contributing to the conversation around human rights as technology and society evolves—ultimately helping to ensure that technology serves human beings rather than the other way round.

The Problem

In the 21st century universities need to maintain a relationship of trust with the public, partnering with community, industry and government to solve the wicked problems of the age.

According to the Executive Director, Social Justice at UTS, Verity Firth, who heads up the Centre for Social Justice and Inclusion, there has been a strong shift towards research which engages with issues faced by industry, the Australian community, and all levels of government—a change reflected by funding bodies, which increasingly require researchers to demonstrate how their work engages with and has impact in the community.

This is backed by Nicole Vincent, UTS Technology and Human Rights submission co-lead, and senior lecturer at the Faculty of Transdisciplinary Innovation. “Once the word ‘applied’, as in ‘applied computer science’ or ‘applied philosophy’, was used as a slur—it was derogatory. ‘But now ‘applied’ is positive, it describes something relevant.”

Another flow-on effect has been a pivot to transdisciplinary thinking.

“The world has problems that cross [disciplinary] borders”, Vincent says, “and this needs to be reflected both in teaching and in research”.

A game changer—the Technology & Human Rights project

In 2018, UTS signed a formal agreement with the AHRC to be the education partner on its three-year Technology & Human Rights project.

As part of that partnership, the whole university worked together to prepare a single comprehensive response to the AHRC’s Technology & Human Rights issues paper. Bringing the working group together was an invaluable opportunity to test approaches to new ways of working at UTS.

“It’s a classic case of a complex challenge with significant multi-dimensionality—it requires different sorts of thinking and different skill sets,” explains Firth’s colleague, Technology & Human Rights project coordinator and executive manager at the Centre, Mitra Gusheh.

The Centre sent out an Expression of Interest (EoI) to check for interest in the project across the entire university. From there, it purposefully identified key stakeholders.

The number of academics involved in the workshops—there were more than 30 in each session—was in itself a challenge according to Firth. However, the fact that there were 10 questions posed by a high-profile body like the AHRC was key for setting parameters and defining the problem.

“It really helped that it was an external partner posing the questions, there was a sense of status in that partner. People could see the public benefit to their work, that there was a path to impact.”

The working groups developed as part of the Technology & Human Rights partnership have given academics opportunities develop capacity in collaborative contexts.

“UTS is like a city, one brand but many neighbourhoods. Part of the richness is the different faculties, the different lenses, the different ways of thinking. Consciously engaging with this gives people the opportunity to network and to connect across faculties,” explains Gusheh.

On a practical level, the Centre for Social Justice and Inclusion is currently working with Professor Fang Chen from the Faculty of Engineering and IT, the UTS Business School’s Futures Academy and the AHRC to deliver short courses and potentially micro-credentials in AI and government decision making.

As part of the next phase of the project, the AHRC indicated it would like to make recommendations to government around new areas for research funding in relation to human rights and technology. The UTS Academic Working Group helped inform the AHRC in this process, providing feedback and advice on the framing of questions

and the existing status of research. This again provided an opportunity for UTS academics to collaborate across disciplines to frame the questions, and hopefully influence the AHRC’s recommendations to government on the topic of future research funding.

“In a world where trust in public institutions is decaying, universities are significant in that they are still, broadly, a trusted institution. They therefore have the ability to bring people together and facilitate discussion of ideas in an open way,” says Gusheh.

This is particularly important for the complex problem of how emerging technologies could impact society and our relationships with one another.

As Vincent puts it, “No technology exists in isolation from other technologies, or from the political, economic, social, legal and environmental context.” As such, decisions made now about emerging technologies will have far-reaching ripple effects in the real-world that impact how future Australians will live their lives.

Through its partnership with the AHRC, UTS is contributing to the development of frameworks that will help promote human rights as technology and society evolve, working across disciplines to ensure values are integrated into technology design, and giving the community a strong voice in decision-making.

Importantly, it has also involved those at the university who will be impacted by these decisions most profoundly through the course of their lives—its students.

