Racial Discrimination Act 1975

How Lowitja O'Donoghue’s activism and leadership changed advocacy on Indigenous affairs in Australia

Retrieved on:

星期一, 二月 5, 2024

In the many tributes that have flowed since the announcement of Lowitja O’Donoghue’s death on February 4 at age 91, many commentators have noted her leadership and commitment to public life over many years.

Key Points:

In the many tributes that have flowed since the announcement of Lowitja O’Donoghue’s death on February 4 at age 91, many commentators have noted her leadership and commitment to public life over many years.
Of her many public roles, chairing the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission (1990-2005) across the first six years of its life stands out.

An activist and trailblazer

There she joined the Aborigines Advancement League and helped spearhead campaigns for civil rights.
Read more:
Indigenous trailblazer Lowitja O'Donoghue dies aged 91
In 1967 she joined the Commonwealth Department of Aboriginal Affairs, rising to become regional director from 1975-79.
A key recommendation of her report was the establishment of regional assemblies across Australia, a model that became central to ATSIC.

Inaugural chair of ATSIC

O'Donoghue was regarded as the logical choice for inaugural chair of ATSIC.
A statutory body, combining representative, advisory and administrative functions, ATSIC was unlike all previous representative bodies for Indigenous Australians.
She steered a board of 17 regional commissioners, along with an extra two commissioners appointed by the minister.

Negotiating Mabo

Not long after this, O'Donoghue was required to steer ATSIC’s response to the Mabo decision.
This was no small task, as it unleashed a torrent of discontent across Australia and resistance in many quarters.
Read more:
Australian politics explainer: the Mabo decision and native title
This was a highlight of her career, not least because it demonstrated that ATSIC was no “toothless tiger” and showcased the acumen of a rising Aboriginal political sector.

Taking Indigenous advocacy around the world

In 1993, the international year of the world’s Indigenous peoples, she spoke at the World Conference on Human Rights at Vienna.
In his PhD thesis on Indigenous engagement with the UN, Indigenous scholar Graeme La Macchia shows how in the development of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, member states became anxious about words like self-determination.
He shows how O'Donoghue held firm, arguing that nothing short of political self-determination and economic empowerment would suffice for the world’s Indigenous people.

A profound legacy

In her farewell address, O'Donoghue described her time at ATSIC as intense, exhilarating and, at times, exhausting.
We should know and remember her considerable contribution to this important part of our political history.

Alison Holland receives funding from the Australian Research Council (DP230100714 - Policy for Self-Determination: the Case Study of ATSIC) with Distinguished Professor Larissa Behrendt, Associate Professor Daryl Rigney, Dr Kirsten Thorpe and Lindon Coombes.

A divided Australia will soon vote on the most significant referendum on Indigenous rights in 50 years

Retrieved on:

星期三, 八月 30, 2023

Today, Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has announced an October 14 date for a national referendum on whether to amend the Constitution to establish a new advisory body for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

Key Points:

Today, Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has announced an October 14 date for a national referendum on whether to amend the Constitution to establish a new advisory body for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.
The Voice to Parliament has been toted as a vital step toward redressing Australia’s painful history of discrimination against Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.
This is why a referendum is needed – and why this particular one has been so fiercely debated for years.

Decades of efforts toward equality

Only eight out of 44 previous referendums have passed in the country’s history.
The last time Australia voted on a referendum dealing with Indigenous affairs was in 1967.
But what it can tell us about 2023 is complicated
The referendum passed by a huge margin.
This act prohibits discrimination in employment, housing and access to public facilities, such as swimming pools, cinemas and shops.

The “yes” and “no” campaigns

The “yes” campaign has declared it’s time for change, emphasising how governments have consistently failed First Nations communities across the country.
They say better policy decisions result from local communities being heard on matters that affect them.
Independent Senator Lidia Thorpe, a DjabWurrung, Gunnai and Gunditjmara woman, has argued the Voice is a powerless advisory body.

The significance of the vote

Internationally, other countries have attempted to create improved political participation and government accountability for Indigenous peoples.
In New Zealand, for example, there is designated Māori representation in the parliament.
In Canada, First Nations people have both “first-contact” treaties that were negotiated upon European arrival, as well as modern treaties.

Why a Queensland court overturned a ban on religious knives in schools

Retrieved on:

星期四, 八月 10, 2023

The Supreme Court of Queensland last week overturned a law banning children from bringing “knives” to school for religious reasons.

Key Points:

The Supreme Court of Queensland last week overturned a law banning children from bringing “knives” to school for religious reasons.
This will allow Sikh students, parents, and teachers to carry a ceremonial dagger known as a “kirpan” at schools in Queensland.
The only religious or ethnic group in Australia that habitually wears a religious or cultural symbol that resembles a knife are Sikhs.
The Queensland case highlights the needs for Australia’s secular legal system to recognise the adverse impact of law on religious and cultural minorities.

What did the court say?

However, knives can be used for a range of legitimate activities such as cutting food or whittling wood.
As a result, all states and territories have exemptions that allow people, including children, to carry and use knives where it’s “reasonably necessary”.
The Supreme Court found the ban on bringing a knife to school specifically for religious reasons was inconsistent with the Racial Discrimination Act.
So, the court found that section 51(5) of the Queensland’s Weapons Act 1990 was void.

A religion or ethnicity?

There are around 25-30 million Sikhs worldwide, with about five million living outside the Punjab region.
While Sikhism is commonly thought of as a religion, the courts have recognised Sikhs have a common ethnic origin.
Nearly all Sikhs continue to have a link with family in Punjab, practice elements of Punjabi culture and speak the Punjabi language.

A knife or a religious symbol?

The Queensland Supreme Court found the kirpan was a knife for the purposes of the Weapons Act 1990.
It found that a knife remains a knife no matter how blunt or sharp it is, how it’s worn or how easy it is to access.
Referring to the kirpan as a knife downplays its important religious significance.

What happens now?

The court did leave the door open for a complete ban on knives in schools, although this would impact other legitimate uses of knives such as preparing food.
Kirpans are currently worn in schools by students, parents and teachers in other states of Australia, often with strict guidelines.