Search results

Learn about the Wiyi Yani U Thangani project, which works to improve health, housing and education outcomes for Indigenous women and girls in Australia.

The two recent High Court decisions in Miriuwung Gajerrong [1] and Wilson v Anderson [2] have clarified some important issues regarding the extinguishment of native title under the Native Title Act 1993 (Cwlth) (‘NTA’) and its relationship with extinguishment under the common law. They also provide some important insights into the meaning of discrimination as it responds to the specific issues raised by the recognition of native title, a proprietary interest which is inherent to a particular racial group.

Initial inquiries about access to Commission documents should be directed to the Freedom of Information Officer by either telephoning (02) 9284 9600 or by writing to:

It is important to note that most tenures and interests continue to affect native title even after they have ceased. So, for instance, an area of land may currently be unallocated crown land, but all previous tenures/interests in that land will have permanently affected, and possibly extinguished, native title rights (unless the land comes within the few exceptions under the Native Title Act 1993 (Cwlth) (‘NTA’) – sections 47, 47A & 47B). The following table summarises tenures examined in Miriuwung Gajerrong [1] and Wilson v Anderson. [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 circumstances of Indigenous peoples were virtually invisible at the United Nations approximately thirty years ago. Very little attention had been devoted to their situation and their claims were by and large unheard in international fora. Since the early 1970s, however, Indigenous peoples have made significant inroads towards the recognition of their rights and acceptance of their legitimate place within the international community. The results, while incomplete, have been nothing short of extraordinary.

HRC Report No. 10 – Report of an inquiry into a complaint of acts or practices inconsistent with or contrary to human rights in an Immigration Detention Centre (2000)

During 2000 - 01 the Commission used a range of consultancy services where there was, for example, a need for rapid access to latest technology and experience in its application; limitations on executive time; lack of in-house resources; the need for independent study; or a need for a change agent or facilitator. There were 8 consultants under engagement during the financial year and total payments of $439,780.00 were made to consultants.

Dr Ozdowski has made public education on human rights a priority for his term. Other priority areas are the elderly in our ageing society and children. Dr Ozdowski is working to progress the Commission’s 2000 recommendations for alleviating age discrimination, as set out in the report Age matters: a report on age discrimination.

The Complaint Handling Section had a productive year investigating and conciliating complaints of alleged discrimination and human rights breaches; providing information to the public about federal anti-discrimination and human rights law through its Complaint Information Service and community education and liaison program; and providing complaint investigation and resolution skills training to state equal opportunity, anti-discrimination authorities, other Australian Public Service agencies and private companies.

The term of the Sex Discrimination Commissioner, Susan Halliday, expired on 26 April 2001 and the federal Attorney - General, the Hon. Daryl Williams, AM, QC, MP announced the appointment of Ms Pru Goward as Sex Discrimination Commissioner for a five-year term on 29 June 2001. Ms Goward commenced her appointment on 30 July 2001. In the interim, the President acted as Sex Discrimination Commissioner.

This appendix provides an overview of the main events leading up to the introduction of the new arrangements for the administration of Indigenous affairs on 1 July 2004, as well as the key events which have occurred since that time to implement the new arrangements.

In the High Court’s formulation of native title in Mabo (No 2), [1] delivered on 3 June 1992, it was made clear that in the past, governments could validly grant interests in land that would extinguish native title. These grants could be made without payment of compensation to native title holders. [2] At least that was as far as the common law was concerned. The Court did not need to consider the effect of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cwlth) (‘RDA’) on laws and grants after the RDA came into force on 31 October 1975.

As a result of the enactment of the Human Rights Legislation Amendment Act (No. 1) 1999 (Cth) the jurisdiction of the Commission to conduct public inquiries into complaints was transferred on 13 April 2000 to the Federal Court and Federal Magistrates Service. However, the Commission retained the jurisdiction to complete those public inquiries it had commenced prior to 13 April 2000. During 2000–01, 32 of these matters were finalised. Of those:

The Commission’s vision is of and for an Australian society in which the human rights of all people are respected and promoted. Our task is to find practical, pragmatic ways to turn the rhetoric of human rights into an everyday reality for all Australians and build a more tolerant and inclusive community. As this report indicates, this past year has been a period of substantial achievement as we strive towards this goal.