New Zealand Human Rights Commission Submission to the CAT in relation to NZ’s 6th periodic review  The Commission would welcome guidance from the Committee as to what circumstances, if any, may necessitate structural independence to comply with the impartiality requirement of Article 12.  The Commission urges the Government to ensure that any proposed new process extends to all claims of historic abuse in state care and is founded on New Zealand’s international human rights obligations. Any such process must also be appropriately adapted to be accessible to people with intellectual disabilities.  The Commission encourages the government to acknowledge all historic abuse and the ongoing detrimental impact it has had on the lives of disabled people who were under state care. It is important that an apology accompany this acknowledgement. 144. Allegations of abuse in state care are dealt with through a variety of mechanisms. These include: a. the existing social security regime; b. the Accident Compensation framework; c. the Ministry of Social Development’s Historic Claims process; d. Confidential Listening and Assistance Service (and before that the confidential forum); and e. the Courts (to a very limited degree). 145. The current framework has progressively developed over the past few years and some hard lessons have been learnt. It is now generally accepted by all parties that the courts are not the appropriate forum for resolving such complaints. 146. That same conclusion was the basis of the establishment of the Accident Compensation (“ACC”) framework in 1974 under which the ability for anyone to sue in tort for damages for personal injury was abolished. As a result people who have suffered personal injury do not have the right to sue an at-fault party, except for 58