The Commission’s model for a Human Rights Act would result in the adaptation of the Commission’s complaints jurisdiction, so that human rights complaints would be managed by reference to the Human Rights Act rather than by reference to international instruments. If conciliation fails or is inappropriate in the circumstances, individuals could then proceed to court for a binding judgment and access to appropriate remedies, as is the case with unlawful discrimination complaints. This would close a significant gap in the human rights complaints architecture, and would greatly improve access to justice for those who have suffered from human rights breaches. (f) International law obligations Legislative implementation of Australia’s international human rights obligations has been described as ‘faltering, sporadic and inconsistent’, and the ICCPR as having ‘a small and almost random presence in Australian law’.114 UN Treaty bodies have repeatedly concluded that core treaties have not been adequately incorporated into Australia’s legal system. For example in 2017, the Human Rights Committee noted ‘gaps in the application of the ICCPR’ and recommended that Australia ‘adopt comprehensive federal legislation giving full legal effect to all covenant provisions’.115 In the same year, the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights recommended that Australia When the Commission was put on a permanent foundation in 1986,119 an ‘Australian Bill of Rights Bill’ was introduced into Parliament at the same time, and the Commission was to be the body that administered this law.120 Together, these steps were supposed to provide cohesive domestic implementation of Australia’s obligations under the ICCPR. However, a statutory Bill of Rights was not ultimately adopted, leaving a gap in the architecture and work of the Commission.121 Australia’s limited approach to human rights implementation leads to incongruity between the Commission’s mandate to protect human rights and the government’s lack of legal accountability for human rights. Australia also has a history of being closely involved in the development of international human rights law. For example, Australia was one of eight nations involved in drafting the Universal Declaration on Human Rights.122 However, without a Human Rights Act, Australia has been increasingly isolated from shared legal standards developed in countries with domestic rights instruments – such as Canada, the UK and New Zealand. A Human Rights Act would bring Australia into alignment with these countries. With a Human Rights Act in place, Australia would also have better standing and credibility on the international stage, including when encouraging other countries to comply with human rights.123 consider introducing a federal Human Rights Act due to the limitations of the existing system.116 Australia’s 2020 Universal Periodic Review also resulted in similar recommendations from multiple countries.117 There have been many other treaty body calls for full incorporation of treaty obligations, dating back many years.118 A Human Rights Act would ensure that Australia’s practice aligns with international law, and with Australia’s own statements and commitments. FREE AND EQUAL A Human Rights Act for Australia 2022 59