Search results

Recognizing that the child, for the full and harmonious development of his or her personality, should grow up in a family environment, in an atmosphere of happiness, love and understanding ... Convention on the Rights of the Child, Preamble

Just send my children to school, and let them be in freedom. They should live in a human good atmosphere, they should learn something good, and not the things they are learning here.(1)

a) A minimalist response to symbolic issues b) The perceived divisiveness of self-determination c) An emphasis on perceived areas of agreement d) Misrepresenting progress towards practical reconciliation

On 3 April 2009, the Minister for Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (Minister for Indigenous Affairs) delivered a formal statement in support of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (Declaration).[1] In this statement, the Minister acknowledged that ‘[w]e need to find more ways of hearing Indigenous voices’.[2]

The reporting period for this Report is 1 July 2008 to 30 June 2009. Throughout this period, there was significantly more activity in native title law and policy than I witnessed in the first five years of my term as the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner.

This report contains a summary of observations by the Australian Human Rights Commission (the Commission) following its July 2009 visit to Australia’s immigration detention facilities on Christmas Island. It follows the Commission’s 2006, 2007 and 2008 annual reports on inspections of immigration detention facilities.[1]

This is a paper prepared by Amnesty International for the HREOC Inquiry into children in immigration detention centres. In particular, this paper sets out Amnesty International's concerns with the detention of children, having regard to the international human rights treaties to which Australia has committed itself.

Last year’s Social Justice Report noted that to date there has been insufficient attention by governments to processes which ensure greater Indigenous participation and control over service design and delivery as part of an overall strategy to redress Indigenous disadvantage and economic marginalisation. I observed that:

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.

On 13 April 2000, the Senate requested the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission to inquire into all aspects of the agreement between the Northern Territory Government and the Commonwealth regarding the Territory’s mandatory sentencing regime; the consistency of mandatory sentencing regimes with Australia’s international human rights obligations; and Western Australia’s mandatory sentencing regime.[1]

The recognition and protection of native title and the participation of Indigenous people in decisions affecting their land are critical priorities within a human rights framework.

I attach a report of my inquiry into complaints by Mr Huong Hai Nguyen and Mr Austin Okoye against the Commonwealth of Australia and GSL (Australia) Pty Ltd, pursuant to section 11(1)(f)(ii) of the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Act 1986 (Cth).

During the reporting period, Australian governments continued to develop tenure reform policies for Indigenous land. Governments frequently describe these policies as a means of promoting home ownership and economic development on Indigenous land. The reality is not so simple.

back to contents Chapter 5: Addressing family violence in Indigenous communities There is no issue currently causing more destruction to the fabric of Indigenous communities than family violence. This has been acknowledged by all levels of government in recent years, with a number of significant inquiries and initiatives undertaken or commenced at the federal, state and territory level to address its impact. The intensive scrutiny and public awareness of this issue has not, however, led to sufficient commitments of resources and effort to date.

In recent years a mutual obligation approach has been adopted to reform public policy on welfare and employment issues. There has been much discussion about the applicability of this approach within an Indigenous policy context. It is seen by many as consistent with Indigenous cultural values such as reciprocity and an emphasis on community, as well as suggesting an antidote to the damage caused by intergenerational poverty, of which long-term welfare dependency and a crippling short-term local cash economy are often features.