Human Rights Commission president tells senators her recommendation was questioned ‘in the pages of a particular newspaper’ rather than parliament

This article is more than 5 years old

This article is more than 5 years old

Gillian Triggs, the president of the Australian Human Rights Commission, has said the government has rarely challenged her findings and recommendations, while facing heavy questioning from Coalition senators.

In estimates on Friday, Triggs was again grilled by senators over a recommendation she made that John Basikbasik receive $350,000 for the time he was held in detention without charge following the serving of a prison sentence for manslaughter.

Triggs has faced sustained attacks from the government – including Tony Abbott – in the lead-up to a damning report released by the commission on children in detention.

Abbott attacks Gillian Triggs over call to free convicted refugee John Basikbasik Read more

Triggs told the estimates committee: “My job as president is to make findings and recommendations, which are discussed with government and a report is finally made to parliament, along with scores of other such reports.

“The government has the option of appealing against my findings and recommendations and has chosen not to do so, and in fact very rarely does.”

“Normally it would be for members of parliament to read my reports, to question them if they chose to, and if appropriate, for the attorney to appeal against them.

“That has not been done and unfortunately the choice has been made to do so in the pages of a particular newspaper, where the facts and legal reasoning were grossly misstated.”

Basikbasik is a West Papuan activist who opposed the Indonesian occupation of his country. After being granted refugee status in Australia, he was charged in 2000 with the manslaughter of his partner.

He remained in Villawood detention centre after serving his full sentence, because he cannot be returned to Indonesia.

The Liberal senator Ian Macdonald repeatedly questioned Triggs on the case, and asked her to provide specific details on the length of time of the investigation. Triggs said it “would take months” but she did not believe it had taken years.

She told the committee that after serving his sentence he had now been held for “close to eight years without charge and without trial”.

“While the government of course has an executive power to detain someone … that executive power must be exercised in a way that is necessary and proportionate to achieve a legitimate aim,” she said.

“I think most fair-minded Australians would say that holding someone for eight years after he has served his prison sentence is something that does require at least the regular consideration of his case, and regular consideration of whether or not alternative forms of detention or supervision might be used.”

After the release of the children in detention report it was revealed that the government had sought Triggs’s resignation.

The shadow attorney general, Mark Dreyfus, wrote to the Australian federal police to ask them to examine whether the attorney general, George Brandis, had committed an offence by offering Triggs a job in exchange for her resignation.