Amnesty: genocide in our own back yard
By Jennifer Thompson
SYDNEY — On March 4, Amnesty International launched a report documenting the failure of the Howard government's response to the recommendations of the "stolen children" inquiry. The human rights organisation called on the government to make a second written response, addressing the inquiry's finding that the removal of more than 100,000 Aboriginal children from their families and communities constituted genocide, as well as recommendations for repairing the damage.
AI's Silence on Human Rights: Government responds to "stolen children" inquiry was launched by a London-based researcher on Australia, Dr Heinz Schurmann-Zeggel, and National Indigenous Working Group executive director Olga Havnen. The government's handling of the report, said Schurmann-Zeggel, "is indicative of an overall disinterest in human rights over the past year".
The report noted that initial criticism of the government focused on the government's refusal to extend an official apology and the rejection of compensation to victims. AI's concern is the government's "failure to comment on, or offer adequate explanations for, its views on important human rights questions raised by the inquiry".
The government's belated December 16 statement does not contain the words "human rights" and "fails to accept the 'wrongs of the past' as violations of human rights" says AI. It falls short of accepted international principles for reparation for victims.
Submitted to the attorney-general on April 5, 1997, and publicly released on May 26, 1997, the stolen children inquiry's report, Bringing them Home: National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Islander Children from Their Families, estimated that more than 100,000 indigenous children were stolen from their families under laws that were not abolished in all states until the early 1970s.
The report concludes that the removal of the children was a crime against humanity which amounted to genocide. It recommends that governments, churches and police forces apologise, that a national "Sorry Day" be declared and that financial compensation be paid to the individuals and communities affected.
The inquiry into stolen children was launched in August 1995 by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (HREOC). It aimed to study the impact of laws, policies and practices which resulted in the forced removal of children in the past, including physical and sexual abuse of removed children, and examine needed changes to laws and services for people affected.
The relevance of these issues, 28 years after the policies were formally abolished, said Amnesty, is illustrated by the "finding that the vast majority of the 300,000 Aboriginal people now living in Australia come from families which experienced the removal of children, in some cases over several generations. Many of these children never saw their parents again, and thousands are now searching for surviving relatives. The inquiry suggested an association between the past experience of forced removal and abuse, and today's high rates of imprisonment and deaths in custody of young Aborigines."
AI notes that in Queensland and Western Australia, more than half the children in custody are Aboriginal while Aborigines are only 5% of the under-18 population.
Systematic discrimination
While the legal basis for the policies varied between state and territory jurisdictions and over time, said AI, the colour of the children's skin or their families' inability to maintain "non-Aboriginal" living standards were among the main grounds for removal.
By discriminating on racial grounds (50 out of 150 laws and policies causing the removal of children over more than 100 years specifically applied to indigenous people), the policies violated the 1948 Universal Declaration on Human Rights, said AI. Many laws gave authorities the right to remove babies, small children and teenagers "by reason of their Aboriginal identity".
Policies sought to assimilate "mixed-race" children by extinguishing their racial and cultural identity. This aim, AI said, was "based on expectations that the Aboriginal race was destined to become extinct".
While removal from their families was generally defined as "in the children's best interest", the stolen children inquiry concluded that its aim "was to eliminate indigenous cultures as distinct entities". This constitutes genocide, under the UN genocide convention.
The inquiry pointed out that these policies continued for 20 years after Australia ratified the genocide convention in 1949. The convention, like all other international human rights treaties, has not become part of Australian law. The government has ignored the inquiry's recommendation that this be rectified.
Aboriginal affairs minister Ian Herron's response to the inquiry mentions "genocide" only in an appendix, implying that an unsuccessful High Court case for compensation by Northern Territory Aborigines, for removal under a 1918 law, meant the government need not respond to the genocide charge. Amnesty states that a serious response is required if the government does not accept the inquiry's finding on genocide.
The government has promised $63 million over four years to implement some of the inquiry's 54 recommendations, including:
- $2 million for the Australian Archives to index, copy and preserve thousands of files so they are more accessible;
- $6 million to extend indigenous family support and parenting programs;
- $1.6 million to the National Library for an oral history project;
- a $9 million boost to culture and language maintenance programs;
- $11.5 million to establish a national network of family link-up services to help individuals;
- $16 million for 50 new counsellors to help those affected by child removal policies;
- $17 million to expand the network of regional centres for emotional and social well-being, giving counsellors professional support and assistance.
Recommendations ignored
Central Land Council deputy director Harold Furber, himself a stolen child, has criticised the government's response because it ignores most of the inquiry's recommendations, including that most wanted — an official government apology. He told the February Land Rights News, "The government is continually talking about money for the stolen generations, but lots of it will go to bureaucracies and organisations that don't necessarily have much to do with the stolen generations and not to the people themselves".
NSW Link-Up and National Stolen Generations Corporation representative Carol Kendall believes that the package is token, designed to pacify international concern over the stolen children and the Wik bill.
The NSGC, set up to monitor the federal government's response to the inquiry in cooperation with bodies monitoring state and territory government responses, has initiated the National Sorry Day on May 26.
Link-Up NSW and its sister state organisations have been angered to find out that part of the $11.5 million allocated to family link-up services will be used for a review of existing link-up services. "It's about control", Kendall said, noting that the organisations had been functioning for years to the satisfaction of their funding bodies.
Kendall attacked the government's refusal to consider reparations. Claimants cannot pursue common law cases for damages, despite what Herron had claimed, she said, "because they are cutting legal aid to the people who most need it".
If the government were seriously concerned about human rights, added Kendall, "Why did they cut HREOC by 43%, including the social justice commission?".
In its report, AI pointed out that Canberra failed to address the human rights questions raised by the inquiry. It rejected "the right of individual victims to reparation, including financial compensation".
The government's statement failed to address the inquiry's finding of genocide or that the removal policies were systematic racial discrimination even though Australia had accepted international treaties to end discrimination.
AI also pointed out that internationally recognised human rights standards (such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, ratified by Australia in 1980, and the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, ratified in 1989) obliged the government to investigate cases of physical and sexual abuse of children in state government care, and authorities' failure to act on complaints of abuse. It was bound to bring those responsible to justice and provide for appropriate reparations.
AI is calling on the government to offer a "thorough, written response" to answer the inquiry's questions about:
- whether child removal constituted genocide;
- what reparations victims and their families are entitled to for suffering racial discrimination, exploitation, physical or sexual abuse; and
- what measures are being taken to address the effects of separation of Aboriginal children from their families under the current criminal justice and welfare systems.
AI is also urging the government to:
- act on last year's recommendation of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child "to create a federal body responsible for drawing up programs and policies for implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child" and monitor their implementation;
- incorporate references to the inquiry and the government's response into Australia's periodic reports to the UN Human Rights Committee (overdue since 1991) and the UN Committee against Torture (overdue since September 1994);
- reconsider a formal apology; and
- give Aboriginal organisations with regional representation a formal role in monitoring government measures to address the recommendations.
AI is urging state and territory governments to make responses to the inquiry and its recommendations and offer "adequate remedies to complement federal initiatives".
The federal government stated that the majority of recommendations were directed to states, territories, churches and other non-government organisations. Rejecting the inquiry's recommendation for binding national standards for the treatment, care and custody of children, Herron expressed confidence that all governments would approach the recommendations with "good will and determination".
The establishment of a National Sorry Day, like the call for a formal apology and the payment of compensation, was also ruled out by the government.
A plan for a "people's movement" acknowledging the grief of the stolen generations was launched in Sydney on March 10.