Mark Dreyfus has delivered a lifeline to Human Rights Commissioner Lorraine Finlay, despite previously lashing her as a Liberal "mate".
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
And the Attorney-General says he is willing to listen to criticism over Labor's anti-corruption model, despite insisting it strikes the right balance between transparency and privacy.
The United Nations this year warned Australia's human rights status was in jeopardy, partly over its politicisation of the human rights commissioner role.
It specifically cited the appointment of Ms Finlay, made human rights commissioner last year despite calling for race discrimination law Section 18C to be repealed, and who was formerly a women's council president in the Liberal Party's Western Australian branch.
Speaking to the National Press Club on Wednesday, Mr Dreyfus stressed the first bill he brought to parliament as Attorney-General was a move to ensure appointments were made at arm's-length from government.
But he insisted he wouldn't cut Ms Finlay's five-year term short, despite labelling her a Liberal "mate" shortly after her appointment last year.
"The thought our national human rights institution could be downgraded to [a] B-status was something I felt we needed to do something about straightaway," he said.
"[But] I've got absolutely no intention of, in any way, altering the term of Lorraine Finlay."
The Greens criticised Mr Dreyfus' move for a merit-based appointment system in August, claiming it would not prevent a "Barilaro-style" appointment to the commission.
Losing its A-grade human rights status would see Australia ranked below Iraq and alongside Libya, Venezuela, Bulgaria and Myanmar.
'Not a court'
Mr Dreyfus also defended Labor over its anti-corruption model, which has drawn criticism from crossbenchers after proposing public hearings only be held in "exceptional circumstances".
Independents and transparency experts have argued the threshold was overly stringent, and likely to allow witnesses to delay proceedings by launching legal challenges.
But the Attorney-General stressed the proposal was "in sharp contrast" to one put forward by the former Coalition government, which ruled out public hearings altogether.
"There will be times when the commission's investigations will be done in public, and other times investigations will benefit from being done in private," he said.
"Let me be clear: the National Anti-Corruption Commission is not a court, it is an investigative body. Its primary work is rooting out and exposing corruption.
"At the conclusion of an investigation, the commissioner will be able to publish a detailed report."
READ MORE:
Polling by the Australia Institute this week suggested more than two-thirds of Australians wanted to relax rules to increase the likelihood of hearings being held in public.
That included 32 per cent who supported removing the "exceptional circumstances" threshold entirely.
"There is a desire on the part of probably many people in this room for as much of the work of the anti-corruption commission to be in public, but it simply can't be," Mr Dreyfus said.
"It has got to look at most of the work it does in private, simply to protect reputations, to guard against prejudicing criminal proceedings. [There is a] whole range of reasons why you would want it to be private."
After revealing independent MP Helen Haines had been appointed deputy chair of a commission examining the bill, the Attorney-General said he was seeking a "level of consensus" on tackling corruption.
"I believe the government has got this bill right, but I'm prepared to listen to other views because I want the parliament to enact the best possible anti-corruption commission," he said.
We've made it a whole lot easier for you to have your say. Our new comment platform requires only one log-in to access articles and to join the discussion on The Canberra Times website. Find out how to register so you can enjoy civil, friendly and engaging discussions. See our moderation policy here.