Search results

This submission will focus on the current Australian immigration detention regime as it applies to minors. The regime will be examined based on data and information made available by the Department of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs (“DIMIA”) and supporting documentation ranging from government publications, the Flood Inquiry and testimonies given to the Australian Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission “HREOC” under oath.

This timeline focuses on one particular aspect of the history of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples - the forcible removal of Indigenous children from their families. This material identifies some significant laws and practices that made removal lawful and includes writing and artwork from members of the Stolen Generations and their families which illustrate their experiences of these policies. This section uses as its primary resource Bringing them home, the report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families.

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 purpose of this chapter is to explain the relevance of international human rights law to children in Australia's immigration detention centres and to provide a quick reference point on the fundamental human rights principles that have influenced the approach of this Inquiry. This chapter also explains the role of United Nations (UN) guidelines in the Inquiry's analysis of Australia's human rights treaty obligations.

1. The commission's jurisdiction 2. The complaint 3. The complainant's evidence and submissions 4. Respondent's response 5. Documentary material before the commission 6. Conciliation 7. Preliminary findings of Commissioner Sidoti 8. Response to Commissioner Sidoti's preliminary findings 9. My Further Preliminary Findings 10. Respondent's response to my Further Preliminary Findings 11. Section 21 Notice 12. Findings of fact 13. Findings on liability 14. Article 10 15. Article 9(1) 16. Recommendations

Explore a report prepared for the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission in relation to Indigenous deaths in custody and police practices.

The reasoning of the High Court in Wilson v Anderson [1] and Miriuwung Gajerrong [2] provides a comprehensive analysis of the operation of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cwlth) (‘NTA’). It is detailed and legally complex. In discussing NSW crown land legislation, Justice Kirby made the following observation about the NTA and the native title system:

In this Chapter I review key developments within the native title system that occurred throughout the Reporting Period (1 July 2010 to 30 June 2011) and consider the impact of these events on the exercise and enjoyment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples’ human rights.

Part 1: What are the new arrangements for the administration of Indigenous affairs?

Lateral violence is a multilayered, complex problem and because of this our strategies also need to be pitched at different levels. In Chapter 3 I have looked at the big picture, with the human rights framework as our overarching response to lateral violence. In this Chapter I will be taking our strategies to an even more practical level, looking at how we can create environments of cultural safety and security to address lateral violence.

For further information contact: Damian Griffis Senior Policy Officer - Systemic Advocacy People with Disabilities (NSW) Inc PO Box 666 STRAWBERRY HILLS NSW 2012 Telephone: (02) 9319 6622 Facsimile: (02) 9318 1372 Email: damiang@pwd.org.au

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.

The deceased had been arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol and for driving while disqualified. He was placed in what the Coroner described as an enclosed cell, in which occupant vision is impossible, at around 3.00am and told he would remain there for a period of four hours.

Improving the health status of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples is a longstanding challenge for governments in Australia. While there have been improvements made in some areas since the 1970s (notably in reducing high rates of infant mortality1) overall progress has been slow and inconsistent. The inequality gap between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and other Australians remains wide and has not been progressively reduced.

Improving the health status of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples is a longstanding challenge for governments in Australia. While there have been improvements made in some areas since the 1970s (notably in reducing high rates of infant mortality1) overall progress has been slow and inconsistent. The inequality gap between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and other Australians remains wide and has not been progressively reduced.