Mr CF v Commonwealth of Australia (Department of Home Affairs) - June 2024

As a result of this inquiry, I find that the following acts or practices were inconsistent with, or contrary to, article 9(1) of the ICCPR: (a) the failure of the Department to refer Mr CF’s case to the Minister in order to consider whether to exercise his discretionary powers under section 195A of the Migration on 2 June 2020 or any time thereafter (b) the failure of the Department to consider re. [...] The functions of the Commission identified in section 11(1)(f) of the AHRC Act are only engaged where the act complained of is not one required by law to be taken, that is, where the relevant act or practice is within the discretion of the Commonwealth.3 3.3 What is a human right? 47. [...] The Minister accepts that, because of the reasoning of the High Court in Davis, the decision not to refer Mr [CF]’s matter to the Minister for Ministerial Intervention was made in excess of the executive power of the Commonwealth. [...] I find the following acts or practices were contrary to article 9(1) of the ICCPR: (a) the failure of the Department to refer Mr CF’s case to the Minister in order to consider whether to exercise his discretionary powers under section 195A of the Migration Act on 2 June 2020 or any time thereafter (b) the failure of the Department to consider referring Mr CF’s case to the Minister in order for the. [...] On 31 May 2024, the Department provided the following response to my findings and recommendations: The Department of Home Affairs (the Department) values the role of the Australian Human Rights Commission (the Commission) to inquire into human rights complaints and acknowledges the findings identified in this report and the recommendations made by the President of the Commission.