Welcome to the United Nations 
OHCHR 
Press releases Treaty bodies
COMMITTEE ON ELIMINATION OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION EXAMINES SITUATION IN AUSTRALIA, ADOPTS DECISION
16 August 1999
Share
MORNING
HR/CERD/99/52
16 August 1999
The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination adopted a decision this morning expressing serious concern that envisaged changes in policy by the Australian Government risked creating an “acute impairment” of the land rights of indigenous communities.
The decision also reaffirmed decisions taken by the Committee in March in reference to the situation in Australia.
The actions came as the Committee reviewed circumstances in the country under its early warning and urgent action procedures.
Gay McDougall, the Committee Expert who served as rapporteur on the situation in Australia, said the recommendations contained in the Committee's March decisions had not been acted upon by the Government and there had been no progress with regard to indigenous land titles in Australia. Rather, she said, the situation was becoming of greater concern in that amendments to the Australian Native Title Act were being brought into effect within the jurisdictions of the various states and territories of Australia.
In March, the Committee expressed concern “over the compatibility of the Native Title Act, as currently amended, with the State party’s international obligations” under the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. It further noted with concern Australia’s proposed changes to the overall structure of its national Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission which would abolish the position of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner and assign those functions to a generalist Deputy President. The Committee urged the Australian Government “to suspend implementation of the 1998 amendments and re-open discussions with the representatives of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples with a view to finding solutions acceptable to the indigenous peoples and which would comply with Australia’s obligations under the Convention”.
The decision of the Committee took note of comments received from the Government of Australia and said those comments would be included in its annual report.
Australia is one of 155 States parties to the Convention and is obliged to submit periodic reports to the Committee on efforts to comply with the treaty and also required, when requested, to supply additional information under the Committee's early warning and urgent action procedures.
Participating in the discussion were Committee Experts Mahmoud Aboul-Nasr, Michael P. Banton, Theodoor van Boven, Regis de Gouttes, Yuri A. Rechetov, Ion Diaconu, Agha Shahi, Mario Jorge Yutsis and Michael E. Sherifis.
Also this morning, the Committee continued its discussion of proposed revisions to reporting guidelines with particular reference to article 5 of the Convention, which says that States parties must undertake to prohibit and to eliminate racial discrimination in all its forms and to guarantee the right of everyone, without distinction as to race, colour, or national or ethnic origin, to equality before the law.
When the Committee reconvenes at 3 p.m., it will take up an initial report of Kyrgyzstan (document CERD/C/326/Add.1).
Decision on Australia
In its decision on the situation in Australia, the Committee reaffirmed the decisions of March 1999. In adopting those decisions, the Committee was prompted by its serious concern that after having observed and welcomed over a period of time a progressive implementation of the Convention in relation to the land rights of indigenous peoples in Australia, envisaged changes of policy as to the exercise of those rights risked creating an acute impairment of the rights thus recognized to the Australian indigenous communities. The decision said the Committee had considered in detail the information submitted and the arguments put forward by the Government of Australia.
The Committee took note of the comments received from the State party, which would be included in the Committee's annual report for 1999 to the General Assembly. It decided to continue consideration of the matter, together with the tenth, eleventh and twelfth periodic reports of Australia, during its fifty-sixth session in March 2000.
Situation of Australia
GAY MCDOUGALL, the Committee Expert who served as country rapporteur on the report of Australia, recalled that in its concluding observations on the report of Australia in 1994, the Committee had welcomed the decision of the High Court of Australia recognizing the survival of indigenous title to land where such title had not otherwise been validly extinguished. The High Court case constituted a significant development in the recognition of indigenous rights under the Convention, Ms. McDougall said.
Ms. McDougall further recalled that the Committee, acting under its early warning procedures in August 1998, had adopted a decision requesting information from Australia regarding proposed changes to the 1993 Native Title Act, changes of policy as to Aboriginal land rights, and changes in the position of the function of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner.
Also, last March, the Committee had adopted a decision in which it expressed concern over the compatibility of the Native Title Act, as currently amended, with Australia's international obligations under the Convention, Ms. McDougall said. She said the Committee had urged the Government of Australia to suspend implementation of 1998 amendments and re-open discussions with representatives of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples with a view to finding solutions acceptable to the indigenous peoples and which would comply with Australia's obligations under the Convention.
Ms. McDougall reported that the recommendations contained in the Committee's decision of March 1999 had not been acted upon by the Government of Australia and that there had been no progress with regard to indigenous land titles in the country. Rather, she said, the situation was becoming of greater concern in that the amendments to the Native Title Act were being brought into effect within the jurisdictions of the various states and territories of Australia. The rights of indigenous Australians were being increasingly attenuated in that respect, making it an ever-increasing likelihood that indigenous Australians would permanently lose significant land title rights, she said.
Other Committee members also made general remarks on the situation in Australia and on the draft decision, later adopted, which had been introduced by several of the Committee's Experts. One Expert said the Australian Constitution included no prohibition of racial discrimination and that the Native Title Act amendment devolved to states of the Australian Commonwealth many of the responsibilities for native title issues in such a way that there was now no legal instrument in Australia which the courts could apply to invalidate discriminatory provisions.
