Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom
Consultative Status with United Nations ECOSOC, UNCTAD and UNESCO
Special Consultative Relations with FAO, ILO and UNICEF
International Headquarters, Geneva, Switzerland
Australian Section Office, Adelaide
PO Box 345, Rundle Mall, Australia 5000
(08) 8390 3456 Email:
26 February 2012
National Human Rights Actin Plan Secretariat
Human Rights Policy Branch
Attorney General’s Department
3-5 National Circuit
Barton ACT 2000
via email to
SUBMISSION ON NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS ACTION PLAN
AND BASELINE STUDY
The Australian Section of the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF) is an international non-government organisation in consultative status with United Nations ECOSOC and UNESCO. We have special consultative relations with the FAO, ILO and UNICEF. This submission is made on behalf of the Australian Section of our organisation. WILPF works for social and racial justice, human rights and an end to war as a means of dealing with human conflict.
WILPF is still keen to see a legislated Human Rights Bill at some future time but appreciates that this Action Plan and Baseline Study are moving forward in
protecting human rights for all Australians.
We thank you for sending a copy of the Baseline Study and think that it is a balanced report which fairly outlines the existing human rights concerns that have been raised by many Australians alongside what actions the Australian government is putting into place to address these concerns.
We welcome the opportunity to make the following comments :
Access to justice
WILPF is pleased to read (p.17) that there has been an increase in funding for legal aid commissions, community legal centres and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander legal services.We recommend that the adequacy of funding for these vital services be carefully monitored in case further funding is required.
The use of force by Police
WILPF is aware that although the overall rate of indigenous deaths in custody has reduced (p.24) there remains an unacceptably high occurrence rate which needs to be addressed.
Use of Tasers
While the use of tasers may seem appropriate in circumstances of immediate serious harm, the fact that an Officer has them handy is likely to prompt the Officer to use a taser as a first response rather than the usual diplomacy or other non-violent response in a difficult situation. Reports that tasers have been used repeatedly on persons inflicting serious injury on them is another area of concern.
WILPF has received reports that Raytheon is now developing a high-tech ray gun that fires an invisible heat beam capable of causing unbearable pain. While this “Assault Intervention System” was built by Raytheon initially for military use, it is now being introduced in the United States for domestic purposes. Raytheon is currently working on creating a hand-held version of the ray gun.
This raises the moral issue of tasers being developed to inflict greater pain and goes down the ‘slippery slope’ of what is appropriate restraint. It is hoped that by making the government aware of the development of such a weapon that it will be prohibited in Australia.
People Trafficking
WILPF is pleased to see the range of measures listed in order to reduce and eradicate people trafficking as for too long this has been a silent crime with a huge impact on women trafficked for the sex industry.
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People
WILPF has written several submissions to the Australian Government outlining a range of human rights concerns about the Northern Territory Emergency Response (NTER) and later bills.
It is important to note that the introduction of the NTER required the suspension of the Racial Discrimination Act in the Northern Territory for the imposition of ‘special measures’ on 73 prescribed Aboriginal communities. This legislation was rightly condemmed as racist discrimination which WILPF pointed out to the Australian government at the time.
WILPF understands that in October 2008 a review of the NTER was conducted by a panel of experts chosen by the Federal Government and chaired by Peter Yu, Executive Director, Kimberley Land Council. Many of the recommendations from this review were supported by the Aboriginal people, such as the recommendation to reinstate the Racial Discrimination Act and a change from compulsory income management to voluntary income management.
WILPF was pleased to support Aboriginal groups to meet in Alice Springs at a Convergence in 2010 where key Aboriginal Elders expressed their concerns about the introduction of the NTER, resulting in the publication of a book “This is What We Said – Australian Aboriginal people give their views on the Northern Territory Intervention.” Aboriginal people still do not believe their views are being respected. Some Aboriginal people have migrated away from their homelands in order to avoid the NTER.
Following the expansion of the NTER to include non-Aboriginal people, the Racial Discrimination Act was reinstated but many of the concerns first raised in objection to the NTER remain today.
The three 2011 Bills that replace the NTER Act 2007 expand the same special measures to not only the 73 prescribed Aboriginal communities but to ‘states, territories or areas in which vulnerable, long-term welfare’ recipients reside, ie any part of Australia or disadvantaged groups, such as unemployed youths, may be compulsorily subjected to income management and/or school attendance plans.
WILPF believes that this is imposing a ‘one-size fits all’ solution to complex personal problems of vulnerable people which would respond far better to an individualised, consensual approach rather than a mandatory punitive approach.
A further example of not listening to Aboriginal communities is the NT Muckaty community who strongly oppose the use of their land for a proposed nuclear waste dump. There needs to be genuine sensitivity to the fact that Aboriginal people do not operate on economic logic alone but have a deep spiritual connection to their land which is often overlooked by Governments taking only a pragmatic point of view.
Housing
The ongoing lack of affordable housing in many cities as well as remote mining towns, shows that there is an immediate need for more public housing as the private sector rental housing is not meeting demand or offering affordable rents, despite the government incentives and programs put in place.
National Disability Insurance Scheme
WILPF supports this initiative.
Women
WILPF supports the actions set out in the CEDAW Action Plan.
We look forward to see actual results in reducing violence against women through implementation of the National Action Plan to Reduce Violence Against Women as well as increasing the range of supports available to assist women and children fleeing from violence.
Gender Equality in Public Life
WILPF is pleased that the Government has adopted the CEDAW recommendation that a target of 40 percent representation of females on public and private boards has been set.
WILPF has found it productive and essential that we work with other national women’s organisations through the National Women’s Alliances to raise the important issues for women and advise government on our deliberations and top priorities.
It was through WILPF working with the formerWomenSpeak Alliance (now Equal Rights Alliance) that we were able to successfully advocate for the development of an Australian National Action Plan to implement UN Security Council Resolution 1325, “Women, Peace & Security.” We look forward to establishing an ongoing partnership with the government on implementation, monitoring and review of this National Action Plan.
Asylum Seekers – Immigration detention
WILPF does not support mandatory detention and remains concerned about the length of time it takes to process asylum seeker claims. Table 3.1 shows 25% of claims taking more than two years. There is plenty of evidence linking the deterioration in the mental health of asylum seekers who are detained for these long periods of uncertainty.
We would like to see more community access and support for unaccompanied minors and women and wonder if they could be placed with a suitable ‘host family or person’ in the community, rather than languish in isolated regional detention centres. We would like to see the latest ‘community detention’ scheme extended to single unaccompanied women and minors.
Summary
We thank you for the opportunity to put forward our views.
Yours Sincerely
Ruth Russell and Barbara O’Dwyer
Joint National Coordinators.
1