The Office of Human Rights Proceedings
Te Tari Whakatau Take Tika Tangata
____________________________________________________________________
21 April 2021
Level 7
AIG Building
41 Shortland Street
Auckland 1010
Tess McCawe
PO Box 6751
Victoria Street West
Auckland 1142
By email:
[FYI request #14999 email]
Telephone: (09) 375-8623
Facsimile: (09) 375-8641
Email: [Office of Human Rights Proceedings request email]
Dear Tess McCawe
Your request for information under the Official Information Act 1982: Gender statistics for
plaintiffs represented
1.
I refer to your request for information sent by email to the Office of Human Rights
Proceedings (
Office) on Friday 26 March 2021. You indicate that your request is made
under the Official Information Act 1982 (
OIA). It is not explicitly clear from the relevant
legislation whether the Office is subject to the OIA. However, it is my practice to apply
the legislation as I consider it appropriate that members of the public should have
access to official information held by this Office.
2.
You have asked two questions of the Office, as follows:
Question One
For the 50 most recent Human Rights Review Tribunal cases (as at 26.3.2021),
please provide the gender count for plaintiffs whose cases were represented by the
Director of Human Rights Proceedings. That is, the count of males and females
(and other if applicable). Where the plaintiff is more than one individual, please
state.
Question Two
Please also provide the same information for plaintiffs who have been declined the
services of the Director of Human Rights Proceedings. That is for the 50 most
recent declines letters sent, how many were sent to males and how many were sent
to females.
3.
I have considered refusing your request under section 18(g) of the OIA because the
Office does not hold any official information regarding the gender demographics of its
applicants and clients. As the information is not held, the Office is under no obligation
to create it in order to respond to a request.
2. Office of Human Rights Proceedings
___________________________________________________________________________
4.
However, I would prefer to be helpful. My staff has been able to create some of the
information you seek. In doing so, we have relied upon the following indicators to
provide our answers:
a. The preferred form of address (for example Mr, Mrs, Ms, Miss) which some
applicants provide on their completed forms when applying for legal
representation.
b. Whether the applicant/client names are commonly attributed to male or
female gender.
c. Whether the circumstances of the applicant or client’s complaint suggests their
gender.
d. Whether we have met or spoken to an applicant/client and can, to an extent,
assume their gender.
5.
We respond to the two questions you have asked.
Question One
6.
To repeat, you have asked:
For the 50 most recent Human Rights Review Tribunal cases (as at 26.3.2021),
please provide the gender count for plaintiffs whose cases were represented by the
Director of Human Rights Proceedings. That is, the count of males and females
(and other if applicable). Where the plaintiff is more than one individual, please
state.
7.
We have interpreted your question to mean where we have accepted an application
under the Human Rights Act 1993 to take a matter through to a hearing at the Human
Rights Review Tribunal or on the basis of achieving settlement only. Of course, a
number of the cases we accept do not ultimately go to hearing in that they are settled
or resolved in some other way. It may mean that we have interpreted your question
incorrectly. If this is the case, then please let us know.
8.
As at 26 March 2021, of the 50 most recent applicants who were granted legal
representation under the Human Rights Act 1993, there were:
a. Twenty-five who were thought to be female;
b. Nineteen who were thought to be male;
c. Four joint applications:
i.
Application 1: thought to be one male and one female
3. Office of Human Rights Proceedings
___________________________________________________________________________
ii.
Application 2: thought to be two females
iii.
Application 3: thought to be one male and one female
iv.
Application 4: thought to be one female and one male; and
d. Two Incorporated Societies.
Question Two
9.
To repeat, your second question is:
Please also provide the same information for plaintiffs who have been declined the
services of the Director of Human Rights Proceedings. That is for the 50 most
recent declines letters sent, how many were sent to males and how many were sent
to females.
10.
As at 26 March 2021, of the 50 applicants who were most recently declined legal
representation there were:
a. Twenty-three who were thought to be female;
b. Twenty-four who were thought to be male;
c. Two were understood to be other; and
d. One joint application was received from two people who were understood to
be husband and wife (therefore thought to be a male and a female).
11.
I note that, pursuant to the OIA, we were required to respond to you by 28 April 2021.
Accordingly, our response is timely and within the prescribed period. As I have noted
above, if we have misinterpreted your question or you require further clarification,
please let us know.
12.
Finally, you have the right to seek an investigation and review by the Ombudsman of
this decision. Information about how to make a complaint is available at
www.ombudsman.parliament.nz or freephone 0800 802 602.
Yours faithfully
Michael Timmins
Director of Human Rights Proceedings
Tumuaki Whakatau Take Tika Tangata