“Not only is it exciting for me, personally, to develop these networks and talk with people across the disciplines,” explains Vincent “but it also had a bonus for my students. I mean how many students ever get the opportunity to talk with the AHRC commissioner, Ed Santow, who came to speak with my class earlier this year?

UTS acknowledges the Gadigal people of the Eora Nation, the Boorooberongal people of the Dharug Nation, the Bidiagal people and the Gamaygal people, upon whose ancestral lands our university stands. We would also like to pay respect to the Elders both past and present, acknowledging them as the traditional custodians of knowledge for these lands.

• Latest News
• Gradient in the news
• Case studies
• Research papers
• Support our mission
• Advisory Board
• Research Student Affiliates
• Search 0){sessionStorage.setItem('searchTerm', searchTerm);window.location.href='/searchresults';}" class="input input-bordered"> 0){sessionStorage.setItem('searchTerm', searchTerm);window.location.href='/searchresults';}" class="btn btn-square" aria-label="search submit" type="submit">

Australian Human Rights Commission

Gradient Institute worked with the Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC), the Consumer Policy Research Centre, CHOICE and CSIRO’s Data61 to develop a technical paper addressing algorithmic bias.

This formed part of the Human Rights and Technology Project being undertaken by the AHRC. The larger project “aims to advance human rights protection in the context of unprecedented technological change. It considers how law, policy, incentives and other measures can promote and protect human rights in respect of new and emerging technologies.”

In this project, Gradient Institute provided the technical work on algorithmic bias including running simulations on synthetic data and writing the technical content of the report. Gradient also worked very closely with the AHRC on the full report contents to ensure that the report was technically accurate as well as being able to be understood by a wide audience. Gradient also develolped an online interactive simulation to demonstrate algorithmic bias that the AHRC released on its website in conjunction with the release of the report.

The final technical paper was called “Using artificial intelligence to make decisions: Addressing the problem of algorithmic bias” and is available here .

The AHRC wants to use the report to help educate industry, government and the public on algorithmic bias and how to manage it. In particular, as Human Rights Commissioner Ed Santow said on the report’s release, “New technology should give us what we want and need, not what we fear. Australians should be told when AI is used in decisions that affect them. The best way to rebuild public trust in the use of AI by government and corporations is by ensuring transparency, accountability and independent oversight. A clear national strategy and good leadership will give Australia a competitive advantage and technology that Australians can trust."

The paper shows that algorithmic bias can result in decisions that are unfair, or even unlawful. It demonstrates how businesses can identify algorithmic bias in AI, and proposes steps they can take to address/mitigate the problem. The paper also offers practical guidance for companies to ensure that when they use AI systems, their decisions are fair, accurate and comply with human rights. It also includes a detailed technical hypothetical simulation to test how algorithmic bias can arise. The hypothetical simulation is that of an electricity retailer that uses an AI-powered tool to decide how to offer its products to customers, and on what terms. The paper includes five recommendations for businesses and five approaches for mitigating algorithmic bias.

A summary of the paper was also published as an article in The Conversation.

Racism. It Stops With Me acknowledges Traditional Custodians of Country throughout Australia and pays respect to Elders, past, present and future. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples should be aware that this website may contain images, voices, or names of deceased persons in photographs, film, audio recordings or text.

Case study: Workplace Survey

The first step is understanding how racism plays out in the workplace.

Conversations about the pay gap for women and gender equality in the workplace are familiar to all Australians. Equally well documented is the toll that the pandemic has had (and is still having) on women’s careers around the country. However, this rhetoric has always been centred around white women. Terms such as intersectionality and “ pet to threat ” are still new and unfamiliar to most Australians. The lived experiences of women of colour are largely an unknown quantity, invisible to those who are not female and part of a racial minority group.

Women of Colour Australia (WoCA) champions women of colour through education programs, community support initiatives, and advocacy. WoCA’s vision is of girls and women of colour reaching their full potential through equitable opportunities. The key phrase here is equitable opportunities , which implies understanding the complex challenges and barriers, implicit and explicit, that prevent women of colour from excelling in their careers – something largely undocumented in Australia.

