Search results

Introduction Pre and post-release programs for Indigenous women exiting prison An overview of Indigenous women in corrections Intersectional discrimination - Addressing the distinct experiences of Indigenous women Post-release programs for Indigenous women exiting prison - common themes from consultations Policy and programs relating to Indigenous women exiting prison Post-release housing programs for Indigenous women exiting prison Healing programs for Indigenous women exiting prison Conclusion Endnotes Introduction

a) Rates of incarceration of Indigenous women b) Recidivism rates among Indigenous women c) Types of crime committed by Indigenous women d) Over-policing e) Sentencing patterns for Indigenous women f) Characteristics of Indigenous women who are imprisoned

The Commission convened a workshop in Sydney on 27 November 2000 on this topic. It was attended by more than 120 participants. The workshop was addressed by two keynote speakers: Dr William Jonas AM, the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner, and Baroness Vivien Stern from the International Centre for Prison Studie at King's College London who travelled to Australia as a guest of the Commission. Dr Jonas's keynote speech "Citizens Inside" can be read by clicking here.

The Report of the National Inquiry into the Human Rights of People with Mental Illness was tabled in Parliament and publicly released on 20 October, 1993.

Human rights are universal. This means they apply to all people wherever they live and whatever their circumstances. People living in rural areas have an equal entitlement to human rights as those people who live in urban areas. However, for rural Australians, the full enjoyment of their human rights can sometimes be problematic. The reasons for this are many and varied. They include issues of distance and remoteness, the extremes of weather and the uncertainties of the rural economy.

Bush Talks was endorsed by Mrs Margaret Smith (National President of the Country Women's Association); Mr Gatjil Djerrkura (Chair of ATSIC); Mr David Dunn (National President of Australian Rural Youth) and Dr Wendy Craik (Executive Director of the National Farmers' Federation).

Read the Same-Sex: Same Entitlements Report, which outlines human rights protection in areas such as marriage, family law, employment, and health care.

The deadline for submissions in response to the Inquiry's first Discussion Paper was 16 June 2006. The deadline for submissions in response to Discussion Paper II was 3 November 2006.

This discussion paper briefly discusses federal laws which exclude same-sex couples from accessing financial and work-related entitlements. The paper discusses the following areas of federal law:

This is an Inquiry into discrimination against same-sex couples regarding access to financial and work-related entitlements and benefits. Many of Australia’s laws exclude same-sex couples from financial and work-related entitlements and benefits that are enjoyed by heterosexual couples. For example, same-sex couples do not enjoy the same tax and health concessions as other de facto couples and they may not have the same rights to pensions and other social security benefits as heterosexual couples.

1. The President, Mr John William von Doussa QC, and the Human Rights Commissioner, Mr Graeme Gordon Innes AM, will conduct an inquiry (the Inquiry), on behalf of the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, into laws regarding financial and employment-related entitlements and benefits to consider the impact of those laws on:

Explore the Same-Sex: Same Entitlements media kit and fact sheet, which outline human rights protection in areas like marriage, family law, and employment.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (the Universal Declaration) was adopted by the United Nations (UN) General Assembly in 1948. Click here for more information about the Universal Declaration

Discover a timeline of treaties on human rights, including the 2007 Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the 1951 Refugee Convention.

In October 2010, the Australian Human Rights Commission commenced a public consultation to canvas the experiences and views of people who may have been discriminated against on the basis of their sexual orientation or sex and/or gender identity. The task was a listening exercise, and a lot needed to be said.

The concept of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is generally understood to mean that corporations have a degree of responsibility not only for the economic consequences of their activities, but also for the social and environmental implications. This is sometimes referred to as a ‘triple bottom line’ approach that considers the economic, social and environmental aspects of corporate activity.

This report is a brief summary of the observations made by the Human Rights Commissioner and staff of the Australian Human Rights Commission (the Commission). These summary notes and recommendations are based on what we personally observed and heard from staff and detainees during our immigration detention facility inspections.

The following notes are a brief summary of the observations made by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission’s (HREOC) President, Human Rights Commissioner and staff. HREOC emphasises that these summary notes and recommendations are based solely on what we personally observed and heard from staff and detainees during our visits.