Search results

The High Court's decisions in Yarmirr [1], Miriuwung Gajerrong [2], Wilson v Anderson [3] and Yorta Yorta [4] clarify the law with respect to the recognition and extinguishment of native title. The consequences of the law of native title for Indigenous people are now starkly apparent. It is thus timely that the 2002 Native Title Report evaluates these principles against the human rights standards to which Australia is committed under international law. Such an evaluation reveals fundamental shortcomings within the native title system.

There is no task more important than building a world in which all of our children can grow up to realise their full potential in health, peace and dignity. [1]

It has been worth it because the wider community is more aware of the issues and our history, but the opening of the old scars has been difficult. It's vital that the truth comes out, though.

On 27 July 2000, the Commonwealth government and the Northern Territory Government signed an agreement for the establishment of a juvenile pre-court diversion scheme in the Northern Territory (NT). This agreement arose specifically as a response to the continued criticism of the NT’s mandatory minimum imprisonment laws and their impact on juveniles and Indigenous people. By establishing the pre-court juvenile diversionary scheme, the NT has belatedly joined most other states and territories in Australia in providing such options for dealing with juvenile offenders.

All Australians are equally entitled to enjoy the rights, benefits and responsibilities of citizenship. In our society, every person should feel free from discrimination of any kind and have the right to share in the nation's land, resources and wealth. The entitlements and freedoms of all people are recognised in human rights instruments, many of which have been freely signed and ratified by Australia, and in some instances are now a part of Australian law.

Sexual harassment in the workplace is a persistent and pervasive problem in Australia and elsewhere, demanding new and creative responses.[1] One significant area that may inform prevention and response strategies is the area of ‘bystander approaches’. In examining the potential for bystander approaches to prevent and respond to workplace sexual harassment, this paper draws upon a range of theoretical and empirical research.

This background paper is a compilation of work conducted by the Office of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner, within the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission1 (HREOC), which examines engagement between Indigenous peoples and governments in the areas of social policy development and native title.

from Behaviours Associated with Victimisation in The Impact of Current and Traumatic Stressors on the Psychological Well-Being of Refugee Communities. [1]

The meeting was facilitated by Omeima Sukkarieh and Susanna Iuliano from HREOC and attended by 13 invited participants from the Canberra Islamic Centre.

Sexual harassment is unwelcome sexual conduct which makes a person feel offended, humiliated and/or intimidated where that reaction is reasonable in the circumstances.

Native title is an intersection of two different legal systems and cultures. The way in which Australia chooses to give recognition to the relationship that Indigenous people have with their land, and the range of options it considers to express that relationship, are matters that affect the human rights of Indigenous people.