In 2020, WoCA conducted its inaugural Women of Colour in the Workplace national survey in partnership with Murdoch University researcher, Dr Catherine Archer 1 . Applying an intersectional lens to gender equality in the workplace provided insight into how gender overlaps with other identities to impact the way oppression and discrimination are experienced.

The survey sought to explore the professional and workplace experiences of women of colour in Australia. A total of 543 women of colour completed the survey. 70 percent of respondents worked full-time and were aged between 25 and 34 years. Seven percent identified as Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander, with the remainder spanning heritage from more than 60 different nations. The women reported being employed in more than 250 different roles.

The main purpose of the survey was to explore and understand the role of different issues within the workplace and the effects they have on the experiences of women of colour in a work environment. It focused on identity; the positive and negative experiences of women of colour within the workplace; recognising and addressing barriers to professional advancement; how organisations like WoCA can best advise, support, and train women; and understanding the role of diverse identities in issues faced by women in the workplace.

The survey highlighted women are more likely to work part-time in white collar professional roles. It was illustrated that challenges of racism, tokenism and sexism were prevalent in the workplace, resulting in discriminatory behaviour from colleagues. This included microaggressions, gaslighting and blind spots, especially along generational lines, creating a space where many women did not feel safe, recognised or valued.

It also highlighted that many women of colour have had to work harder and be more direct to get where they are, and their job progressions have been slower than that of their Anglo peers. The lack of women of colour leaders in the workplace has also contributed to issues of isolation and lack of mentorship and sponsorship. Half of the women surveyed felt there were cultural barriers in the workplace that held them back from achieving their goals, particularly in terms of unconscious bias and the perception of white superiority. In the instances where a workplace had diversity and inclusion policies, the survey revealed that they were often not enacted, were only briefly covered in training, or only protected certain groups of people.

WoCA has developed a three-year strategic plan to directly address some of the challenges and barriers that surfaced in the survey. The strategic plan was created by WoCA board members made up of nine diverse women of colour. The leadership of the organisation is culturally rich, racially and ethnically diverse with an intersectional approach to solving systemic issues facing Australia’s women of colour. To address and implement their strategic objectives, WoCA has established seven volunteer committees: volunteer management; research & advocacy; learning & development; mentoring; events; communications & engagement; and fundraising & grants.

The Women of Colour in the Workplace national survey will be undertaken by WoCA annually to measure changes in this space.

More information is available at https://womenofcolour.org.au/ .

1 Senior Lecturer in Strategic Communication; social media researcher, Murdoch University

• Going to Court
• Online Services
• Law & Practice
• Forms, Fees & Costs
• Court Calendar
• Digital Law Library
• National Practice Areas (NPAs)
• Case allocation Including Individual Docket System
• Case Management
• Insurance List
• Court documents
• Public Interest Cases (Online files)
• Arbitration
• Conference of Experts
• Administrative and Constitutional Law and Human Rights NPA
• Admiralty and Maritime NPA
• Commercial and Corporations NPA
• Employment and Industrial Relations NPA
• Federal Crime and Related Proceedings NPA
• Intellectual Property NPA
• Native Title NPA
• Taxation NPA
• Other Federal Jurisdiction
• Practice Notes
• Notice to Practitioners
• Current Class Actions
• From Courts
• From other bodies
• Full Courts in the original jurisdiction
• Federal Court Rules
• Bankruptcy Rules
• Corporations Rules
• Criminal Proceedings Rules
• Native Title Regulations
• Admiralty Rules
• Administrative forms
• Fees payable
• Legal costs allowable Under Federal Court Rules 2011, Schedule 3
• National Guide to Counsel Fees
• Bills of costs Guide to discretionary items
• 5 February - 20 December
• 19 February - 1 March
• 5 - 30 August
• 4 - 26 November
• 3 - 28 March
• 28 July - 29 August
• 3 - 28 November

