Search results

The Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) requires Australia to protect children's rights to cultural identity, language and religion. The most effective way of ensuring enjoyment of these rights is to encourage and allow refugee and asylum-seeking children to participate in cultural and religious activities in the community. The Australian community is well equipped to respond to this need as a wide range of cultural and religious opportunities are readily accessible and this remains a key factor in the maintenance of our multicultural society.

This will be how we assess the success or otherwise of the reconciliation process in years to come. The reconciliation process has the potential to be as significant, and difficult, as the process that led to the joining together of the states into one indissoluble federation in 1901. It challenges us to adapt the structures of society in ways that ensure that first nation peoples can participate fully, be welcomed and have our cultures respected. Integral to this process is an acknowledgement of the wrongs of the past and an acceptance of the need for a restructured relationship.

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.

Introduction Part A: Structure of this report Part B: Summary of findings and recommendations Part C: The complaints by Mr El Masri Part D: The Commission’s human rights inquiry and complaints function Part E: Mr El Masri’s detention from 14 November 2002 to 14 October 2005 Part F: The detention of Mr El Masri on 28 November 2006 Part G: The detention of Mr El Masri in MSU Part H: Use of force on 8 August 2005 Part I: Restrictions on Mr El Masri’s telephone calls Part J: Visits by Mr El Masri’s family Part K: Findings and recommendations Appendix 1 Appendix 2 Functions

I have spent a lot of time this past year convincing people from all walks of life that the challenges facing Indigenous peoples in this country are not insurmountable.

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

Family violence and abuse is causing untold damage to the cultures and fabric of Indigenous societies. It is damaging our communities, our families, our women, our children and our men. All Indigenous people are entitled to live their lives in safety and full human dignity - without fear of intimidation, family violence or abuse. This is their cultural and their human right. Like all Australians, Indigenous peoples are also entitled to the full and equal protection of the law.

The 'right to negotiate' is a fundamental right assured by the Commonwealth Native Title Act (the 'NTA') and reflected in international human rights standards. Yet in practice the capacity of native title parties to exercise their 'right to negotiate' is determined by factors other than the mere existence of the right. Given the primary role of state and territory governments in land administration, their policies regarding the administration of the right to negotiate have a significant impact on native title parties' capacity to exercise their 'right to negotiate'.

According to the United Nations Convention and Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees (also called the Refugee Convention), a refugee is someone who is outside their own country and cannot return due to a well-founded fear of persecution because of their:

Since 2001, the primary method of assessing whether an individual is under the age of 18 years in the context of criminal proceedings in Australia has been through the analysis of an x-ray of the young person’s wrist. As this Inquiry is considering the treatment of young Indonesian males suspected of people smuggling who say that they are children, it is important to consider the appropriateness of this and other age assessment processes in this context.

This chapter considers some of the Commonwealth’s practices regarding the use of wrist x-ray analysis as a means of assessing chronological age for the purposes of criminal prosecution. It highlights situations where the reliance on wrist x-rays as evidence of age was contrary to stated Australian Government policy; or where it contributed to individuals who were in fact children, or who are likely to have been children, spending long periods of time in detention, including in adult correctional facilities.

DR OZDOWSKI: Good morning everybody. I would like to formally open this public hearing which is the last, hopefully, of the series held around Australia. My name is Sev Ozdowski and I'm the Human Rights Commissioner and to my right I've got Professor Trang Thomas, who is Professor of Psychology at the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology. Today the Commission will be assisted by counsel Michael Wigney and Mr Jonathon Hunyor of the Commission and I would like to ask for the benefit of the audience that the counsel for DIMIA and ACM would introduce themselves.

This report contains a summary of observations made by the Australian Human Rights Commission (the Commission) during its 2010 visit to the immigration detention facilities on Christmas Island.