Student Name:
Student Number:
Subject Coordinator:
Subject Name:
Due Date:
Turnitin Similarity Percentage: 0%
Word Count: 2500
Aboriginal Protection Acts of 1909 and 1915 and Their Impacts to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People
Most government policies that have been made in history which relate to aboriginal people are normally implemented by the aboriginal people. This has been repetitive since the colonial period to the present world. During legislation of the policies of the aboriginal people, the legislators have always argued that it is only good for the aboriginals. The policies extensively cover aspects of protection, self-determination, reconciliation and assimilation of the people into the society. The question that still lingers in the minds of the people especially the aboriginals Torres Strait islanders is the effectiveness of the policies made.
The 1901 act was made after six Australian colonies decided to become a federation. The main believe at this time by the white Australians was that the race of the aboriginal people would diminish with time therefore there was no need to dwell much in the policing. The constitution therefore adopted only two sections in reference to aboriginal people [1]. The most conspicuous sections at this time were section 127 and 51 of the Australian constitution. During the census that was done at this time, section 127did not include the aboriginal people and the Torres Strait islanders. What was counted was the people owned example domestic animals. Section 51 did not also recognize the rights of the aboriginal people and Torres Strait islanders till 1967 when there was a countrywide demonstration for the rights of these people to be recognized in Australia. Part 26 of section 51 only gave power to states denying the federal government any powers to exercise. This meant that any cases presented by the aboriginal people would be easily thrown out or challenged by the states which had all the powers vested to them by the constitution. The federal state had no powers to control the work of the stats at this time. Lucky enough the efforts of the people bore fruit and the Torres Strait islanders and aboriginals were recognized as citizens of Australia.
The right to vote was a big issue especially when it came to women. Aboriginal women were not allowed to vote. Non aboriginal women were the only group of women that were allowed under the constitution to exercise their democratic right. In 1929 however, compulsory voting was introduced by the federal state. At this time aboriginal women were still not allowed to vote by the commonwealth electoral act of 1918. The state laws were in particular strict about the rights to vote because they still had much power over the aboriginal women compared to the federal government. The government frantically made a move further by introducing optional rights to vote which were again inhibited by the states because somehow they had a degree of control over the wards.
Section 25 of the constitution allows the parliament to come up with laws which discriminate on the basis of race. It states that if the persons are disqualified from voting based on their race, then based on the number of people of the race discriminated against that live in the host country are not counted. This is a clear go ahead that people with different racial origin should not be allowed to vote in Australia. It is not correct and cannot be left to work in a multicultural country like Australia.
The then protector of the aborigines, Gorge Thornton was replaced by aborigines’ protection board in 1909 which had the responsibility of controlling government policies, freedom and financial control of the aboriginals. Almost every part of the life of the aboriginals was under full control of this board till late in the 1960s. During this time, the policies that were made were even more destructive. Children were separated from their parents who still move around in search of their identity. In Australia (NSW) they are estimated to be over 15000. This happened especially during World War I when the parents were fighting in the army. The government had a bigger role in the separation of the children from their families; a violation of human rights. This was a great violation of human rights, the right to association and family.3 Aborigines act of 1934-39 finds guilty, the parents who do not take their children to school. It is clear the government disrespected the law in denying access to education by the children. In addition the SSOLA act also defines e social responsibility of parents towards their children. However if the government does not provide the necessary support such acts are useless.
Further violation of human rights was demonstrated by the denial of the aboriginal the right to be entertained freely. Alcohol was not allowed to be sold to them, part 2 of the INTER act for liquor legislation. People with mixed blood were exempted from the list of the aboriginals and issued with certificates which denied them protection by the Protection act. The people were totally bared from associating with their families. Working proved difficult for these people as it was mandatory for them to produce a certificate and written permissions to make any visits to their families. This was aimed at effecting the assimilation policy in Australia. This was meant to remain with a group of people who would then be taught on how to adopt the ways of the community.
At this time, protection and segregation of the pure blood exercised started diminishing up to the 1940s where assimilation and integration started to take shape [3].
The Mabo case of 20th May 1982 is a good demonstration of how the government of Australia participated in the violation of human rights. The case involved the meridian group who took action against the government of Queensland and Australia. They wanted to be granted a native title deed for their land located in the Murray islands. The case was send to the Supreme Court by Sir Harry Gibbs the then chief justice and later a second case was brought in concerning the validity of the constitution. An attempt was made by the parliament to pass a law that could throw away the cases by denying the meridians the right to own their land [4]. Later Eddie Mabo succeeded in proving that the laws of the meridian land remain fundamental in the traditional ownership of land therefore the states had no right to take away the land [10]. This could further be enhanced by the 1909 (NSW) s 8(3) Aborigines protection act which states that all land and domestic a property founded on the land of the Aboriginal people remains their property hence replacing the malicious FCSIA Act.
