As Australia rapidly advances into an era dominated by artificial intelligence, concerns are mounting about the country’s lack of comprehensive human rights legislation to protect individuals from the growing influence of automated decision-making systems. Despite broad public backing and recommendations from parliamentary committees, Australian federal lawmakers have yet to enact a national human rights act, leaving citizens vulnerable as AI-driven tools increasingly govern access to essential services.
Artificial intelligence technologies, including algorithms and automated assessment tools, are being implemented across government departments to manage everything from social support distribution to healthcare eligibility. However, transparency in how these systems operate remains limited, and provisions for human oversight or appeal of automated decisions are insufficient. This shortfall stands in contrast with several states and territories like Victoria, Queensland, and the Australian Capital Territory, which have enacted their own human rights frameworks.
The federal government has publicly promoted its proposed “digital duty of care” initiative, aimed at curbing harmful algorithmic impacts by giving individuals more control over the content they encounter online. Yet critics argue that this plan does not address the accuracy of information, nor does it adequately regulate the use of AI in critical decision-making contexts.
A particularly urgent issue has emerged in aged care, where the Department of Ageing’s Integrated Assessment Tool (IAT) has been employed since late last year to determine eligibility for services. Reports have surfaced indicating significant errors and inappropriate assessments generated by the algorithm, resulting in vulnerable older Australians being denied necessary care. State health officials have raised alarms about the absence of human discretion within the system, describing the tool’s flawed outcomes as “potentially catastrophic.” This failure not only inflicts hardship on affected individuals but also places additional strain on hospitals, as many elderly people unable to access adequate home or residential care occupy hospital beds.
The problems in aged care come in the wake of a royal commission that exposed widespread failures and human rights infringements within Australia’s residential aged care system, further exacerbated during the COVID-19 pandemic. In response, the new Aged Care Act, effective from November 2025, enshrines principles of dignity, respect, and independence for elderly residents. Yet these rights currently lack enforceability through legal action, relying instead on complaint mechanisms that fall short of full protection.
Government efforts to incorporate AI across departments have accelerated. All federal agencies were required to appoint chief AI officers by July 2026, and from December, privacy statements must disclose the use of AI in decision-making processes that affect individuals. Still, experts caution that most people do not read or understand privacy notices, limiting the impact of disclosure requirements.
Critics point out that current laws do not meet recommendations from the robodebt royal commission, which called for transparency regarding algorithms and a guaranteed right to human review in automated decisions. Private members’ bills, such as one introduced by independent MP Kate Chaney, represent some resistance to the expansion of unregulated AI in government services.
As Australia confronts the challenges of an AI-infused future, advocates emphasize the need for robust human rights protections at the national level to ensure that emerging technologies enhance, rather than undermine, the dignity and wellbeing of all citizens.