It’s all change at the Human Rights Commission if a bill tabled in the House yesterday is approved by legislators.A press release from Youth Minister Glenn Blakeney, whose portfolio includes the HRC, explained that the current system is “extremely lengthy, circuitous and confusing to the parties.”The changes will remove the Minister from all decisions concerning the HRC with the exception of appointing the Chairperson of a new committee to select Commissioners.The Commission itself, currently politically appointed, will be selected by that committee via a recruitment process and be transformed into a Human Rights Tribunal.And the process of accepting and hearing discrimination complaints will also be radically changed.“Currently, the Human Rights Commission screens complaints, conducts investigations and seeks to conciliate or settle complaints of unlawful discrimination,” the Minister’s press release stated.“The Commission does not adjudicate a complaint and when the Commission is unable to settle a complaint it is forwarded to the Minister for referral to a Board of Inquiry for a hearing. The progression of cases through the Human Rights Commission to the Minister and then on to a Board of Inquiry is extremely lengthy, circuitous and confusing to the parties.”The amendments “will transfer the screening functions of the Commissioners to the Executive Officer and the investigations team at the Human Rights Office who are trained to carry out that role and it will also convert the Commissioners’ role to that of a Human Rights Tribunal.“Boards of Inquiry, as they currently exist, will be replaced by the Human Rights Tribunal each one comprised of a small number of Commissioners who will hear cases and render decisions. Therefore, the primary function of Commissioners will become the adjudication of cases and the Minister will be removed completely from this process.”“The amendments contained in the Human Rights Amendment (No.2) Act 2011 tabled today are based on the determination that three key requirements had to be met. First, that knowledgeable and competent decisions, able to withstand scrutiny, are made throughout the process of addressing a human rights complaint; second, that the complaint process is clear to the public; and thirdly, that all cases progress in a timely manner.”