Malaysian helms NZs human rights policies unit
Hired as senior legal counsel, one of Chiam's first tasks was to devise a human rights policy unit for the commission.
Chiam was born and educated in Port Dickson, Negeri Sembilan. She moved to Hong Kong in 1989 and was senior crown counsel at the Attorney-General's Chambers before finally settling down in New Zealand in 1993 for family reasons. She got married the same year and has two children. She joined NZHRC in 1999.
Of Chiam's appointment, then chief commissioner Pamela Jefferies said, "Her experience and involvement in human rights issues includes acting for prisoners of conscience held on indefinite detention in Malaysia and as a founding member of Suaram."
The NSHRC has five commissioners and 36 full-time staff. The commissioners are appointed for five-year terms by the Governor-General, usually on the advice of the prime minister and the Justice minister. Headquartered in Auckland, it has offices in Christchurch, Auckland and Wellington.
Chiam, who also heads the human rights policy unit of the commission, tells malaysiakini the rewards and challenges of her work.
Q: How did you get involved with the NZHRC?
Chiam: They advertised for the position of a senior legal counsel and I started working there in 1999. When I came in, I looked at what was really required. [My experience with] the AG's Chambers in Hong Kong gave me management training. So I knew the issues. I knew how to run the system. I ended up having to draft up a whole new human rights policy unit from scratch because in the 22-year history of the NZHRC, it never had a human rights policy unit.
The NZHRC was promulgated by the Human Rights Commission Act in 1977. It is the oldest HRC in the Asia-Pacific region. New Zealand has always taken a strong role in the United Nations and is the first to give women the right to vote. The women's groups there are fantastic as they are well organised and well versed in women's issues.
How is it like working there?
It's hard work but it does make a difference in people's lives. The NZHRC is a very important institution and in the two years that I have been there we have gone through a lot of changes. Now there is absolutely no delay in the complaints process and if you complain today we would tell you if you had a case or not in a week.
A lot times, the problem with these organisations is that the process is very slow. You complain today and they open up a file for you only 18 months later. Coming from Hong Kong, where the Bill of Rights is based on the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), [I believe] there is a right to trial without undue delay. So my premise is that 'justice delayed is justice denied'. I believe in no delays.
How does the NZHRC deal with 'delays'?
One of the things that the HRC did and I was a part of was to have a 'best practise review policy' in which we looked at the whole complaints process and we totally revamped it. Any bottleneck found was cut. We are happy to say we've done an excellent job and the complaints process is now more efficient.
What do you mean 'bottlenecks'?
You complain, we're not sure what you are talking about, we call you two months later, then we ask you to clarify certain points and two weeks later we write to you again, then by the time we decide whether there is a case or not it is six months down the line. Before I came things were quite laid back with no time frame given.
I felt that there was no sense of urgency and for me, coming from Asia, if you don't act fast someone might be beaten to death. There was a great need to have staff members become committed to issues of human rights. I wanted to give them a sense of urgency and not let them think it is just another nine-to-five job. I wanted staff that were very committed to human rights.
We are not a governmental organisation, neither are we a non-governmental organisation. We are fully funded by tax payers' money and we are here because of our commitment to human rights. We subscribe to process management, where we have a strategic planning process with the strategies for the year put out. We then operationalise this into our plans and budget. We keep our managers to their budgets and they have to deliver what they say they are delivering. All staff, too, have personal objectives that fit into operational plans, so everything works like clockwork.
The NZHRC is a professional organisation. We are serious about our business. It is not a laid back, iron-bowl job. The pay is not good but you sleep well at night and you feel you've made a difference and my staff feel that.
We also put a lot of effort into internal training. We have internal training programmes that are very structured and the staff have to go through training. Even the receptionist has to go through it. Anybody who fails comes to see me. I always tell my staff, "You are in the business of human rights, you must know your product." We must have a sense of pride in where we are working.
The shift in my staff came when the first Thai women who were forced into prostitution turned up at the office. The staff have never seen such exploitation before. I think that made a difference and until they saw that, the NZHRC was just another job.
From then onwards they had greater pride and commitment. I am there to build capacity and I have seen a lot of commissions work; any commission is only as good as its people.
What is the complaints process like?
