A public apology, the standards I’m adopting going forward, and an update on progressing justice against RNZ for Alex.

Tēnā koutou katoa,

I’m writing to apologise unreservedly to the trans community and its allies.

In a recent email to the CEO of RNZ, my clumsy wording accidentally implied that gender identity could have possibly contributed to the tragic death of a young man. That was wrong. Intent does not erase impact, though. I failed to meet the highest standards of allyship and care that you should expect from me. I’m extremely sorry.

Why I’m posting this now

RNZ has indicated—after what I consider an extremely bad-faith and impossibly short consultation—that it unlawfully intends to release two emails I sent, in response to an Official Information Act (OIA) request from an unknown third party.

In doing so, RNZ is, in my view, treating me differently from other editorial participants, and the timing gives the firm appearance of a retaliatory step in light of my imminent Human Rights Commission (HRC) complaint concerning this matter. While I am advised by eminent counsel that both case law and statute support the withholding, I have decided that pursuing judicial review would not be a good use of my time or our organisation’s resources. These manoeuvres risk pulling me away from my core advocacy; I will not be diverted from the goal of promoting and defending universal human rights.

About the subsequent email

In a later email, I also used a strong expletive. That message was written under the residual stress of having to leave my apartment permanently within two hours after Courts NZ disclosed my address to third parties. Courts NZ has admitted its error to me in writing, and I will seek the appropriate remedies when I can. That context explains my distress; it does not excuse my language, as I was writing from my Rights Aotearoa email. July was a very stressful month for me.

My engagement with RNZ

I engaged with RNZ in what I understood to be the editorial process around this story. From my first such approach, I reasonably expected that communications—especially those referring to a large body of highly sensitive private messages—would be treated as confidential news gathering. RNZ’s stated intention to release some of those emails is, in my view, inconsistent with basic source protection and responsible newsroom practice. I have asked RNZ to maintain confidentiality and to handle this material with the care it requires. They declined my request. Also, this apology is in no way an authorisation for them to publish the emails. I reserve all my rights to take legal action in this matter still.

I contend that RNZ has acted so unethically by publishing the story with the perspective they did that they are now acting in a menacing way to stop my HRC complaint. My proof for this is that they are treating an OIA request that I put in differently from this current request for my emails. It’s rank hypocrisy on their part.

RNZ’s approach appears inconsistent with the OIA’s requirement to conduct a record-by-record assessment (Kelsey [2015] NZHC 2497 at [108]) and to genuinely consider source-protection and third-party privacy as mandatory relevant considerations. They are also not correctly interpreting other privacy-related considerations, nor interpreting the public interest test correctly.

Finally, it is my well-informed and considered personal opinion that Fern Hickson and others actively collaborated with RNZ Journalist Ruth Hill to make this story as devastating as possible for the cause of transgender rights to suit all of their hateful personal agendas. As pointed out — by an RNZ journalist — in the Mediawatch episode discussing this matter, RNZ violated its own editorial policies in the way it reported this story.

Justice for Alex

I am highly determined in this matter and will pursue justice for Alex all the way to the Supreme Court. When his close friend reached out to me with the 6000 messages, I took on this responsibility. I will discharge it faithfully to honour Alex’s memory and the transgender, non-binary, and intersex communities of Aotearoa.

For now, the next step in justice for Alex is the Human Rights Commission, with some admittedly novel legal arguments. Leges mutantur cum moribus; Tempora mutantur, nos et mutamur in illis.

What I did wrong

• I used careless language in an intensely sensitive context. I let my emotions get the better of me in the case of the second email.
• I framed a point in a way that could be read as attributing causation to gender identity. That implication is hurtful and unacceptable. My true view on this matter is the same as that expressed in this brilliant article: https://thespinoff.co.nz/society/13-06-2025/stop-conflating-being-transgender-with-being-sick
• In a subsequent email, I used an expletive; even under residual stress, that fell short of the standard I owe our community.

(I will not re-publish the specific wording, as repeating it risks further harm.)

What I’m changing immediately

Language discipline: Adopting a “respect-first” writing protocol for all communications and publishing it on the Rights Aotearoa site.

Community oversight: Revisiting the composition and governance of our transgender-led advisory group to review our sensitive-communications protocols and how to hold me to account.

Transparency: Publishing a short 30-day public update on what has changed and what remains to improve. I operate Rights Aotearoa with radical candour and transparency at all times.

Therapy: I am going to undertake therapy to help me deal with the hateful content and forces that I necessarily deal with in my role as CEO of Rights Aotearoa.

I will also host an open Zoom kōrero in the coming fortnight for anyone from the community who wishes to speak with me directly: email me at paul@rightsaotearoa.nz if you want to join, or bsky DM. If you prefer to write, you can reach me at that email; I will listen without defensiveness.

Anticipated questions

Why not fight RNZ in court?

Although I believe the legal position for withholding is strong, judicial review would consume time and resources better spent on the work that matters: protecting rights and supporting our community. I’m choosing transparency and improvement over litigation.

Are you blaming RNZ for your words?

No. I am responsible for my words. I am also entitled to voice principled concerns about how sensitive, source-context emails are handled. Both can be true.

What exactly did you say?

Out of respect, I won’t re-publish the language. The gist is set out above; the important part is accepting responsibility and fixing systems so it doesn’t happen again.

Final word

Rights Aotearoa exists to protect dignity. That starts with me - being disciplined, respectful and careful. I fell short. I’m sorry—and I’m changing practices to ensure I do better, starting now.

Ngā mihi,

Paul Thistoll

Chief Executive, Rights Aotearoa