The United Nations declaration on international human rights affirms that all indigenous people have the right to enjoy fully all the human rights and freedoms according to the United Nations charter for human rights. Australia has continually not respected these laws [12] explains.
The pure aboriginals were at this point allowed to freely share in the life of the white people. They stared living in big cities. They were not allowed to depend on casual and seasonal work. Jobs which were paid for were made available to the groups. However, despite being allowed to earn from white collar jobs, the wages were still not equal. This means there was intimidation and their rights were still not respected. This was done in secluded stations called missions to enforce or teach civilization.
Further changes which were rather positive took shape by the start of 1943. The aborigines’ welfare board created more arms one for the pure bloods and the other for the mixed blood groups of aboriginal people. In 1911, kinchella home for boys and Cootamundra home for girls were built for those families disentangled from their families most of which were children. The children were mainly taught how to domestic chores to become servants to the rich on Australia-Sydney [3]. This has further been enhanced by the continued inquiry about the response of the government towards the rights of the aboriginal people. The department of premier and cabinet in Australia has been keen on the implementation of the rights of the sub-originals. However 2006 saw an increased rate of abuse according to reports by the BBC New as on May 16th [13]
The aboriginal and Torres Strait international commission (ATSIC) is mandated the task of policy making and delivery of service to the groups of people. It has been operational as from the 1900 to 2005 commissioned by the commonwealth act in 1989. The board of commissioners was responsible for all forms of policy formulation processes in representing the aboriginal and Torres Strait islander communities [6].
Despite the introduction of the assimilation policy, the basic rights of the aboriginal women were denied. Freedom of association and movement was curtailed. The right to education, fair wage at places of work, and entertainment were all taken away from them [2]. The INTER review board report of 2008 (35) for example says that the government response to rights of the aboriginal people was seasonal and short-lived perhaps only when pressure external was applied, says Raelene Web, a member of the INTER Review board[14].
In view of Australia respect to the international law, it appears that the law has not been that significant in the nation [1]. The Australian human rights protection policy is actually inadequate and not effective at all. This might have been contributed much by the sidelining in the application of the strong traditional liberal democracy, a judiciary that is independent, and huge media base responsible for the protection of the rights of the people. Aboriginal and Torres Strait islanders continue to be neglected. The international human rights supposed to guard al groups of people in society that have not been upheld by the Australian government include:
There is lack of justification for laws made in parliament that do not uphold the rights of all people for example the right to vote which was not included in section 51 part 26 of the 1901 act. The international law on the move to eliminate racial discrimination has not been followed to the latter in Australia. Discrimination laws are being applied selectively in favor of the original people over the aboriginal and the Torres islander people. Decisions made by the administration-federal government have continually breached the human rights due to discrimination by the states which have been given more power over the government [1]. There are no remedies which have proved effective in the event of human rights being breached. This could be due to lack of strictness in the implementation of the human rights act and the historical view of aboriginal people as an inferior race of people. It is the obligation of the Australian government to protect the people who choose to live outside the country or those that have been deported to other nations. Article 33 of the refugee convention act prohibits any state from sending refugees to places where the lives of the refugees are exposed to danger. In addition section 31 also prohibits a nation from imposing fines or detaining without sufficient reason. Australia has continually broken this law by putting the aboriginal people under quarantine and separation from their families those thought to be of mixed blood. Later those who do not abide by the rules are fined heavily [7].
There are key sections of the Australian constitution that need serious reconstituting to guarantee full protection of human rights. There is need to pass a national human rights act which protects aboriginal and Torres Strait islander rights. Furthermore the United Nations declaration on human rights especially for the indigenous people should be fully implemented. Amendment of the constitution should remove existing provisions that that discriminate against indigenous people. Section 25 of the Australian constitution is vague and the only remedy that can be done is to scrub it from the constitution [7]. Attempts to amend it have been futile as it always gives the states powers while taking away the power from the federal government [12]. Finally since the culture of the people has been poisoned by t e poor law system into believing that there exists a group of people superior to the other, there is need to conduct education on the people to understand the need to protect human rights and aid in the amendment of the constitution [1].
To conclude, Australia should first acknowledge that there exists the violation of human rights in order to effectively deal with the effects of these acts for effective reconciliation [8]. Efforts are being made which are positive for example the establishment of foundations which provide a national healing and making the rift between generations smaller. Secondly, past violence’s committed against aboriginal and Torres Strait islander’s people who are the custodians of the law and primary inhabitants of the land should be adequately addressed to bring a full agreement between the people affected and the non-indigenous people [1]. Despite taking long, the reforms are necessary in the respect for human life.