HR/CERD/99/52
16 August 1999
The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination adopted a decision this morning expressing serious concern that envisaged changes in policy by the Australian Government risked creating an “acute impairment” of the land rights of indigenous communities.
The decision also reaffirmed decisions taken by the Committee in March in reference to the situation in Australia.
The actions came as the Committee reviewed circumstances in the country under its early warning and urgent action procedures.
Gay McDougall, the Committee Expert who served as rapporteur on the situation in Australia, said the recommendations contained in the Committee's March decisions had not been acted upon by the Government and there had been no progress with regard to indigenous land titles in Australia. Rather, she said, the situation was becoming of greater concern in that amendments to the Australian Native Title Act were being brought into effect within the jurisdictions of the various states and territories of Australia.
In March, the Committee expressed concern “over the compatibility of the Native Title Act, as currently amended, with the State party’s international obligations” under the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. It further noted with concern Australia’s proposed changes to the overall structure of its national Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission which would abolish the position of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner and assign those functions to a generalist Deputy President. The Committee urged the Australian Government “to suspend implementation of the 1998 amendments and re-open discussions with the representatives of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples with a view to finding solutions acceptable to the indigenous peoples and which would comply with Australia’s obligations under the Convention”.
The decision of the Committee took note of comments received from the Government of Australia and said those comments would be included in its annual report.
Australia is one of 155 States parties to the Convention and is obliged to submit periodic reports to the Committee on efforts to comply with the treaty and also required, when requested, to supply additional information under the Committee's early warning and urgent action procedures.
Participating in the discussion were Committee Experts Mahmoud Aboul-Nasr, Michael P. Banton, Theodoor van Boven, Regis de Gouttes, Yuri A. Rechetov, Ion Diaconu, Agha Shahi, Mario Jorge Yutsis and Michael E. Sherifis.
Also this morning, the Committee continued its discussion of proposed revisions to reporting guidelines with particular reference to article 5 of the Convention, which says that States parties must undertake to prohibit and to eliminate racial discrimination in all its forms and to guarantee the right of everyone, without distinction as to race, colour, or national or ethnic origin, to equality before the law.
When the Committee reconvenes at 3 p.m., it will take up an initial report of Kyrgyzstan (document CERD/C/326/Add.1).
Decision on Australia
In its decision on the situation in Australia, the Committee reaffirmed the decisions of March 1999. In adopting those decisions, the Committee was prompted by its serious concern that after having observed and welcomed over a period of time a progressive implementation of the Convention in relation to the land rights of indigenous peoples in Australia, envisaged changes of policy as to the exercise of those rights risked creating an acute impairment of the rights thus recognized to the Australian indigenous communities. The decision said the Committee had considered in detail the information submitted and the arguments put forward by the Government of Australia.
The Committee took note of the comments received from the State party, which would be included in the Committee's annual report for 1999 to the General Assembly. It decided to continue consideration of the matter, together with the tenth, eleventh and twelfth periodic reports of Australia, during its fifty-sixth session in March 2000.
Situation of Australia
GAY MCDOUGALL, the Committee Expert who served as country rapporteur on the report of Australia, recalled that in its concluding observations on the report of Australia in 1994, the Committee had welcomed the decision of the High Court of Australia recognizing the survival of indigenous title to land where such title had not otherwise been validly extinguished. The High Court case constituted a significant development in the recognition of indigenous rights under the Convention, Ms. McDougall said.
Ms. McDougall further recalled that the Committee, acting under its early warning procedures in August 1998, had adopted a decision requesting information from Australia regarding proposed changes to the 1993 Native Title Act, changes of policy as to Aboriginal land rights, and changes in the position of the function of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner.
Also, last March, the Committee had adopted a decision in which it expressed concern over the compatibility of the Native Title Act, as currently amended, with Australia's international obligations under the Convention, Ms. McDougall said. She said the Committee had urged the Government of Australia to suspend implementation of 1998 amendments and re-open discussions with representatives of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples with a view to finding solutions acceptable to the indigenous peoples and which would comply with Australia's obligations under the Convention.
Ms. McDougall reported that the recommendations contained in the Committee's decision of March 1999 had not been acted upon by the Government of Australia and that there had been no progress with regard to indigenous land titles in the country. Rather, she said, the situation was becoming of greater concern in that the amendments to the Native Title Act were being brought into effect within the jurisdictions of the various states and territories of Australia. The rights of indigenous Australians were being increasingly attenuated in that respect, making it an ever-increasing likelihood that indigenous Australians would permanently lose significant land title rights, she said.
Other Committee members also made general remarks on the situation in Australia and on the draft decision, later adopted, which had been introduced by several of the Committee's Experts. One Expert said the Australian Constitution included no prohibition of racial discrimination and that the Native Title Act amendment devolved to states of the Australian Commonwealth many of the responsibilities for native title issues in such a way that there was now no legal instrument in Australia which the courts could apply to invalidate discriminatory provisions.
VIEW THIS PAGE IN: