Search results

This report contains a summary of observations by the Australian Human Rights Commissioner, Graeme Innes AM, and staff of the Australian Human Rights Commission (the Commission) following visits to Australia’s immigration detention facilities, and to people in community detention, between June and September 2008. The contents of the report are based on direct observations made during the visits, and on discussions with staff and immigration detainees.

The Australian Government has signalled that economic development is a central focus for the Indigenous Affairs portfolio this term. The Ministerial Taskforce on Indigenous Affairs, created in May 2004 to drive and coordinate the federal Government’s Indigenous policies,1 identified as one of three key areas2 for priority action:

The ownership, particularly communal ownership of land by Indigenous people began in 1976 with the introduction of land rights legislation in the Northern Territory (the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976 (Cth) (ALRA (NT)).

In the Social Justice Report 1999, my first report as Social Justice Commissioner, I identified four key themes and challenges that existed in the approach of the federal government to Indigenous policy making at the time. These were moving beyond welfare dependency, accountability, participation and reconciliation.[1] Since the release of that report approximately four years ago, the key themes and challenges facing the government have remained relatively constant.

The twin pillars of the government's approach to Indigenous policy in 2003 continued to be practical reconciliation, with its emphasis on service delivery in core areas of disadvantage, and mutual obligation, with its emphasis on reciprocity and individual responsibility. Through both of these policies, the government has identified moving Indigenous people beyond welfare dependency and enabling Indigenous participation in program delivery and design as key features of its approach.

In September 2002, the South Australian Coroner brought down his findings in the inquests into the deaths of Kunmanara[1] Ken (who died on 3 August 1999), Kunmanara Hunt (who died on 27 January 2001) and Kunmanara Thompson (who died on 26 June 2001). Each of these young Anangu was a chronic petrol sniffer (they had been sniffing for at least ten years) in their mid to late twenties living on the Anangu Pitjantjatjara Lands (AP Lands). All three were found to have died as a result of inhalation of petrol fumes.[2]

a) Do Indigenous peoples have a right to self-determination? b) What is Indigenous self-determination? c) Summary - Defining Indigenous self-determination

Introduction Pre and post-release programs for Indigenous women exiting prison An overview of Indigenous women in corrections Intersectional discrimination - Addressing the distinct experiences of Indigenous women Post-release programs for Indigenous women exiting prison - common themes from consultations Policy and programs relating to Indigenous women exiting prison Post-release housing programs for Indigenous women exiting prison Healing programs for Indigenous women exiting prison Conclusion Endnotes Introduction

It has now been over two years since the federal government introduced new arrangements for the administration of Indigenous affairs. One of the catchcries of the new arrangements is that they are aimed at ‘harnessing the mainstream.’ This is to be achieved by removing or reducing the barriers that prevent Indigenous peoples from accessing existing mainstream services on an equitable basis.

We are deeply dissatisfied with the performance to date by various government agencies... there does not appear to be any process beyond monitoring to ensure that effective implementation takes place...

a) Rates of incarceration of Indigenous women b) Recidivism rates among Indigenous women c) Types of crime committed by Indigenous women d) Over-policing e) Sentencing patterns for Indigenous women f) Characteristics of Indigenous women who are imprisoned

On 21 June 2007, the Australian Government announced a ‘national emergency response to protect Aboriginal children in the Northern Territory’ from sexual abuse and family violence.[1] This has become known as the ‘NT intervention’ or the ‘Emergency Response’. The catalyst for the measures was the release of Report of the Northern Territory Board of Inquiry into the Protection of Aboriginal Children from Sexual Abuse, titled Ampe Akelyernemane Meke Mekarle: ‘Little Children are Sacred’.