Search results

The failure in Australia to perceive native title and land rights as the basis on which to address Indigenous economic and social development has been evident at legal, policy and administrative levels. Legally, the increasingly narrow interpretation of native title by the High Court has, as Noel Pearson has pointed out, stripped native title of much economic meaning or benefit.

1. The provisions made by Australia to implement its international human rights obligations regarding child asylum seekers, including unaccompanied minors

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]

The resolution of the debate as to whether the extinguishment of native title by the common law and the Native Title Act 1993 (Cwlth) (‘NTA’) is racially discriminatory, depends upon the interpretation given to its two essential components: extinguishment and discrimination. The interpretation that the High Court has given to the extinguishment provisions of the NTA and its relationship with the common law was the subject of the chapter 2. It is to the second of these components, the meaning of discrimination as it applies to the extinguishment of native title, that I now turn.

The Commission is a national independent statutory body established under the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Act 1986. It has a President and five Commissioners. The five positions are currently held by three persons. Please refer to the organisational chart for further information.

In accordance with the general principle stated at Guideline 2 and the UNHCR [1] Guidelines on Refugee Children, minors who are asylum seekers should not be detained…

a) Ngaanyatjarra Regional Partnership Agreement. b) Murdi Paaki Regional Assembly c) Post-ATSIC regional representation for Torres Strait Islanders on the mainland

Australia is a wealthy nation. In 2003, Australia ranked fourth in the United Nations Human Development Index (1) indicating Australians enjoyed one of the highest qualities of life in the world. Overall, Australia ranks equal fourth with the highest life expectancy at birth (79.0 years) suggesting Australians are among the healthiest people in the world. (2)

This report identifies the necessity to adopt a human rights approach to reconciliation, as well as shortcomings in Australia's performance on human rights issues as they relate to Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders. This chapter emphasises processes and mechanisms that enable reconciliation to be implemented within a human rights framework. It identifies crucial commitments and processes that governments must engage in to progress meaningful reconciliation in the coming years.

It was established to consider whether Australia's immigration detention laws and its treatment of children in immigration detention comply with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.

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.

I want to tell you that actually I spent about fifteen nights in the ride to Australia. I was in a small boat if you want to call that a boat, because it was smaller than that, with lots of difficulties. When I saw [we were] getting near Australia I was becoming a little bit hopeful. When we passed Darwin I got to the detention centre as soon as I looked at these barbed wires my mind was full of fear. That was the time that I experienced fear ...

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 section outlines current knowledge around Indigenous young people with cognitive disabilities and/ or mental health issues. It introduces concepts and best practice models from Australia and internationally.

One of the major events of the period covered by this report was the handing down of the decision by the full Federal Court in the Croker Island case (1) on appeal from the decision of Justice Olney. (2) It is the major test case on the recognition of native title sea rights and represents the most authoritative statement of the law in Australia at the present time. It was a split decision and this chapter analyses the human rights implications of the different legal positions adopted by the majority and the minority decisions of the court.