Search results

Pursuant to section 11(1)(d) of the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Act 1986 (Cth) ('HREOC Act'), I attach a report of my inquiry into a complaint made by Dr Julie Copeman. I have found that Dr Copeman's employment as a general medical practitioner was terminated by Derbarl Yerrigan Health Service (her employer) in circumstances that amounted to discrimination, and that such termination constitutes discrimination in employment for the purposes of s 31(b) of the HREOC Act.

Workers’ compensation schemes are intended to provide compensation to an employee who is incapacitated because of a work-related accident or to an employee’s dependants if the employee dies because of a work-related accident.

Every morning our people would crush charcoal and mix that with animal fat and smother that all over us, so that when the police came they could only see black children in the distance. We were told always to be on the alert and, if white people came, to run into the bush or run and stand behind the trees as stiff as a poker, or else hide behind logs or run into culverts and hide. Often the white people - we didn't know who they were - would come into our camps. And if the Aboriginal group was taken unawares, they would stuff us into flour bags and pretend we weren't there.

Human rights principles require that Indigenous people's relationships to land, based on traditional laws and customs, be given legal recognition and protection. International legal principles also recognise that Indigenous peoples have economic, social and cultural human rights. Native title, as it is constructed through the Australian legal system, has a limited capacity to meet these human rights standards.

As my predecessor pointed out in the Native Title Report 2003, native title is a political process as well as a legal process. Indigenous people enter a relationship with the State on the basis of their identity as the traditional owner group of an area of land. In some cases native title has provided the first opportunity since colonisation for a relationship of this type to be formed.

The forcible removal of Indigenous children from their families occurred during two periods in Tasmania. The first commenced with the European occupation of Van Dieman's Land (as Tasmania was called until 1856) in 1803 and lasted until the middle of the nineteenth century. The second commenced in the 1930s with the forcible removal of Indigenous children from Cape Barren Island under general child welfare legislation and continues into the present.

1.1 Background to this report 1.2 Compliance with human rights obligations 1.3 Conduct of visits 1.4 Overview of immigration detention facilities 1.5 Response by Department of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs

Department of Justice and Youth Studies at the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology The Department of Justice and Youth Studies (JYS) is part of the Faculty of Education, Language and Community Services (FELCS) at RMIT University. JYS offers undergraduate courses in Criminal Justice Administration and Youth Affairs, as well as Masters by Research and PhD programs.

The general opinion of station people is that it is a mistake to take these children out of the bush. They say that the aboriginal mothers are fond of their children and in their own way look after them and provide for them and that when they grow up they are more easily absorbed and employed than those who have been taken out of their natural environment and removed to towns.

Explore a report prepared for the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission in relation to Indigenous deaths in custody and police practices.