• Library Catalogues
• Native Title Infobase
• Latest Published today, this week
• High Court special leave applications
• Subscribe to Daily Judgments Alerts Select alerts based on National Practice Area
• Help with legal problem
• Learn about Court processes, procedures & documents
• Communicating with the Court
• Find out about an area of law
• Interpreters
• About jury service
• Am I eligible?
• Attendance fees & allowances
• Requests to be excused
• Practice Areas
• Using the Court's Online Services
• Registering to practice
• Preparation
• What to expect
• Cross examination
• What is a subpoena?
• What is a Notice to Produce?
• Electronic litigation
• Online hearings with Microsoft Teams
• Videoconferencing
• Preparing documents for the Court
• Federal Law Search
• Commonwealth Courts Portal
• About our Online Services

• Administrative & Constitutional Law & Human Rights
• Admiralty & Maritime
• Commercial & Corporations
• Employment & Industrial Relations
• Federal Crime & Related Proceedings
• Intellectual Property
• Native Title
• Court Rules Acts & Regulations
• About the appellate jurisdiction
• Full Courts
• Protocols with Supreme Courts
• User groups
• Communication Devices
• Human rights

Guide to Human Rights Cases

• A. What is a human rights proceeding?
• B. What do I have to prove?
• C. What can I ask the Court to order?
• D. Steps in a human rights proceeding
• E. What happens if a matter is commenced against you?
• F. Further information

This guide sets out information about human rights cases in the Federal Court and the steps involved from the commencement through to the finalisation of these types of cases.

You should always consider the relevant legislation (including the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) ( "Federal Court Act" ) and the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) (" Federal Court Rules ").

Human rights cases fall within the Administrative and Constitutional Law and Human Rights (ACLHR) National Practice Area (NPA) .

This guide is procedural advice only. You should seek your own legal advice about legal cases and procedure in the Federal Court and in this area of law. 

A. What is a human rights proceeding?

A human rights proceeding is a case which is brought under one of the following discrimination statutes:

• Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth)
• Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth)
• Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth)
• Age Discrimination Act 2004 (Cth)

The Court has power to hear these proceedings under s 46PO of the Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 (Cth). Normally, the Commission must have issued a Notice of Termination before the Court can begin to deal with the case.

B. What do I have to prove?

In human rights proceedings, for you to succeed you must prove, at a general level, three things:

• what happened to you – what was done to you, and who did it;
• that what happened to you was unlawful under one of the discrimination statutes - you must identify the area of activity (education, accommodation etc) and the reason you say you were treated as you were (eg sex, race etc); and
• what harm or damage you have suffered because of what was done to you.

C. What can I ask the Court to order?

In this area, if you are successful the Court may order the person who discriminated against you to do certain things to fix the discrimination. The Court can also order that the person pay you compensation.

D. Steps in a human rights proceeding

The person making the complaint about discrimination is called the " applicant ".

The person or organisation that the applicant says has carried out the discrimination is called the " respondent ".

If you want to come to the Federal Court to defend yourself against a complaint, see section E .

1. Complaint to the Australian Human Rights Commission

• you must first make a complaint to the Australian Human Rights Commission and the complaint must be terminated;
• you need a copy of the termination notice from the Australian Human Rights Commission;
• you must commence a claim within the time limits in the Federal Court - usually, it must be made within 60 days after the issue of the notice of termination.

2. Preparing your application

• Complete the  Form 116 - Originating Application  under the Australian Human Rights Commission Act (r 34.163 of the Federal Court Rules) and, if required,  Form 16 - the Applicant's Genuine Steps Statement (r 8.02 of the Federal Court Rules). 
• If you are making your complaint more than 60 days after the date on the notice of termination you need to complete the "Extension of time" part of Form 116 . This part of the form is where you request an extension of time for making the complaint and explain the reasons for the delay.
• Make a copy of the complaint that you made to the Australian Human Rights Commission . Make a copy of the notice of termination. Copies of these documents must accompany the originating application.

