Recognising the need to increase and enhance the capacity and expertise of the legal profession and judiciary to develop Australian law and policy consistently with international human rights standards, the Public Interest Law Clearing House Inc (‘PILCH’) and the Victorian Council for Civil Liberties Inc (‘Liberty Victoria’) jointly incorporated the Human Rights Law Resource Centre Ltd (‘HRLRC’) in January 2006. The HRLRC was renamed the Human Rights Law Centre in 2011.

The HRLRC proposal was developed by PILCH and Liberty Victoria over a two year period with significant input from diverse stakeholders, including legal professional associations, community legal centres, legal aid, the private legal profession and human rights and community organisations. In particular, the development built on, and was informed by, the significant human rights commitment and experience of community legal centres and legal aid and pro bono practitioners over the last three decades. This input included a proposal by the then Senator Gareth Evans in 1996 to establish a specialist human rights community legal centre. The development of the proposal had close regard to the findings of a series of consultations conducted during 1999-2000 by the International Human Rights Law Group (now called Global Rights) with the input of over 125 human rights legal organisations from more than 50 countries. The aim of the consultations was to identify the characteristics, methods and strategies of effective human rights legal organisations.  Amongst others, the following six key findings informed the development of the HRLRC. First, human rights lawyering organisations that have clearly stated and narrowly defined objectives and targets tend to be more effective than organisations with wide-ranging and comprehensive goals. Second, the most effective organisations tend to develop individual specialisations or focus on thematic priorities or groups. Organisations that think structurally and strategically about the application of limited resources have the greatest impact. Third, strategic litigation is an important tool for promoting human rights, but it is most effective when combined with other strategies such as advocacy, education, lobbying and policy work. Amicus interventions were identified as being particularly useful as they tend to be less resource-intensive and do not have the potential adverse costs implications of being party to litigation. Fourth, the most effective human rights legal organisations work cooperatively and collaboratively with non-legal human rights Non-Governmental Organisations. Fifth, the principle and practice of client empowerment is central to effective human rights legal organisations and lawyering. Sixth, successful human rights legal organisations have expertise in the application of international human rights norms in domestic courts and in the use of international human rights complaint mechanisms.

The HRLRC was Australia’s first specialist human rights legal service and, when it was established, had two primary aims. First, it aimed to promote, protect and contribute to the fulfilment of human rights in Australia – particularly the human rights of people who are disadvantaged or living in poverty – by contributing to the harmonisation of law, policy and practice in Australia with human rights norms and standards. Through a range of activities, including particularly strategic superior litigation, the HRLRC sought to bring to bear the influence of international human rights instruments and standards on domestic law and policy.

The second initial aim of the HRLRC was to empower people who are disadvantaged or living in poverty by operating and providing services within a human rights framework, including by: treating people with fairness, dignity and respect; promoting equality and freedom from discrimination; promoting participation and the principle that people should have a say in processes and decisions that affect them; and promoting social inclusion and community development. This aim was informed by research and past practice which demonstrates that a client’s relationship with his or her lawyers, together with that client’s experience of legal processes, can itself contribute to, or derogate from, the physical, psychological, social and emotional well being and human rights of the client. For example, research in the United Kingdom regarding ‘what people do and think about going to law’ demonstrates that individuals who receive legal services of a high quality are 56 per cent more likely than self-represented participants to consider that the legal system and its substantive outcomes are ‘fair and just’. Similarly, research in both Australia and the United States reveals that being treated with respect and dignity throughout the process is often more important to many clients’ perceptions of justice, fairness and satisfaction than the substantive legal outcome.

The HRLRC set out to achieve its dual aims through a range of activities, including by supporting, conducting, coordinating, resourcing, facilitating and enhancing the provision of legal services, litigation, education, training, research, policy analysis and advocacy regarding human rights. The HRLC continues to undertake these activities through partnerships which draw together and coordinate the capacity and resources of pro bono lawyers and legal professional associations, the human rights law expertise of university law schools, and the networks, grassroot connections and community development focus of community legal centres and human rights organisations.

For a detailed discussion of the genesis and establishment of the HRLRC, see Philip Lynch, ‘Harmonising International Human Rights and Domestic Law and Policy: The Establishment and Role of the Human Rights Law Resource Centre’ (2006) 10 Melbourne Journal of International Law.