The two faces of the NZ Human Rights Commission

More and more people are starting to notice the two faces of the NZ Human Rights Commission, currently led by Commissioner Paul Hunt. Hunt, before he became Commissioner, supported Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, who is infamous for his antisemitism. Paul Hunt has chosen to remain silent on antisemitism within UK Labour, which is a very worrying stance from the man selected to head the NZ Human Rights Commission. quote.

Should a person steeped in British left-wing activism be shaping our human rights policy?

[…] Hunt’s fellow rapporteurs 20 years ago included representatives from Russia, Belarus, Cameroon and Egypt, all of which are ranked as “not free” by the international organisation Freedom House.
So we may be entitled to feel just a tiny bit sceptical about the credentials of UN officials professing to champion human rights.
But wait, there’s more. When Hunt wasn’t busy polishing his human rights credentials, he was dabbling in British politics.

[…] Hunt’s writing on social justice issues aligned closely with the policies of the Corbynite socialist (aka “progressive”) Left of the British Labour Party.
Last year, Hunt put himself forward for election to the party’s National Policy Forum. The aim was to “ensure Labour has an election-winning manifesto”. In a pamphlet, Hunt wrote that he could help strengthen and deliver Labour’s “exciting social policies”.

Of course he’s entitled to embrace whatever brand of politics he likes. But at the same time, we’re entitled to ask whether Hunt, a man steeped in British Left-wing activism, is the right person to shape New Zealand’s human rights policy.
We’re also entitled to ask whether there was no suitably qualified candidate from a New Zealand background ? someone with an intuitive understanding of New Zealand society and unencumbered by imported leftist ideology.

[…] Many New Zealanders first heard of Hunt on the Tuesday following the Friday Christchurch mosque shootings, when he had an opinion article published on Stuff. In that article he warned of “violent, transnational, neo-fascist ideology” and issued a thinly disguised call for tougher hate speech laws.
He wrote passionately about the importance of protecting tolerance, diversity and equality, but strangely his polemic made no mention of one of the most fundamental human rights of all: freedom of expression.


The NZ Human Rights Commission on social media shows two very different faces to the world. It was slow to condemn the antisemitism of Ahmed Bhamji, a former Fijian MP, mayor and a former chair of FIANZ and current chairman of the Mt Roskill Masjid E Umar, for blaming Israel for the terror attack in Christchurch. The commission had to be shamed and pressured into making a statement. They finally said something but the fact that they dragged their feet on the issue is very telling.

Nevertheless, it showed one face to the world, and that face said, “Prejudice against Jewish people has no place in New Zealand”. (Strangely they protected the identity of Ahmed Bhamji, whom they were supposedly condemning for his antisemitism, by blurring out his face)


Their other face, however, has been revealed by their failure to moderate their Facebook page when an antisemitic slur is written there, even when their attention is called to it.

Susan Hatten like Ahmed Bhamji is not only being antisemitic; she is doing it on the NZ Human Rights Commission’s Facebook page, and they are doing nothing to stop her.

This is the same Human Rights Commission headed by Paul Hunt, who is keen to curb our freedom of speech and to bring in hate speech laws. How long do you think a comment on Muslims blaming them for a false flag attack would last on their Facebook page? It seems to me that the Human Rights Commission cares about some minorities more than others. Action (or in this case lack of action) speaks louder than words.

FACE TWO: Unmoderated comment on the NZ Human Rights Commission Facebook page

I wrote this post on Saturday afternoon. I have put a link to the Facebook page below so you can see if the antisemitic comment is still there or not. If it is still there that will mean that the Human Rights Commission have left it in place even though it was brought to their attention.