Search results

Bringing Them Home - the Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families (the National Inquiry) - made 54 'head' recommendations, 83 recommendations in total [1], to address what was referred to as 'the continuing devastation of the lives of Indigenous Australians'. The implementation of most recommendations requires action to be taken by the Commonwealth Government and/or State or Territory Governments.

This submission will focus on the current Australian immigration detention regime as it applies to minors. The regime will be examined based on data and information made available by the Department of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs (“DIMIA”) and supporting documentation ranging from government publications, the Flood Inquiry and testimonies given to the Australian Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission “HREOC” under oath.

State, Territory and Commonwealth native title policies (1) direct the way in which governments conduct negotiations with native title claimant groups and the scope and content of the agreements they make as a result of these negotiations. Such policies may influence whether negotiations will be confined to native title rights and interests as they are legally defined, or whether they address the broader economic and social development needs of the claimant group.

The Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) requires Australia to protect children's rights to cultural identity, language and religion. The most effective way of ensuring enjoyment of these rights is to encourage and allow refugee and asylum-seeking children to participate in cultural and religious activities in the community. The Australian community is well equipped to respond to this need as a wide range of cultural and religious opportunities are readily accessible and this remains a key factor in the maintenance of our multicultural society.

During the 2004 reporting period I have embarked on a series of consultations focusing on the ideas and principles that were contained in a Discussion Paper, released by my predecessor as Social Justice Commissioner in June 2003. The Discussion Paper was entitled Promoting Economic and Social Development through Native Title (at Annexure 1). This chapter seeks to record and develop the ideas and discussions that were generated in the consultation process. 1

In its final recommendations, the Council for Aboriginal Reconciliation proposed that there be a legislative requirement for the Social Justice Commissioner to monitor progress towards reconciliation on an annual basis. In the Social Justice Report 2000 it was noted that while legislative amendment to this end was desirable, this task could be undertaken under my existing functions. Accordingly, I undertook to provide an annual evaluation of progress towards reconciliation as part of the social justice report.

In September 2002, the South Australian Coroner brought down his findings in the inquests into the deaths of Kunmanara[1] Ken (who died on 3 August 1999), Kunmanara Hunt (who died on 27 January 2001) and Kunmanara Thompson (who died on 26 June 2001). Each of these young Anangu was a chronic petrol sniffer (they had been sniffing for at least ten years) in their mid to late twenties living on the Anangu Pitjantjatjara Lands (AP Lands). All three were found to have died as a result of inhalation of petrol fumes.[2]

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:

The twin pillars of the government's approach to Indigenous policy in 2003 continued to be practical reconciliation, with its emphasis on service delivery in core areas of disadvantage, and mutual obligation, with its emphasis on reciprocity and individual responsibility. Through both of these policies, the government has identified moving Indigenous people beyond welfare dependency and enabling Indigenous participation in program delivery and design as key features of its approach.

Part D of the paper focuses on how a paid maternity leave scheme would actually operate were it to be introduced in Australia. The emphasis, as in the rest of the paper, is on the feedback that HREOC has received through submissions and consultations. Each Chapter canvases the views that were expressed in relation to each component of a national paid maternity leave scheme.

COMMISSIONER OZDOWSKI: Welcome to every one, I think we will start rolling and I would like to formally open this public hearing which is one of series of hearings conducted around Australia. My name is Sev Ozdowski and I am the Human Rights Commissioner and with me are my two Assistant Commissioners. To my right is Dr Trang Thomas, Professor of Psychology at the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology. And to my left is Dr Robin Sullivan who is Queensland's Children's Commissioner. At the end of the table on the left is Vanessa Lesnie who is the counsel assisting the Inquiry.

Pursuant to section 11(1)(f)(ii) of the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Act 1986 (Cth), I attach a report of an inquiry by the former President of the Commission into complaints made by immigration detainees against the Commonwealth of Australia. The former President found that the Commonwealth had breached the human rights of the complainants pursuant to articles 10(1) and 17(1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.