In the Commission’s Position Paper, Free and Equal: A Reform Agenda for Federal Discrimination Laws (December 2021), the Commission recommended that serious consideration be given to reintroducing an intermediate adjudicative process to bridge the gap between voluntary conciliation at the Commission and litigation in the federal courts, in relation to unlawful discrimination matters. This could also be extended to the resolution of disputes in relation to Human Rights Act matters. An additional means of enhancing access to justice is to include protections against adverse cost orders. A person who considers that a statutory decision maker did not give proper consideration to a relevant human right, as required by a Human Rights Act, could seek (l) Parliamentary scrutiny judicial review of the decision through the courts. Under existing grounds for review, a person may be able to argue that the decision was affected by jurisdictional error, that the decision involved an error of law or that the decision was an improper exercise of power because of a failure to take into account a relevant consideration that the decision maker was bound to take into account. Principles of administrative law, and administrative remedies should apply as usual to decisions that require adherence to the Human Rights Act. • Standing and costs The Commission proposes that standing under the Human Rights Act be afforded to individuals who claim that their human rights were breached by public authorities, and organisations or entities acting in the interest of a person, group or class affected by human rights breaches (representative standing). It is important that representative standing be circumscribed to ensure that claims address a specific breach of human rights in relation to a particular individual or a clearly defined and identified group of individuals. The organisation initiating a claim should also have some kind of subject matter connection and/or representative interest in the matter at hand. 30 (k) Periodic reviews The Human Rights Act should include a provision for a periodic statutory review process within a set timeframe. The Commission proposes that an initial review be undertaken at the five-year mark, with the timeline for subsequent reviews assessed at that stage. The Commission has made recommendations designed to improve the operation and effectiveness of parliamentary scrutiny of laws for compatibility with human rights. These proposals would strengthen mechanism of accountability for human rights protection provided by the PJCHR, ensuring early consideration of human rights in the development of legislation and embedding human rights in primary legislation against which the scrutiny is conducted. The principal recommendation of this Position Paper is for a Human Rights Act. The work of the PJCHR will then complement this legislation in its role of review. The range of matters to be addressed in a statement of compatibility will principally focus on the rights and freedoms in the Human Rights Act. The Commission advocates that the PJCHR also continue a wider scrutiny role, referable to all the international treaty obligations and UNDRIP. The Commission also sets out practical and procedural suggestions to strengthen the operation of the PJCHR.