Words missed,
'Gillian Triggs and the AHRC she headed should have BEEN THE lead protectors of the rights of those QUT students.'

leoj,

How about you read for yourself the links given,
including this one:

http://womensagenda.com.au/leadership/profiles/gillian-triggs-responds-to-malcolm-turnbull-s-attacks-on-the-hrc/

You are doing what PM Malcolm Turnbull did. It is deeply misleading
in suggesting that the HRC had brought the case. As the Commissioner
explained to Leigh Sales on the 7.30 Report - "We never bring
cases and we are purely passive in that sense."

"We don't prosecute, we don't pursue, we don't instigate proceedings."

When asked by Leigh Sales why the Commission had not thrown out
the QUT case sooner, Triggs was resolute.

"The Commission is bound to accept any complaint that is in
writing that alleges a breach of discrimination law. So the
first obligation is to accept the complaint and then to
investigate it and conciliate it". She went on to explain that
the Commission deals with around 20,000 matters each year and on
average they concilliate about 76 per cent of those within
4 months".

The link goes on to say that the cases that command media
attention are the distinct minority which inevitably warps
the public perception of the HRC's role and dealings.

What did impress was that "throughout the interview Triggs
was measured and methodical; it was impossible to watch
without admiring her tenacity and grace under fire. It's
a lesson in resilience and leadership."

As the article adds, that's not to say that there were
not any missteps. There were. But missteps are part of life.
Show me a leader who has never fumbled. How many of us
would emerge from scrutiny of our every word and action
without mistakes being revealed?

How about you showing a little bit of compassion yourself
this time for a lady who's shown so much grace under fire.
You're ignoring the facts being presented to you about
what her and the Commission's job actually is and what
their powers really are.

I support the retention of Ms Triggs and Mr Soutphommasane in their current positions, and for as long as the AHRC exists.

Their abuse of position and attempted destruction of the QUT students, in the face of that ridiculous charges, and of the wonderful Bill Leak, in his plea for attention to the root causes of so much Indigenous youth misery ( which Ms Triggs and her side-kick showed so little concern about) demonstrates all too clearly that the AHRC is a blot on the human rights landscape.

So perhaps one way for the AHRC to be shown to be morally bankrupt is to let them speak out again and again, and let us know how low they can go, and how much of a threat, to the fundamental rights to the freedom of expression in Australia, they represent.

Fools and bastards should have the same rights to freedom of expression as other Australians. Let them continue to open their mouths and make outrageous assertions in print, so that we can see how flimsy and precious our rights are.

Joe

Foxy,

Are you so incapable of putting yourself in the shoes of those poor students whose lives and careers are forever affected?

What if it had been you?

Re: Triggs & 18 (c)...from http://controcurator.org/browse/article/5828ead6e4b0eb4ebf273aef

"Its not that the Human Rights Commission requires more power the law as it stands just needs to be appropriately applied. To have said what she did, it might be assumed that Triggs had been poleaxed by too much bullying from the media and politicians.

Related: Section 18C explainer: what is it, and why do some politicians want it changed?

What does need close attention is section 18D of the Racial Discrimination Act the defence to what otherwise would be offences under 18C. The context here are performances, exhibitions or artistic works or discussion and debate for academic, artistic or scientific purposes.

For the media the defence extends to fair and accurate reporting of any matter of public interest or a fair comment on any event or matter of public interest ...

Professor Rolph points out there are problems with 18D, not least of which is that it imports the ineffective fair comment element from defamation law, thereby creating difficulties for media defendants in 18C cases.

If only these swivel-eyed campaigners would recognise that it is 18D that needs fixing, not 18C, then the mental health of the entire nation would be a lot better."

From: http://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/abolishing-section-18c-aka-free-speech-for-the-few,9697

Second, racism (an example of "othering") has been an important tool of the Australian ruling class in dividing the working class against each other and uniting major sections of our class with the bosses against a fictitious "enemy". The Indigenous, Irish, Chinese, Jews, Germans, Asians, Muslims, refugees non-whites generally — the list goes on and on.

On a very simple analysis, it is nothing more than panem et circenses. So the lead performer has now been given an award for her performance then ?

leoj,

This dispute was initially between Ms Prior and
the university. It should have stayed there and
been resolved. The university did not play its
part in what it said it would do.

Of course we all feel sorry for the students and their
families. This dispute should have been stopped by the
university from the very start.