Two candidates for a position in the academia are not evaluated in terms of historical bias, they are evaluated looking at their CV, track record, publications, etc...

That’s meritocracy. And there’s no place for this “historical biases” in the decision making process in the academia. At least not in science.

Biases exist for more reasons than biased interviewers. Within certain structures, well-meaning people doing their jobs will inadvertently propagate injustices and biases. There is evidence for this. This isn't hard.