3. Lodgment, filing & fees

• Once your application and any supporting documents have been completed you need to get these to the Court (see Division 2.3 of the Federal Court Rules). This is called 'lodging'. If the Court accepts those documents, that is referred to as "filing". 
• You can lodge a document at the Court in a number of ways. The Court's preference is that you eLodge using the Court's electronic eLodgment system, however you may also lodge documents at your local registry, by post or by fax. You cannot lodge documents by email. More information about how to lodge a document is available on the Court's website. 
• Upon lodgment you must pay the application fee (if any). If you cannot afford this fee, you may be able to ask the Court to exempt you from having to pay it or to defer the time for its payment. You can get a form to ask the Court to either exempt or defer payment and information about the circumstances where an exemption or deferral can be given on the exemptions and deferral of fees page or from the Registry.
• a Notice of Filing and Hearing (if a hearing date is required) - which sets out the time and date when the people involved in the case need to come to the Court for the first case management hearing; 
• a Notice of Filing - confirm filing of the document. 
• Once you have filed the required documents with the Court, you must give a copy of the stamped application with accompanying document(s), to each of the people involved in the case. This is known as "service".
• Part 10 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) (Rules) relates to service, including how to go about personal service. Registry can assist you about what to do.

5. Case management hearing

• The next step will usually be a first case management hearing. The Judge who has been allocated the case will hold this hearing. You must prepare carefully for this hearing.
• an idea of how many witnesses you intend to call; and 
• what documents you might need to obtain from the respondent or respondents, or from anyone else.
• If you or your representative do not come to the Court at that time, the Court may dismiss your proceeding.

6. Documents and discovery

• You may be entitled to ask another party for documents relevant to your case, if all the documents have not been provided.
• You may also be asked by another party to supply documents you have that might relate to the issues in the proceeding.
• If you consider you need more documents, and the other party does not agree to give them to you, you must request the Court to make an order for discovery. Part 20 of the Federal Court Rules relates to discovery.
• In human rights proceedings, discovery orders may be made more often than in administrative or constitutional law cases, but the Court decides whether discovery is appropriate if the parties cannot agree.
• Part 20 of the Federal Court Rules ;
• Part 10 of the Central Practice Note ; and 
• Part 8 of the ACHLR Practice Note . 

7. Mediation

• The Court has a broad range of options to facilitate alternative dispute resolution (ADR), including mediation (see s 53A of the Federal Court Act and Part 28 of the Federal Court Rules ). 
• A wide variety of outcomes can be achieved in mediation, often more than can be achieved by court orders, even if you are successful at trial.
• In human rights cases, a successful mediation can result in an agreement that the respondents will do certain things to remedy the discrimination, or pay compensation, or both. A wide variety of outcomes can be achieved in mediation, often more than can be achieved by court orders, even if you are successful at trial.
• Further information about mediation  in the Federal Court is available in the Central Practice Note and on the Court's website.

8. Preparing for trial: affidavits or outlines of evidence

• The individual Judge will decide whether she or he wants the trial to be undertaken with affidavits, or with oral evidence.
• The Judge may prefer parties and witnesses to give oral evidence, in the witness box at the hearing. If this is the case, the Judge may order parties to provide outlines of evidence.
• The Judge will make orders about when parties must file and serve affidavits, or outlines of evidence. Parties can put documents with affidavits if they wish those documents to form part of the evidence. They can also attach documents to outlines of evidence.
• Parties should refer to the information relating to evidence in Part 11 of the Central Practice Note and Part 9 of the ACLHR Practice Note . 
• whether a person has a disability and what kind of disability may be established by calling an expert medical practitioner
• whether a person has suffered psychological damage from unlawful discrimination for which she or he should be compensated may be established by calling a psychiatrist or psychologist to give her or his opinion about what kind of harm a person has suffered.
• If an expert witness is retained, parties should be familiar with the Court's Expert Evidence Practice Note , including the Annexure A - Harmonised Expert Witness Code of Conduct .

