STEPHEN RAINBOW: HIS APPOINTMENT AS HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSIONER WAS UNLAWFUL

The High Court has ruled that Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith unlawfully appointed Human Rights Commissioner Stephen Rainbow and Race Relations Commissioner Melissa Derby. But neither of the commissioners will have to stand down from their jobs, as the case against them did not seek their removal. But the unlawful nature of their appointments makes both their positions untenable. In particular, Stephen Rainbow's record of partisan attacks and pro-Zionist advocacy means he should resign immediately.


THE CONTROVERSY surrounding Stephen Rainbow’s appointment did not emerge overnight. In August 2024, Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith announced a slate of new commissioners for the Human Rights Commission, including Rainbow as Chief Commissioner. This decision was immediately contentious. Documents later revealed that Rainbow had not been recommended by the independent panel tasked with vetting candidates, raising questions about political interference and the integrity of the process. Labour and the Greens criticised Goldsmith for bypassing proper procedure, accusing him of bowing to ACT Party pressure rather than following statutory requirements.

Concerns about Rainbow’s suitability were not limited to process. His public record included outspoken support for Israel and Zionism, alongside disparaging remarks about pro-Palestinian activism. At a time when global human rights discourse is increasingly shaped by the plight of Palestinians under occupation, Rainbow’s alignment with one side of the conflict undermined the impartiality expected of a Human Rights Commissioner. His commentary suggested hostility toward grassroots movements advocating for Palestinian rights, raising doubts about his ability to uphold universal principles of human dignity and equality.  

The legal challenge brought by human rights advocate Paul Thistoll crystallised these concerns into a formal test of legality. The High Court has ruled that Goldsmith’s appointments of Rainbow and Race Relations Commissioner Melissa Derby were unlawful. The Court found that Goldsmith had applied the wrong legal test under the Crown Entities Act and Human Rights Act, and had failed to consider mandatory statutory criteria. This was not a minor technicality: it was a fundamental breach of the law governing appointments to one of the country’s most important watchdog institutions.  

Although the Court did not order Rainbow’s removal—because the case sought only a declaration—the ruling leaves his legitimacy fatally compromised. A Human Rights Commissioner must embody independence, impartiality, and integrity. Rainbow’s appointment has now been judicially declared unlawful. That alone should compel resignation. To remain in office would be to cling to a mandate that has been stripped of legal and moral authority.  

Moreover, Rainbow’s political record compounds the problem. His vocal support for Zionism and his attacks on the pro-Palestinian movement are not incidental opinions; they directly contradict the expectation that commissioners defend the rights of all communities without prejudice. In a role that demands sensitivity to global human rights struggles, Rainbow’s stance risks alienating those who look to the Commission for solidarity and protection. His appointment already raised fears that the Commission would be politicised; the High Court ruling confirms those fears were justified.  

The broader context is one of declining trust in institutions. New Zealanders expect the Human Rights Commission to stand above partisan politics, to be a bulwark against discrimination and injustice. Rainbow’s continued presence undermines that trust. Every statement he makes will be overshadowed by the knowledge that he was unlawfully appointed, and every intervention will be tainted by his record of ideological bias.  

Resignation is not simply a matter of personal accountability; it is necessary to restore the credibility of the Commission itself. If Rainbow refuses to step down, the Commission risks being paralysed by controversy, unable to speak with authority on issues of race, equality, and justice. His departure would allow for a lawful, transparent appointment process that could rebuild confidence in the institution.  

Stephen Rainbow’s position is untenable, and he must resign to protect the integrity of New Zealand’s human rights framework.