Search results

This chapter considers the Commonwealth’s approach to the use of biomedical markers to assess age since wrist x-rays became a prescribed procedure for the purpose of age determination following the enactment of the Crimes Amendment (Age Determination) Bill 2001 (Cth). It also considers what each relevant Commonwealth agency knew, or should have known, about the value of specific age assessment processes for the purpose of establishing whether an individual is under the age of 18 years.

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

DR OZDOWSKI: Good morning everybody. I would like to formally open this public hearing which is the last, hopefully, of the series held around Australia. My name is Sev Ozdowski and I'm the Human Rights Commissioner and to my right I've got Professor Trang Thomas, who is Professor of Psychology at the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology. Today the Commission will be assisted by counsel Michael Wigney and Mr Jonathon Hunyor of the Commission and I would like to ask for the benefit of the audience that the counsel for DIMIA and ACM would introduce themselves.

New arrangements for the administration of Indigenous affairs (introduced as of 1 July 2004) transferred responsibility for the administration of Indigenous specific programs to mainstream government departments. The new arrangements aim to remove, or at least reduce, the barriers that prevent Indigenous peoples from accessing existing mainstream services on an equitable basis. This objective has been called ‘harnessing the mainstream’.

This submission makes brief comment on the education of children in detention. It provides a more complete picture of the education services offered to these children by the Department of Education, Training and Employment in South Australia (hereafter the department) after they have been processed as refugees and released into the community. Note is also made of a group of children who have been sent to Adelaide as detainees in a place of alternative detention and also of recent discussions on the issue of children in detention being enrolled at Woomera Area School.

This appendix provides an overview of the main events with regard to the administration of Indigenous affairs to 30 June 2006. It commences with a summary table and is followed by a detailed description of each event.

Pursuant to section 11(1)(f)(ii) of the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Act 1986 (Cth), I attach a report of my inquiry into complaints made by Ms Susan Campbell that the human rights of her daughter were breached by the Commonwealth of Australia. I have found that acts or practices of the Commonwealth were inconsistent with or contrary to the human rights of Ms Campbell’s daughter as provided for in Article 3(1) and 19 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

The Council for Civil Liberties NSW (CCL) considers mandatory detention of asylum seekers to be a breach of Australia's international obligations. The CCL is of the view that mandatory detention of children is morally indefensible particularly given Australia's ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CROC)