9. Preparing for trial: Court eBooks

• The Judge may order an applicant, or sometimes a respondent if the applicant is self-represented, to file and serve a Court eBook. The Court eBook contains all the necessary documents and evidence, and previous decisions, as well as the filed court documents, all in one book for easy access.
• Parties should refer to the eBooks Practice Note when compiling court eBooks.

10. Preparing for trial: submissions

• Submissions are written documents that set out what a party's case is about. They cover what a party says are the relevant facts about what happened, what law the party says applies and arguments about why the Court should make the orders the party asks the Court to make (see Part 14 of the Central Practice Note and Part 12 of the ACLHR Practice Note ).
• The Court may order a summary of submissions to be filed and served on the other parties ahead of the trial.
• The Court may also order that the parties file and serve final submissions at or after the end of the trial.

11. The trial itself

• The trial will be listed for one or more specified days and the Court expects parties to finish in the time that has been allocated. Trials usually start at 10:15 am with a one to one and a half hour break for lunch and finish about 4:15 pm each day.
• The Court might place limits on how long a party can ask witnesses questions, or how long a party can make arguments for.
• If there are expert witnesses called by both sides, the Court may order the expert witnesses to give their evidence together. This is called concurrent evidence. The Judge will explain this to you if the Judge decides this should occur in your proceeding.
• At the hearing, the Judge will listen to the evidence of the applicant and the respondent and their witnesses (if they have any). The Judge will also listen to any submissions about the relevant law.
• The Judge will then consider the complaint and give a final decision.
• A transcript of the trial is always made. However a party must pay for access to the transcript. Information about how to order a copy of the transcript is set out in the Access to Documents and Transcripts Practice Notes (GPN-ACCS) and on the Court's website. You may be permitted to inspect a copy of the transcript at the registry. This generally incurs a cost. The Registry may require you to provide an undertaking to the Court that you will not make a copy of the transcript. 

12. The Court's decision

• The Court may make an immediate decision on your case when the case finishes and give oral reasons for the decision in open court. If this happens, the Court will generally provide a written copy of the reasons and a copy of the orders made.
• Alternatively, the Judge may "reserve" her or his decision to think about what is the correct decision and to take some time to read and consider all the evidence, and to write reasons for the decision (judgment).
• You will be notified when the Court is ready to hand down its decision in your case. Usually this will be done in open court. The Court will pronounce its orders and give written reasons for its decision. You will get a copy of those orders and reasons.
• Although it is not always possible or achievable, the Court's policy is that it attempts to hand down decisions within 3 months of the final submissions being made.
•  If your case is unsuccessful you may be able to apply to the court to appeal the decision. More information regarding the appeals process is available on the court's website, including information relating to the time limits that apply to starting an appeal.
• If the Judge is not satisfied that there has been unlawful discrimination the Judge will dismiss the complaint.
• In most matters in the Federal Court, the unsuccessful party is ordered to pay part of the legal costs of the successful party. The amounts involved can be many thousands of dollars, sometimes tens of thousands or more.
• Costs orders are enforceable and bankruptcy proceedings can be taken if orders are not complied with. For further information regarding costs, refer to the Difference between fees and costs and the Court's Costs Practice Note (GPN-Cost) .

E. What happens if a matter is commenced against you?

• If the applicant has made a complaint against you, the applicant must give you a copy of the documents which the applicant has filed with the Court. 
• If you want to come to the Federal Court to defend yourself against the complaint, you need to take the following steps:

1. Preparing for Court

• Once the forms have been filled out you need to lodge the forms together with any accompanying documents. For further information about lodging and filing documents, refer to Part D .

2. Attend Court

• On the day of your hearing you should check the Court List which is available in each registry for the courtroom and time. You should aim to get to the Court with enough time to allow you to find the courtroom and make sure you are in court on time.
• You should make sure that you bring a copy of all the documents that you have filed at the Court or have been served with and be prepared with any relevant material that you might need for your matter.
• This hearing is called the first case management hearing. If you or your representative do not come to the Court at that time, the Court may still make orders which affect you.

