Search results

I would like to acknowledge the Gadigal people of the Eora nation, the traditional owners of the land on which we meet today, and pay respect to their elders.

I would like to acknowledge the Gadigal people of the Eora people, the traditional owners of the land on which we meet today, and pay my respects to their elders.

I would like to acknowledge the Gadigal people of the Eora people, the traditional owners of the land on which we meet today, and pay my respects to their elders.

The topic for discussion is the role of human rights in good governance. Along the way I will touch on HREOC’s perceptions of cultural change at DIMA, legal roadblocks to cultural change, and the importance of human rights principles in the law and policy making process.

HREOC is a statutory body independent of government. While our main function is to promote an understanding and acceptance of human rights in Australia, we are also charged with the responsibilities of investigating, and attempting to conciliate complaints of unlawful discrimination under the federal Racial Discrimination Act 1975, the Sex Discrimination Act 1984, the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 and the Age Discrimination Act 2004.1 HREOC also has specific responsibilities to report annually to Parliament on the enjoyment of human rights of Indigenous Australians.

I would like to acknowledge the Larrakia people on whose traditional land we meet today. I would also like to thank the Northern Territory Anti-Discrimination Commission for hosting this event at such short notice. What I plan to do today is to talk briefly about a few of the issues which are currently on HREOC’s agenda. The first issue is HREOC’s Same-Sex Same Entitlements Inquiry.

In the age of globalisation there has been a massive increase in international migration and, as the number of international migrants has grown, so too has the problem of irregular migration. Many states have tried to stem irregular migration by introducing new border control measures and tougher criminal sanctions for people smugglers.[1] However, while effective border control is a legitimate objective of all sovereign states, state responses to the issue of irregular migration have often failed to protect the human rights of irregular migrants.[2]

It is almost 40 years since the last man was hanged in Australia. Today, the death penalty has been abolished in every Australian jurisdiction. Opposition to the death penalty attracts bi-partisan political support. Yet in a region where many of our closest neighbours still maintain the death penalty, I believe Australia can - and should - take a stronger stand against state sanctioned execution.

As many of you know, for over a decade Dr Kidd has been a tenacious and dedicated advocate for the rights of Indigenous people. She has focused especially on the gross inequities that occurred through and under the various 'Protection Acts' that operated in Queensland from the 1890s to the 1980s.

I'll start with what's stayed the same. The fundamental restructuring of Australia's workplace relations system has left the functions of HREOC untouched. In particular there is no change in its responsibilities to investigate and conciliate complaints of unlawful discrimination.

I would like to acknowledge that we are meeting on the traditional country of the Gadigal people of the Eora nation and pay my respects to their elders past and present.

Firstly, I must applaud Amnesty International Australia’s campaign to secure a fair trial for David Hicks. I hope you take some heart from the recent US Supreme Court ruling that the military commissions set up to try prisoners at Guantanamo Bay are illegal and must be abandoned.

When I first entered the law 'benchbooks' were closely guarded, leather bound books into which judges carefully entered notes as a case progressed - usually I thought adverse comments and exclamation marks about one's arguments or less than flattering remarks about one's principal witness. These books seemed to be some kind of secret code to the outcome of cases and never saw the light of day.

International Human Rights Day falls on 10th December each year. It marks the occasion on 10th December 1948 when the United Nations adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The first is that HREOC has been suggesting for a considerable time that there needs to be renewed public debate on whether Australia should have a charter of human rights of some sort. It seems that the launch of the New Matilda campaign will give momentum to such a debate. A lot has changed, both nationally and internationally since the unsuccessful attempts of the 1970s and the 1980s to interest Australians in a bill of rights. As is so often said, Australia has now become the only major Western democracy that does not have a bill of rights.

When I was invited to give this address, my first thought was to talk about unlawful discrimination in the context of higher education and, in particular, disability discrimination.

I am honoured to have been invited today to open this conference. I have a surname and ancestors with German origins, and I am the Chancellor of this august institution. I guess this explains the invitation, but I have to confess that I feel a bit of an outsider here amongst a distinguished audience steeped in knowledge about the topic of the Conference.

I would like to acknowledge the Kaurna People, the traditional owners of the land on which we stand and pay my respects to their elders, both past and present.

Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world

In the second century AD, Marcus Aurelius, a Roman emperor and Stoic philosopher, thanked one of his brothers for teaching him to value "the conception of the state with one law for all, based upon individual equality and freedom of speech, and of a sovereignty which prizes above all things the liberty of the subject."1