We believe in a low-level, free and accessible resolution process. The commission actually tries to mediate and conciliate the cases as much as possible. When people come, we say "Look, before we even investigate, let's sit around the table and talk, and let's sort it out." If it is sorted out there and then, then it goes no further. And only for those cases that don't get sorted out, we have no choice but to investigate, then it goes to the complaints division which comprises wholly lay people.
The commissioners are all lay people; they're not even lawyers. They decide on a balance of probability who they think is in the right and come out with an opinion.
We are not a court of law and we usually recommend that compensation be paid and a lot of times the complainers only want an apology or they don't want what they experienced to happen to another person. If someone is sexually harassed, they would want training on how to fight sexual harassment.
When does it go to the complaints division?
If the proceedings commissioner (PC) decides to do that, he becomes your lawyer and you don't have to pay for it. If the other side is found wrong, they would want to take it to the Complaints Review Tribunal (CRT) and when you go there it's all lawyers. If the PC takes up their case then they have someone taking care of their end.
Are the CRT orders binding?
They have the power of court and it is under the courts system, totally separate from the commission. Yes, it can award a lot of things but no, they haven't put people in jail before.
What do you think of Malaysia's new human rights commission, Suhakam?
Even though it is only one year old, it is very young and exciting. The few commissioners I talked to are very committed and want the best for Malaysia. We are going to assist Suhakam in its capacity building. The NZHRC does a lot of capacity building through networking and support
What do you think of the criticisms Suhakam been receiving and the many seeming obstacles in its way?
SC: Well its just part and parcel of being a human rights commission. Even until now the NZHRC gets flak, but I welcome it. However when you are new commission , there could be problems to have people come. But at the end of the day you would like to report that at an enquiry we invited so and so but they did not want to come. That's the whole point of having open enquiry. We should let the public decide. The commission should also effectively get itself in order. You have a serious job to do, and you have to get into the right people and get on with job.
Suhakam had problems in summoning witnesses to its previous inquiry on the Kesas Highway incident. Does NZHRC have similar that problems?
We have not had the problem at all. People want to clear their names and we have reputation of being fair. Witnesses are comfortable when they come. However when you are new commission, there could be problems to have people come.
Perusing through the web site for the commission, it seems to place more emphasis on discrimination than on safeguarding civil and political rights. Why does the NZHRC place more emphasis on discrimination?
New Zealand has structured its human rights obligations very well. New Zealand signed and ratified all main covenants. What it has done internationally, it then tries to implement domestically. In fact there are two acts which have come as a result of this. One is the New Zealand Bill of Rights and the Human Rights Act (HRA).
These laws only came about in the 1990's. Why?
Human rights is a new word, people laughed at it in the 70's and it wasn't in the vocabulary. The UN has done a great deal in making it every one's business, that it was the right of everyone. Now New Zealand is mainstreaming human rights into all public and private sectors. So it is doing a tremendous lot in trying to make sure that human rights is the foremost in terms of national policy making. The commission has a lot to do with it because we are the watchdog. Every six months the Ministry of Justice has to make a report to Parliament. The Ministry has to make a report stating what all government ministries are doing to make all government policies go in line with the HRA. When they finished their draft report they have to give it to the commission. What they do is that they give their compliance report to us and we would write our comment on it. We would say good, no good, what's happening here, how come this ministry is not doing this and our comments go to parliament as part of the report, unedited, like a check list. We are quite independent.
Are they required to follow the recommendations?
No, they are not, but it is the power of persuasion, I mean, how would parliament look if they were told off for not doing this or that to mainstream human rights. On the whole all parties whether they are in opposition or in power, are all more or less committed to human rights. So all politicians are supportive of the commission's work. Of course, they feel that we could do more all the time, if they give me more money we can do more, but the budget is limited only to NZ4 million dollars a year to deliver our programs.
Is that amount restrictive? Of course it is restrictive, but we make do with what we can, and we live within our means.
What does the public think of the NZHRC?
They have had the commission for so long that it is part of the landscape, so they don't think of it very much. I have to try to capture their imagination, so from time to time we have a big campaign to have them interested again. Last year we had a big splash with a sexual harassment prevention campaign.
It was a lot of hoo-haa and suddenly our sexual harassment complaints went up. You have to do something novel, so that's why we have targeted campaigns.