F. Further information

Human Rights cases fall within the ACLHR NPA. Further information about practice and procedure in this NPA can be found:

• in the Administrative Law and Constitutional Law and Human Rights Practice Note ;
• on the Administrative Law and Constitutional Law and Human Rights NPA webpage .

The Court's website contains useful information to assist litigants including, attending court, how to address the Judge and a courtroom layout.

Updated: October 2022 

• Share this link on facebook
• Share this link on twitter
• Share this link on linkedin

Was this page useful?

What did you like about it, how can we make it better.

• Accessibility
• Social Media

Accessibility tools

• Skip to main content
• Accessibility

You are here:

Case studies

Main site sub navigation

In this section:

• The top level navigation links
• Legislation
• Leading Authorities
• Judicial review decisions
• Case notes - discrimination
• Case notes - human rights
• Reports on unresolved human rights complaints
• Tribunal exemptions
• Intervention guidelines
• Interventions
• Call for case studies
• Submissions
• Health equity
• Age case studies
• Breastfeeding case studies
• Family responsibilities case studies
• Gender identity case studies
• Impairment case studies
• Lawful sexual activity case studies
• Parental status case studies
• Political belief or activity case studies
• Pregnancy case studies
• Race case studies
• Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander case studies
• Relationship status case studies
• Religious belief or religious activity case studies
• Sex discrimination case studies
• Sexuality case studies
• Trade union activity case studies
• Association case studies
• Sexual harassment case studies
• Unlawful requests for information case studies
• Victimisation case studies
• Vilification case studies

Human rights case studies

• Guides and toolkits
• Fact sheets
• Human Rights Month 2019 Speaker Series: Right to education
• Human Rights Month 2019 Speaker Series: Understanding the impact of Queensland's Human Rights Act
• Working it Through
• A Human Rights Act for Queensland
• 2023 theme: Universal means everyone
• Events and training
• Human Rights Week in your workplace
• Posters and supporter resources
• Why the hummingbird?
• Queensland human rights timeline

This page contains summaries of outcomes from a selection of complaints made to the Commission under either the Anti-Discrimination Act 1991 or the Human Rights Act 2019 that have been decided by tribunals or courts, or resolved through the Commission process.

Complaints under the Human Rights Act that are not resolved through conciliation are not referred to the tribunal, and so there are no tribunal or court decisions for them.

The summaries provide a guide to the range of outcomes that may result from a complaint, the types of issues raised, and may assist people prepare for conciliation.

Anti-Discrimination Act case studies

Back to top

Conciliated outcomes

When a case has been resolved through the Commission's conciliation process, the parties have made a private agreement, after working through the issues with the help of a conciliator.

Decided cases

Unresolved complaints under the Anti-Discrimination Act may be referred to the relevant tribunal.

When a case is decided by the tribunal, the decision has been made after listening to the evidence from all sides and considering the law. In some cases, an appeal against a tribunal decision may be decided by a court.

The case studies on this page should not be treated as legal advice. For advice about possible outcomes in your matter, you should seek independent legal advice from a lawyer.

Discrimination

• breastfeeding
• family responsibilities
• gender identity
• lawful sexual activity
• parental status
• political belief or activity
• relationship status
• religious belief or religious activity
• trade union activity
• association with, or relation to, a person identified on the basis of an attribute

Other contraventions

• sexual harassment
• unlawful requests for information
• victimisation
• vilification
• Human rights complaints

Ethnolink Education Ethnolink Summit

Home » Case Studies

Australian Human Rights Commission

The Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) engaged Ethnolink to produce translated resources to help raise awareness about elder abuse in 19 languages. The AHRC was resolved to ensure appropriate and accessible translations for their multicultural users. We tailored a solution that delivers just that.

The Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) is an independent statutory organisation, which aims to protect and promote human rights in Australia and internationally. Certain topics — such as elder abuse — can be difficult to approach. The AHRC was concerned about ensuring that their information is conveyed as respectfully and appropriately as possible for older Australians from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds.

