Search results

Letter to Mr Philip Ruddock MP 31/01/2002 Letter to Mr Philip Ruddock MP 22/02/2002 Letter to Mr Philip Ruddock MP 21/03/2002 Letter to Mr Philip Ruddock MP 03/04/2002 Letter to Mr Philip Ruddock MP 29/04/2002 Letter to Mr Philip Ruddock MP 06/05/2002 Letter to Mr Philip Ruddock MP 09/06/2002

This report to the Attorney-General concerns inquiries made by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission ('the Commission') into complaints by Quan Ri Qing and Su Yu Fei against the Commonwealth of Australia, Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs ('the Department') concerning violations of human rights under the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Act 1986 (Cth) (…

This chapter explains how the provisions of international human rights treaties protect same-sex couples and their children, in the context of accessing financial and work-related entitlements. In particular, this chapter focuses on the right to non-discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation. It also describes how the breach of that right can interfere with a range of other basic human…

Between 1 September 2008 and 22 November 2011, 180 young Indonesians who said that they were children arrived in Australia, having worked as crew on boats bringing asylum seekers to Australia. These young people were often fishermen from impoverished communities in the south and east of Indonesia. Many of them have spent long periods of time in immigration detention without being charged, or…

In my previous two Native Title Reports, I have strongly argued the need to reform the native title system. Stakeholders from all sectors engaged in the native title system have also stressed the need for the Government to take significant steps to ensure that the system meets the original objectives set out in the preamble to the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) (Native Title Act).

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.

The Inquiry received submissions from 680 different individuals and organisations. Some provided submissions in response to both the first and second round discussion papers.

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…

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.

As discussed in Chapter 1, Australia’s international human rights obligations require that individuals who say that they are children be given the benefit of the doubt and treated as minors unless there is proof to the contrary. In the case of unaccompanied children, this should lead to consideration by the State of what steps need to be taken to ensure their special protection and care.

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:

Pursuant to section 11(1)(f)(ii) of the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Act 1986 (Cth), I attach a report of my inquiry into complaints made by Ms Susan Campbell that the human rights of her daughter were breached by the Commonwealth of Australia. I have found that acts or practices of the Commonwealth were inconsistent with or contrary to the human rights of Ms Campbell’s…

The Australian Human Rights Commission visited the immigration detention facilities at Villawood from 21 to 25 February 2011. This statement contains a summary of the key observations and concerns arising from the Commission’s visit. It focuses on conditions as they were at that time.

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.