Search results

8.1 The profiles indicate a growing awareness by custodial and medical staff of issues concerning the proper treatment of both Indigenous and non-Indigenous prisoners. However, implementation of the recommendations is uneven. Some recommendations have not been implemented in any jurisdiction.

This chapter explains how the provisions of international human rights treaties protect same-sex couples and their children, in the context of accessing financial and work-related entitlements. In particular, this chapter focuses on the right to non-discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation. It also describes how the breach of that right can interfere with a range of other basic human rights, for example, the right to social security. The chapter also explains how discrimination against parents on the grounds of sexual orientation can impact on the rights of their children.

In 2007-08, the number of new migrants who settled permanently in Australia was 205 940.[78] The Department of Immigration and Citizenship (DIAC) and the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) defines ‘settled permanently’ as:

The circumstances of Indigenous peoples were virtually invisible at the United Nations approximately thirty years ago. Very little attention had been devoted to their situation and their claims were by and large unheard in international fora. Since the early 1970s, however, Indigenous peoples have made significant inroads towards the recognition of their rights and acceptance of their legitimate place within the international community. The results, while incomplete, have been nothing short of extraordinary.

In the past year Australia's compliance with international human rights obligations has been under scrutiny by United Nations human rights treaty committees through consideration of Australia's periodic reports under four treaties. [1] Much of this attention has focused on issues relating to Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders. This chapter focuses on the dialogue between the Australian government and the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (the Committee or the CERD), which took place in March 2000.

Under the AHRC Act, an employer can make a distinction against someone with a criminal record if the person’s particular criminal record means that they are unable to fulfil the inherent requirements of the job. Another way of putting this is that an employer can make a distinction against someone if the criminal record is relevant to the job. This conduct does not constitute discrimination under the AHRC Act.

The interim paper, Valuing Parenthood: Options for paid maternity leave set out an extensive range of objectives that paid maternity leave could meet. [242] Many of these objectives were dependent on the structure of the scheme that was implemented.

Dr Sev Ozdowski was appointed Human Rights Commissioner in December 2000 for a five year term. He is also the acting Disability Discrimination Commissioner.

We are deeply dissatisfied with the performance to date by various government agencies... there does not appear to be any process beyond monitoring to ensure that effective implementation takes place...

This document is intended to provide a brief overview of the main findings of the Social Justice Report 2002. See the executive summary of the report for a more detailed description of the reports findings.

This document is intended to provide a brief overview of the main findings of the Social Justice Report 2002. See the executive summary of the report for a more detailed description of the reports findings.

The consultation was organised by Houssam Abiad and facilitated by Omeima Sukkarieh, HREOC (notes). Franco Parrella from the South Australian Equal Opportunity Commission also attended the meeting. Eight young people participated.

“I saw an Afghani guy cut his own throat in my compound – he was working with me in the kitchen that day, and after work, he went outside and he cut himself up everywhere. It was really hard. Even the officers started crying when this happened”. [17–year–old asylum-seeker]

Children's experiences following their removal contributed to the effects of the removal upon them at the time and in later life. In this chapter we briefly survey the evidence to the Inquiry concerning those experiences which have had the most significant impacts on well-being and development.

While feedback in relation to the legal system was actively sought throughout all of the consultations, a number of targeted consultation sessions with individuals and organisations specifically involved or engaged in the legal system were also undertaken. These included:

This submission draws substantially on research papers by Eileen Pittaway and Linda Bartolomei which are currently pending publication. The content of this submission may not be reproduced or quoted without the written permission of these authors.