About the project

The challenge

The AHRC was looking to create translated resources to help promote awareness about elder abuse among older Australians. As part of their campaign, they produced English bookmarks and posters for distribution — then, they looked to have those resources translated. To produce a culturally-appropriate multilingual campaign, the AHRC needed a multicultural communications agency that understood how to communicate with older, multicultural Australians on sensitive topics. That's where Ethnolink came in.

The solution

We designed a solution for the AHRC that would ensure their resources were translated in a way that approaches the topic of elder abuse tactfully — with respect to each language community's cultural values and ways of communicating. Our community checking service invited members of the AHRC's target audience to review the translations and give their thoughts and insights. It's one of the best practices available for multilingual resources. Not only does community checking ensure that translated texts are culturally appropriate, it also confirms that the information is conveyed in clear and accessible language. In addition to community checking, we implemented PDF accessibility tagging on each of the documents. This was particularly important for older Australians who may be using screen readers or similar tools to assist them with consuming online, text-based content.

The results

Our solution ensured that the AHRC's resources are not only highly accessible for older Australians, but that they are also culturally appropriate with respect to each language community's values. With the help of our community checkers, who reported being highly satisfied with the quality of the translated resources, we ensured that the AHRC's resources delivered in a clear, culturally appropriate language for older, multicultural Australians. The AHRC's resources are now available on their website in 19 languages.

Discover the Ethnolink difference for yourself

Request a translation quote.

Which option best describes you?

To access this FREE lesson , please enter your email.

Former Hawthorn coaches Alastair Clarkson and Chris Fagan to meet First Nations players at Human Rights Commission

Sport Former Hawthorn coaches Alastair Clarkson and Chris Fagan to meet First Nations players at Human Rights Commission

North Melbourne coach Alastair Clarkson and his Brisbane Lions counterpart Chris Fagan are attending conciliation sessions alongside former players in the wake of Hawthorn's explosive racism saga .

Clarkson and Fagan were due to miss training today to attend the sessions at the Human Rights Commission in Melbourne.

Former Hawthorn star Cyril Rioli — who was among those to raise allegations of systemic racism at the club — flew into Melbourne from Darwin on Monday to take part in the talks.

It will be the first time former Hawthorn coach Clarkson and the club's ex-football boss Fagan have met with the complainants since allegations regarding their time at the Hawks aired via an ABC report in grand final week in 2022.

Clarkson, Fagan and former Hawks welfare boss Jason Burt have all denied any wrongdoing.

The talks are due to take place across Tuesday and Wednesday. Should the talks break down, the case could be headed to a Federal Court hearing.

"We handle it the way we handle everything else, we just keep going on," North Melbourne president Sonja Hood told ABC Radio on Monday when asked about Clarkson's absence from training.

"I'm just delighted that, after 500 days or whatever it's been, Alastair finally gets to hear directly from the people who have been hurt in this process.

"They need to have their say and I'm really pleased that he finally gets to have his."

Hood conceded it would be an "emotional" week for Clarkson but was confident the coach would be back at the helm for North's Good Friday match against Carlton.

"We've got plenty of support around him and plenty of support around the family," she said.

"We've got plenty of people that can step in and take the role if that's what's needed.

"But I'm pretty confident he's going into this in exactly the right mindset. He'll come out ready to coach on Friday."

Fagan is expected to return to coaching Brisbane on Wednesday, ahead of Thursday's grand final rematch with premiers Collingwood.

North Melbourne's head of football, Todd Viney, was set to run North Melbourne's training with Clarkson away.

"For a footy preparation point of view, it's not ideal, but we've got a really good staff of people to make sure we can get prepared as best we can,'' Viney said.

"The bigger picture is that hopefully it can be put to bed and they can sit down altogether and get a resolution to the long-running saga.''

The ABC of SPORT

• X (formerly Twitter)
• Australian Rules Football