37 This case raises significant issues relating to the right to freedom of expression and the need to balance the right to express opinions that may be unpopular or controversial against material that is likely to expose persons to hatred or contempt. 38 The Commission intervened in this case. In its submission the Commission took into account the high value placed on freedom of expression in international human rights law and domestically in the BORA. The Commission noted that “international law mandates a high threshold for intervention to ensure the right to freedom of expression is infringed as little as possible.” At the time of writing the Tribunal had not released its decision. 39 It remains unclear, however, whether s61 of the HRA (and s131 – inciting racial disharmony) applies to all religious groups. This is because both sections refer specifically to the actions being likely to excite hostility, or bring into contempt any group “on the ground of the colour, race, or ethnic or national origins of that group of persons.”22 Although this has not been tested in the New Zealand Courts, International jurisprudence suggests that the definition in ss61 and 131 of the HRA may not extend to groups such as those of the Islamic faith where religious belief may not be directly related to ethnicity, race or national origins. 40 Removing the reservation would, in the Commission’s view, provide clarity that it is the Government’s intent that ss61 and 131 of the HRA extend to protect all groups against national, racial or religious hatred as envisaged by Article 20(2) of the ICCPR. 41 The Commission recommends that Committee urges the Government to take the necessary steps to remove its reservation to Article 20(2) without delay. D. Pre Legislative Scrutiny – The New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 42 Section 7 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 (“BORA”) requires the AttorneyGeneral to inform Parliament about any provision in a Bill that appears to be inconsistent with any of the rights and freedoms affirmed therein. The Ministry of Justice and the Crown Law Office examine all draft legislation and advise the Attorney-General on any BORA implications. 43 The effectiveness of the section 7 process hinges on the extent to which Parliament is systematically informed and involved in the scrutiny process. 22 Human Rights Act 1993, ss61 and 131: http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1993/0082/latest/DLM304212.html?search=ts_act%40bill%40regulation%40dee medreg_human+rights+act_resel_25_a&p=1 Page 16 of 93 Human Rights Commission submission to the Human Rights Committee in relation to New Zealand’s 6th periodic review under the ICCPR