CEO loses racial discrimination case against Aboriginal organisation

The CEO of an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander LGBTQSB+ organisation alleged the founding director said he “shouldn’t even be in this community” because he was “not even black”.

Shane Sturgiss, CEO of BlaQ Aboriginal Corporation, failed to substantiate claims of racial vilification, discrimination and victimisation against the community-controlled organisation and its founding director, John Leha, over an incident in October 2023.

The not-for-profit organisation is the peak body for Aboriginal lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer + sistergirl and brotherboy (LGBTQSB+) people and communities in NSW.

In his complaint, filed with Anti-Discrimination NSW in April 2024, Sturgiss alleged an agitated and angry Leha walked to the centre of the office and said words to the effect of: “You shouldn’t even be here, you aren’t even black, you shouldn’t be in this community.”

Sturgiss said Leha then told him he would be asking the BlaQ board to “demand a certificate of Aboriginality from you”.

Leha conceded he asked for the document confirming Aboriginality, but denied raising his voice or acting in an aggressive manner.

The incident occurred after Leha became aware that Sturgiss convened a members meeting but had allegedly intentionally excluded Leha and other directors from the notice, in breach of the BlaQ rule book.

Senior member Jane Smith and general member Maryanne Maher of the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal found that, in circumstances where there was no evidence the issue was taken to the board, Sturgiss did not substantiate the claim of racial discrimination.

Smith and Maher were of the view that asking for verification that a person was of Aboriginal race would not objectively have the capacity to incite hatred, contempt or ridicule on the grounds of race.

Due to a lack of reliable and consistent evidence, the tribunal was unable to make positive findings in relation to the “not even black” comment, whether it was said that Sturgiss “should not be in the community”, and if a threat was made to terminate his employment.

Part of Sturgiss’ complaint related to the location of the incident, which occurred in front of three witnesses.

Sturgiss alleged Leha “blocked the only entry point”, was using profanities, and had to be asked to leave by one of the staff members because he was being “scary and it’s frightening”.

The evidence of two witnesses differed substantially.

On Leha’s evidence, he asked Sturgiss to meet with him in a smaller office for a conversation, followed Sturgiss when he walked away, and asked whether he wanted to talk about it in front of the office.

While Sturgiss alleged the racial abuse constituted a public act, Smith and Maher noted Leha tried to have the conversation in a private room, there were no members of the public in the office, and it was unlikely Leha could be heard by people on the street.

Even if the conversation occurred in the presence of other employees, it was still a private conversation “in the sense of it occurring between Leha and Sturgiss”, and with Sturgiss the “intended audience”.

Shortly after the incident, Sturgiss was placed on gardening leave, but the tribunal found this was not due to his race.

Instead, Smith and Maher said the gardening leave was for Sturgiss’ own benefit in response to his complaint, “and to ensure the matter was appropriately and independently investigated”.

Sturgiss has received WorkCover payments since November 2023 and has not returned to the organisation, but BlaQ said it has continued to engage with him on his fitness to return to work.

The case: Sturgiss v BlaQ Aboriginal Corporation & Leha [2025] NSWCATOD 244.