More than a year of FOI requests and appeals has produced a broadly consistent picture of how the Australian Government manages its relationship with the UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls, Reem Alsalem.
The entries on the document list from September to November 2024 confirm that Ms Alsalem’s letter to the Prime Minister and her 4 September statement on Tickle v Giggle were treated as requiring prompt attention.
The documents show that officials asked internally whether a reply to Ms Alsalem’s letter to the Prime Minister was required, and were advised that no response was needed because it was treated as a “courtesy letter” and no reply had been requested, although AGD could respond if it wished and DFAT would then “consider further”. Whether Australia subsequently replied remains unknown; the scope limitations and redactions do not allow us to determine this.
[S]ubject lines strongly suggest that, after a period of cross‑agency deliberation over February 2025, officials were acting on advice that Australia would not provide a submission in response to the Special Rapporteur’s call for inputs on sex‑based violence.
In October 2025, following an internal review of an earlier refusal, the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations released, in part, the transcript of a ‘Fireside Chat’ held on 18 September 2024 and jointly hosted by DEWR and the Department of Education for their staff. That transcript (LEX 1781) revealed that Ambassador Campbell had told staff that Ms Alsalem had “taken a fairly difficult position on transgender rights in a way that doesn’t conform with our views”, and that “we are directly engaging through various different mechanisms” to deal with those concerns.
The department determined, in accordance with section 11C(1) of the FOI Act, that publication of the information provided in relation to FOI request LEX 1781 would be unreasonable and therefore chose not to publish it on the department’s disclosure log. We publish it here in the public interest.
In the material released so far under LEX 13100, the only detailed meeting preparation disclosed is for engagement with Graeme Reid, the Independent Expert on sexual orientation and gender identity (IE SOGI), while comparable material for direct engagement with Ms Alsalem has not been released. Detailed talking points were prepared for a meeting with him, including references to disagreements between his mandate and that of Ms Alsalem as Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls. Mr Reid’s mandate appears to be closer to the Government’s preferred framing on these issues.
On the documents released so far, Australia appears to have spoken about Ms Alsalem’s mandate, and around her mandate, but there is no disclosed record of substantive two‑way engagement with her on the Tickle v Giggle decision or her December 2024 call for inputs to understand, test or even seek to correct her views.
This belies belief. That the Australian government constantly purports to be concerned and taking action in relation to violence against women and girls, yet apparently refuses to provide a submission on the issue to the UN Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women and Girls is astounding. Every Australian woman and girl is at risk of violence from an Australian man, or Australian men. This includes every woman member of the Australian parliament. It includes the women advisors to the Australian government, in whatever capacity – for example, Sex Discrimination Commissioner, Women’s Advisor (that is head of the Australian government division or department – having gone under various names/titles over the years since then Prime Minister Gough Whitlam’s appointment of the first in the last half of the last century, head of the entity that addresses women’s workplace conditions and pay rates, etc. Women must demand that the Australian government acknowledge its substantial lack of care and concern for the rights of Australian women not to be beaten, abused, exploited and killed by Australian men which is evident in this gross lack of government responsibility to engage and evident commitment to empty words whenever it professes to be concerned about women’s rights in this regard.