Search results

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…

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:

Key findings of Review Given their age, most undergraduates enter ADFA without much ‘real world’ experience, with many having never lived away from home before. 1 The differing levels of maturity of undergraduates, combined with the pressures of living, working and studying together, can present substantial risk factors for ADFA. In particular, the Review findings indicated that: A number of…

DR OZDOWSKI: I would like to formally open this public hearing which is one of a series of hearings conducted around Australia. My name is Sev Ozdowski and I'm the Human Rights Commissioner. I have two colleagues sitting with me, Mrs Robin Sullivan who is Queensland Children's Commissioner, who is assisting with the Inquiry and Dr Trang Thomas who is Professor of Psychology at the Royal Melbourne…

The failure in Australia to perceive native title and land rights as the basis on which to address Indigenous economic and social development has been evident at legal, policy and administrative levels. Legally, the increasingly narrow interpretation of native title by the High Court has, as Noel Pearson has pointed out, stripped native title of much economic meaning or benefit.

The Indigenous Land Use Agreement (ILUA) and Argyle Management Plan Agreement (AMPA) together are arguably the most comprehensive arrangements ever made between a resource company and traditional owners negotiated in Australia. They are the result of one of the most comprehensive agreement processes undertaken with traditional owners.

Same-sex couples are not eligible for a range of rebates and tax concessions available to opposite-sex couples. This means same-sex couples may end up paying more tax than opposite-sex couples because tax legislation does not recognise their relationship.

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).

The current mandatory detention policy of the Commonwealth of Australia breaches the fundamental principle of the rights of the child which is that children should be able to develop to their full potential. The policy breaches every article of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. The policy violates the right to health as established by international law.

In order to establish what is provided for Indigenous young people with cognitive disabilities and/ or mental health problems, information was requested from all relevant government departments across Australia.[213]A letter was sent to departments requesting:

This discussion paper briefly discusses federal laws which exclude same-sex couples from accessing financial and work-related entitlements. The paper discusses the following areas of federal law: