The NT Intervention And Human Rights - Amnesty International
INDIGENOUS PEOPLES’ RIGHTS IN AUSTRALIA TODAY WHERE DO YOU STAND?The NT interventionand human rights
Fairfaxphotos/Bruce PettyRESOURCE PACKAGE CONTENTSThe accompanying website, www.amnesty.org.au/wheredoyoustand,includes the following PDFs and worksheets:01 Introduction for teachers02 Indigenous rights: Starting points for discussionWorksheets:2.1 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples’ rights and you2.2 Where do you stand? Discussing the issues through cartoons2.3 Investigating media coverage of Indigenous issues2.4 Indigenous rights in the media2.5 Telling the story of Indigenous rights in Australia2.6 Patterns in Indigenous and non-Indigenous relation2.7 Exploring the timeline of Indigenous and non-Indigenous historyAboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peopleare respectfully advised that this resourcecontains images of Aboriginal and TorresStrait Islander people who may be deceased.03 The intervention and human rightsWorksheets:3.1 The Amperlatwaty walk-off3.2 The intervention and human rights04 Land and Indigenous Peoples’ rightsWorksheets:4.1 Debates about land in Australian history4.2 Land and Indigenous rights05 The Northern Territory Intervention: the media debateThis section includes Worksheet 5.1 Analysing and respondingto different points of view and 16 worksheets each relating tospecific articlesCONTENTSThe Northern Territory intervention:overview4Income management: how it works12Does the intervention still breachhuman rights?14The NT intervention:case studies and voices17A better way forward2406 Cartoons07 Taking actionCover: A group of young people in one of the regions affected by the NT intervention. Mervyn Bishop/AIAmnesty International Australia ABN 64 002 806 233 Locked Bag 23, Broadway NSW 2007 1300 300 920 supporter@amnesty.org.au www.amnesty.org.au
SECTION 03: THE NT INTERVENTION AND HUMAN RIGHTSWhile large sections of Australian societycan indulge in contemporary grief aboutpast injustices inflicted on Indigenouspeoples, there is a pervasive silenceabout the policies of national, state andterritory governments.Patrick Dodson (a Yawuru man) Chairman,Lingiari Foundation1We feel, here, that the interventionoffers us absolutely nothing, except tocompound the feeling of being secondclass citizens. The only thing we havegained out of the intervention is thepolice. We had had dialogue in the pastabout having a police station here.But that is all, and also, we are stillreeling from the way the Federalgovernment wheeled out, or dealt out,the intervention, in a military fashion,when Major Chalmers sent out the army,in uniform, and they did the healthcheck, which is a duplication of ourclinic here, and we still feel that you arebreaking some human rights points, inthe way you have addressed our needs.I’ve just come back from listening to theTop End communities in the ArnhemLands, and people are dissatisfied withwhat’s at the front of our Sacred Lands,those blue signs. I have spoken to JennyMacklin’s advisor. I have asked them toremove that. There is this morning on thenews, just for your information, sly grogrunning between Geelong and Ballarat.Why hasn’t the intervention signs goneup there? If this Intervention was so good for us,why did you remove the RacialDiscrimination Act?Rosalie Kunoth-Monks, President of UrapuntjaCouncil and Barkley Shire President23
The Northern Territory intervention: overviewIn 2007, the Federal Government announced far-reaching policies affecting Aboriginal communities in theNorthern Territory. Using a report documenting child sexual abuse in these communities as justification,the Federal Government launched the Northern Territory Emergency Response, also known as the intervention.Aboriginal leader Pat Dodson, known as the ‘father of reconciliation’, reflects on the events that took place:June 21, 2007, may well be seen as a defining date in Australian history. That daychanged government/indigenous relationships profoundly.The stated aim of the intervention was to protect children, however while it included some positive initiatives,it also included a range of policies that discriminate against Aboriginal people. Describing governmentpolicies as “a regime of coercive paternalism,” Pat Dodson continues:There is no argument that the urgent immediate priority is to protect children. The welfareof our children and our families remains the key to our lives and future. But this priorityis undermined by the Government’s heavy-handed authoritarian intervention and itsideological and deceptive land reform agenda.The agenda is to dismantle the foundations of the Northern Territory Aboriginal LandRights Act. It seeks to excise residential community settlements from the Aboriginal landestate under special Commonwealth Government five-year leases, and the abolition ofan authorisation entry protocol called the permit system.The Government has not made a case in linking the removal of land from Aboriginalownership and getting rid of the permit system with protecting children from those whoabuse them. What is becoming increasingly clear is that the Howard Government hasused the emotive issue of child abuse to justify this intervention in the only Australianjurisdiction in which it can implement its radical indigenous policy agenda.3A banner at a rally in Melbourne calling for an end to theNorthern Territory intervention in June 2008. Aboriginalleaders have called for urgent and decisive action by theFederal government to improve living conditions forAustralia’s Aboriginal communities. (AAP Image/SimonMossman)4 Download the full resource and take action at www.amnesty.org.au/wheredoyoustand
SECTION 03: THE NT INTERVENTION AND HUMAN RIGHTSSOME POLICIES INTRODUCED AS PART OF THE INTERVENTION Management of people’s incomeIndigenous people in areas affected by the intervention who receive payments, such as NewstartAllowance or the Baby Bonus now have 50 per cent of their income controlled by the government.This policy has been applied to people whether they manage their income well or not and targetsall Indigenous people regardless of need. Compulsory leases of Indigenous-owned landThese leases give the government “exclusive possession” of land which is owned by Aboriginal people.The five year leases allow the Government to demolish, repair, or replace any existing building withoutthe consent of the owners. Blanket bansAlcohol, gambling and pornography are banned in prescribed communities and signs announcing thesebans are placed at the entrance to Indigenous communities. Abolishing the permit systemThe permit system gave Aboriginal people control over who entered their land. The Northern TerritoryLand Rights Act recognised Aboriginal land as private property, and the permit system ensured Aboriginalpeople had the same rights as other owners of private property to decide who can and cannot enter. Offering government services in exchange for leasesUnder the intervention, prescribed communities are offered government services, such as housing andhousing maintenance on the condition that they sign away their property rights by leasing land that theyown to the government.No other group in Australian society receives services on this basis. To make it legal to implement theintervention, the Racial Discrimination Act and Northern Territory anti-discrimination laws were suspended.Australian and international law prohibits discrimination on the grounds of race, however, the governmentsclaimed that it was necessary to override human rights in order to protect children.AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL’S VIEW ON THE INTERVENTION Many policies did not protect children or were not related to achieving this goal (including thecompulsory acquisition of land, the abolition of the permit system and offering housing and otherservices in exchange for giving up rights to land). Many policies did not relate to the goals expressed in the media to justify the intervention. Many policies offered benefits (such as health services or anti-violence programs) that could havebeen provided without breaching human rights. Many policies reflect a return to the paternalistic approach of the past and policies of ‘assimilation’.Paternalism involves a ‘father-child’ relationship between governments and Indigenous people, wheregovernments act on their view of what is ‘best’ for Indigenous people. Under policies of assimilation,the lifestyle and values of ‘mainstream’ Australia were treated as the model that everyone in Australiashould fit into.This approach was followed in an era where Indigenous people were not recognised as citizens, were notcounted in the census, had no rights to traditional land, had their wages stolen and had their familiestorn apart.Some positive initiatives offered as part of the intervention include: more doctors, nurses, police and health professionals and morehealth checks. measures to reduce alcohol-related violence improved domestic violence programs resources to refurbish housing school nutrition programs.However, it is the job of governments to address these needs andgovernments had neglected them for decades. Governments candeliver all of these services in partnership with the communities thatneed them – and without discriminatory laws.5
INDIGENOUS PEOPLES’ RIGHTS IN AUSTRALIA TODAY: WHERE DO YOU STAND?Indigenous elder Rosalie Kunoth-Monksspeaks out against the interventionThe following comments were made during a visit by a government official to the community of Arlparrain the Utopia homelands. Government representatives met with Indigenous community members across theNorthern Territory. Transcripts of the discussions are available online in the document Will They Be Heard?4If this intervention was so good for us, why did you remove the Racial Discrimination Act?We are human beings, and we also have our own culture, which we’re not about to rollover and hand over Now I want you to answer and tell these men, and these womenand myself, why we are being punished by the Federal Government and by the NorthernTerritory Government You gonna babysit us, you going to hand feed us? We’re capable people. We are capableof looking at future directions for ourselves You heard it loud and clear Futuredirections of the Australian Aboriginal persons will come at our pace. We’ll own thatjourney. We’ll not be dictated to from edicts coming down like bullets from Canberra.Our authority has been usurped.We, on this place here, have always controlled alcohol coming into this place. If thereare any of our young people come back here, we, we discipline them. We say, ‘You donot drink, where there’s children, women, and older people like, like myself.’We have a good community here. But there has not been any investment, financiallyor otherwise, into our lives here.The only beautiful thing that has happened to us lately is that we now have the secondaryschool . And once again the government undermined the interests of our young peopleand they have understaffed that school. There are people wanting to go in there and wehave not got enough teachers.Once again the government has assumed, assumed, that assumption has to stop, and areal dialog has to begin, and it has to begin very soon.So [to government official] there’s a lot of things that we want to hear from you, and wewill tell you whether it’s good or whether it’s bad for this community. We have survivedthis long and we will continue to survive, under our Law, not under the whiteman’s law.We will obey the whiteman’s law because it runs parallel to how we feel anyway. But ourrituals and so forth, that’s our business, nobody else’s. Not any whiteman has a right totell us how we live or how we speak.White Australia has not bothered to meet us halfway. We’ve met you more than halfway.5Rosalie Kunoth-Monks, President of Urapuntja Council, Barkly Shire President andresident of Arlparra in the Utopia homelands.Protests in Sydney about theintervention policies adopted inthe Northern Territory. From an earlystage of the intervention, there wereproposals to extend this approachto other areas of Australia. AAP Image/Dean Lewins6 Download the full resource and take action at www.amnesty.org.au/wheredoyoustand
SECTION 03: THE NT INTERVENTION AND HUMAN RIGHTS7
INDIGENOUS PEOPLES’ RIGHTS IN AUSTRALIA TODAY: WHERE DO YOU STAND?Didn’t the Little children are sacred reportcall for urgent action?The intervention policies pursued by the government bear little relationship to what was called for in theLittle children are Sacred report. In fact, the entire approach taken by the government contradicts a centralmessage of the report. Its recommendations begin with a detailed statement on the importance of workingwith Indigenous communities in order to ensure that government policies will be effective:We have been conscious throughout our enquiries of the need for that consultation andfor Aboriginal people to be involved The thrust of our recommendations, which aredesigned to advise the Northern Territory Government on how it can help supportcommunities to effectively prevent and tackle child sexual abuse, is for there to beconsultation with, and ownership by the communities, of those solutions.In the first recommendation, we have specifically referred to the critical importance ofgovernments committing to genuine consultation with Aboriginal people in designinginitiatives for Aboriginal communities 6In contrast, the intervention was imposed on Indigenous communities without respect for the perspectivesof the communities themselves, without talking with community leaders and without community ownershipof solutions.“We moved away from the controlsand measures. We walked off to whereit is about freedom.” Richard Downsat the opening of the Protest House,the Walk-off Camp, Ampilatwatja, NT.2010 Jagath DheersekaraHuman rights do not dispossess people. Humanrights do not marginalise people. Human rightsdo not cause problems. Human rights do not causepoverty. Human rights do not cause life expectancygaps. It is the denial of rights that is the largestcontributor to these things.Professor Mick Dodson, Indigenous leader and formerAustralian of the Year78 Download the full resource and take action at www.amnesty.org.au/wheredoyoustand
SECTION 03: THE NT INTERVENTION AND HUMAN RIGHTSThere is certainly nothing dignified about losingyour human rights as a human being, based onbeing an Aboriginal citizen. We are asking youto stop the intervention, protect our human rightsand dignity and lead us to unity.Yananymul Mununggurr, Councillor, East Arnhem Shire andChief Executive of the Laynhapuy Homelands Association8THE AMPE AKELYERNEMANE MEKE MEKARLE(LITTLE CHILDREN ARE SACRED) REPORTThe Ampe Akelyernemane Meke Mekarle (Little Children are Sacred) report drew attention to theviolence and abuse that is entrenched in many Aboriginal communities. Indigenous children are morelikely than other Australian children to be in out-of-home care and, in the case of substantiated abuse,protective care. The report says rates of sexual abuse reflect the fact that Indigenous children arelikely to be raised in circumstances where risk factors associated with neglect and abuse are common.These include alcohol and drug abuse, poverty, housing shortages and unemployment.The report made 97 recommendations advising the Northern Territory Government on how it couldhelp support communities to effectively prevent and tackle child sexual abuse, address underlyingpoverty and return strength to the Aboriginal people. Genuine consultation with Aboriginal peoplein designing initiatives for Aboriginal communities was highlighted as critically important.Emphasising the need for consultation with Indigenous communities, the authors of the LittleChildren Are Sacred report prefaced their recommendations by quoting former Liberal AboriginalAffairs Minister and co-Chair of Reconciliation Australia, Fred Chaney.Interviewed on the ABC’s 7.30 Report on 19 April 2007, Chaney was asked why successivegovernments have “failed so comprehensively to turn the story of Aboriginal deprivation around.”He replied:One of the things I think we should have learned by now is that you can’t solvethese things by centralised bureaucratic direction. You can only educate childrenin a school at the place where they live. You can only give people jobs or get peopleinto employment person by person. And I think my own view now is that the lessonwe’ve learned is that you need locally-based action, local resourcing, local controlto really make changes.But I think governments persist in thinking you can direct from Canberra, you candirect from Perth or Sydney or Melbourne, that you can have programs that run outinto communities that aren’t owned by those communities, that aren’t locally controlledand managed, and I think surely that is a thing we should know doesn’t work I am very much in favour of a model which builds local control in communitiesas the best of those Native Title agreements do, as has been done in the ArgyleDiamond Mine Agreement, as is being done in Kununurra. Not central bureaucraciestrying to run things in Aboriginal communities. That doesn’t work.9Reproduced by permission of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation and ABCOnline. 2007 ABC. All rights reserved.The majority of the recommendations of the Little Children are Sacred report have not been addressedor implemented, despite the fact they were well-evidenced, grounded in communities’ experience andbuild on communities’ strengths and capacities.The full report can be found at www.inquirysaac.nt.gov.au.9
INDIGENOUS PEOPLES’ RIGHTS IN AUSTRALIA TODAY: WHERE DO YOU STAND?What’s wrong with the Intervention?The Australian Government has claimed that the Intervention is necessary due tourgent needs in Aboriginal communities. These needs, including protecting womenand children, clearly have to be addressed, but Amnesty International believes thatthe Intervention is the wrong answer.TARGETING A WHOLE GROUP, REGARDLESS OF NEEDAboriginal people in areas affected by the Intervention who receive governmentpayments have 50 per cent of their income controlled by the government. Those whomanage their income well and those who do not have all been treated in the same way.Following protests, people can now apply to be exempt from this policy. However, theprocess is lengthy, complicated and bureaucratic. This policy is offensive to Aboriginalpeople. It reminds many older people of the days when they had to apply to nativewelfare officials for permission to travel, marry, study or visit their families.LEGALISED DISCRIMINATIONThe Intervention has targeted people based on their race. For more than two years it hasbeen applied exclusively to Aboriginal people. This would have been illegal because ofprotections provided by the Racial Discrimination Act (RDA) and NT anti-discriminationlaws. These laws, however, designed to give legal power to values of respect andhuman rights, were suspended by the Federal Government.Positive measures included in the Intervention, such as increased funding for healthservices and anti-violence programs, could all have been implemented withoutracial discrimination.Following protests in Australia and around the world, the government has now reinstatedthe RDA. As a result, income management is now applied to some non-Aboriginalgroups as well as to Aboriginal people. However, the Intervention is still discriminatory:the people who are affected by its policies are overwhelmingly Aboriginal. There istherefore a question of whether this amounts to indirect discrimination, which wouldbreach the RDA. The government continues policies of compulsory acquisition ofAboriginal land and blanket bans on alcohol that are not applied to other groups inAustralia, and still deny Aboriginal people the right to decide who enters theirprivate property.How is a compulsory system ofmoney management supposed togive people the skills to managetheir m
2.5 Telling the story of Indigenous rights in Australia 2.6 Patterns in Indigenous and non-Indigenous relation 2.7 Exploring the timeline of Indigenous and non-Indigenous history 03 The intervention and human rights Worksheets: 3.1 The Amperlatwaty walk-off 3.2 The intervention and human rights 04 Land and Indigenous Peoples’ rights Worksheets:
Silat is a combative art of self-defense and survival rooted from Matay archipelago. It was traced at thé early of Langkasuka Kingdom (2nd century CE) till thé reign of Melaka (Malaysia) Sultanate era (13th century). Silat has now evolved to become part of social culture and tradition with thé appearance of a fine physical and spiritual .
May 02, 2018 · D. Program Evaluation ͟The organization has provided a description of the framework for how each program will be evaluated. The framework should include all the elements below: ͟The evaluation methods are cost-effective for the organization ͟Quantitative and qualitative data is being collected (at Basics tier, data collection must have begun)
̶The leading indicator of employee engagement is based on the quality of the relationship between employee and supervisor Empower your managers! ̶Help them understand the impact on the organization ̶Share important changes, plan options, tasks, and deadlines ̶Provide key messages and talking points ̶Prepare them to answer employee questions
Dr. Sunita Bharatwal** Dr. Pawan Garga*** Abstract Customer satisfaction is derived from thè functionalities and values, a product or Service can provide. The current study aims to segregate thè dimensions of ordine Service quality and gather insights on its impact on web shopping. The trends of purchases have
On an exceptional basis, Member States may request UNESCO to provide thé candidates with access to thé platform so they can complète thé form by themselves. Thèse requests must be addressed to esd rize unesco. or by 15 A ril 2021 UNESCO will provide thé nomineewith accessto thé platform via their émail address.
Chính Văn.- Còn đức Thế tôn thì tuệ giác cực kỳ trong sạch 8: hiện hành bất nhị 9, đạt đến vô tướng 10, đứng vào chỗ đứng của các đức Thế tôn 11, thể hiện tính bình đẳng của các Ngài, đến chỗ không còn chướng ngại 12, giáo pháp không thể khuynh đảo, tâm thức không bị cản trở, cái được
Le genou de Lucy. Odile Jacob. 1999. Coppens Y. Pré-textes. L’homme préhistorique en morceaux. Eds Odile Jacob. 2011. Costentin J., Delaveau P. Café, thé, chocolat, les bons effets sur le cerveau et pour le corps. Editions Odile Jacob. 2010. Crawford M., Marsh D. The driving force : food in human evolution and the future.
Le genou de Lucy. Odile Jacob. 1999. Coppens Y. Pré-textes. L’homme préhistorique en morceaux. Eds Odile Jacob. 2011. Costentin J., Delaveau P. Café, thé, chocolat, les bons effets sur le cerveau et pour le corps. Editions Odile Jacob. 2010. 3 Crawford M., Marsh D. The driving force : food in human evolution and the future.
