Search results

Indigenous imprisonment rates in Australia are unacceptably high. Nationally, Indigenous adults are 13 times more likely to be imprisoned than non-Indigenous people[1] and Indigenous juveniles are 28 times more likely to be placed in juvenile detention than their non-Indigenous counterparts.[2]

Climate change has been regarded as a diabolical policy problem globally. The potential threat to the very existence of Indigenous peoples is compounded by legal and institutional barriers raise distinct challenges for our cultures, our lands and our resources.[1] More seriously, it poses a threat to the health, cultures and livelihoods of Indigenous peoples both here in Australia and around the world.

As part of the Ismaع project, the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (the Commission) investigated existing initiatives that address anti-Arab or anti-Muslim prejudice at a local, state and federal level across Australia. We conducted research and requested information about current initiatives from seven federal government agencies, 37 state and territory government agencies (including education and police authorities), 83 local governments (mostly in areas with substantial Arab or Muslim populations) and 14 non-government and community organisations.

The table below contains information about each of the individuals of concern to the Inquiry. The data contained in this table was provided by the Department of Immigration and Citizenship and the Australian Federal Police.

Part 1: What are the new arrangements for the administration of Indigenous affairs?

“The discussion about a new National Representative Body is about our place at the table in making the decisions that impact on our communities, on our men, our women and our children.

</B>The Yankunytjatjara and Pitjantjatjara and other Indigenous people of the town of Yulara, in the shadows of Uluru, had their claim for compensation for extinguishment of native title rejected by Justice Sackville in the Federal Court (the Jango case)1in 2006. The Noongar people (the Noongar case)2 had their claim for native title over the metropolitan area of Perth upheld. Further north, around Darwin, the Larrakia people (the Larrakia case)3 learned that the common law would not recognise their native title when Justice Mansfied handed down his decision.

An entrenched pattern of disadvantage and dispossession continues to wreak havoc and destruction in Indigenous families and communities. This situation has been described in the preceding chapters of this Part. State and Territory legislation, policy and practice in the areas of child welfare, care and protection, adoption and juvenile justice do not comply with the evaluation criteria established by the Inquiry (see Chapter 15).

Explore a report for the Office of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner in relation to Indigenous deaths in custody.

In 2006 the Secretary of the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet made a revealing statement about Indigenous affairs. He argued that his own government&#8217;s policy performance in the Indigenous portfolio had been a failure. He went further to say that while well intentioned, the policies and approaches of the past 30 years had contributed to poor outcomes for Indigenous people.

These comments were prepared in 1996 by HREOC staff acting as secretariat to the subcommittee of the National Committee on Discrimination in Employment and Occupation considering development of disability standards on employment under the DDA. This document summarises submissions received on the first draft of standards and provides commentary on those submissions.

This is a Report of the findings and reasons for findings made by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission [1] (the Commission) following an inquiry conducted by the Commission. The inquiry related to a complaint by Amnesty International Australia (Amnesty) on behalf of Mr PH1, Mr PH2, Mr PH3, Mr PH4 and Mr PH5 (the asylum seekers) against the Commonwealth of Australia (the Commonwealth), Department of Immigration, Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs (the Department).

3.1 Introduction In chapters 1 and 2, I look back over the past 20 years that the Social Justice Commissioner position has been in place and think about the journey and our learning over this time. In this chapter, I want to explore how those lessons can take us forward to chart a confident course into the future and how the realisation of our rights can produce long term sustainable improvements ...

Indigenous peoples from all over the world have suffered the long-standing effects of colonisation. Consequently, we continue to struggle with the challenges that I have raised in this Report; particularly those that concern our identity, culture and access to and protection of our lands, territories and resources.

The Inquiry received submissions from 680 different individuals and organisations. Some provided submissions in response to both the first and second round discussion papers.

The Social Justice Report 2002 discusses initiatives currently underway or in development at the federal, state and territory levels in relation to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs. The report commends the following positive developments in Indigenous policy:

On 21 June 2007, the Australian Government announced a &#8216;national emergency response to protect Aboriginal children in the Northern Territory&#8217; from sexual abuse and family violence.[1] This has become known as the &#8216;NT intervention&#8217; or the &#8216;Emergency Response&#8217;. The catalyst for the measures was the release of Report of the Northern Territory Board of Inquiry into the Protection of Aboriginal Children from Sexual Abuse, titled Ampe Akelyernemane Meke Mekarle: &#8216;Little Children are Sacred&#8217;.