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.

This document contains a record of the key points of discussion at the above forum and is prepared by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission. It does not constitute minutes of the forum, and the fact that a position is stated does not mean that every party in attendance has committed to that position. However, it does indicate the key points of discussion during the day, and provides a platform for taking work forward on the issues raised.

According to National Ethnic Disability Alliance (NEDA) as of 5 February 2002 there were 16 children with disabilities such as vision impairment, acute dwarfism, trauma, Perthes disease, cardiac, asthmatic and genetic disabilities residing in detention centres (Port Hedland and Woomera). This number does not include any of the detained refugees on the Pacific Islands like Nairu, Christmas Islands and other Australian detention centres in third countries.

The reach of the internet and the freedom it gives those wanting to share information and publish opinions presents a wide range of regulatory challenges. One such challenge is preventing online acts of racial hatred, or ‘cyber-racism’.[1]