15 December 2011

As part of a series of articles to mark International Human Rights Day, 10 December 2011, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) Regional Office for the Pacific highlights successes and challenges faced in the region during the year.

Matilda Bogner, OHCHR Regional Representative for the Pacific, writes that recent policy changes concerning the treatment of asylum seekers show signs of progress in Australia’s human rights situation in 2011, however some concerns remain.

This year has seen a number of developments on the human rights front in Australia. It began in January with the Human Rights Council’s review of Australia’s human rights record under the Universal Periodic Review (UPR). This resulted in 145 recommendations to Australia on a broad range of issues, including those that are most difficult and controversial within the country.

In the peer review, at least nine countries recommended that Australia incorporate its international human rights obligations into domestic law, including by developing a judicially enforceable human rights act. Following an extensive consultation in Australia on the issue in 2009, the overwhelming majority of submissions supported a human rights act. In April 2010, the Government announced a Human Rights Framework, which did not include a human rights act, although left the way open to revisit the issue in 2014, when the framework is due to be reviewed. An important aspect of the Framework was implemented in November 2011, however, with the passing of Federal legislation committing the Parliament to issuing certificates of compliance with human rights obligations for new laws.

Other recommendations from the UPR suggested that Australia adopt a national human rights action plan and consolidate anti-discrimination laws. This year saw progress on the drafting of a national action plan, with the draft released for consultation during human rights day celebrations on 9 December. Similarly, consultations are now in progress on the consolidation of anti-discrimination laws, on the basis of a commitment by the Government not to lower any protections that are already in place.

Other recommendations made during the UPR asked Australia to ensure compliance with international standards for asylum seekers and cease mandatory detention of irregular migrants. Concerns regarding the treatment of irregular migrants and asylum seekers were also raised in May 2011 by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, during a visit to Australia. She urged a rethink of Australia’s asylum policies, including an end to mandatory detention. It was therefore a positive development to see the Government announce in November that more asylum seekers would be released from detention facilities. The change should allow some undocumented migrants arriving by boat to be placed in the community on bridging visas after undergoing initial assessments of health, security and identity.

During 2011, the Government also decreased the numbers of children in detention facilities, so that now a majority of children are placed in the community. It will be important to see further reductions in the numbers of asylum seekers in detention facilities, and hopefully an openness to explore broader reforms to bring Australia’s asylum and migration systems in line with international human rights standards. As the High Commissioner said, a more humane approach to asylum seekers can only strengthen the tolerance and understanding that is essential to a modern multi-cultural society like Australia.

The UPR produced numerous recommendations on the issue of discrimination against indigenous peoples. There have been positive steps taken by the Government in recent years on indigenous issues. The Government issued the national apology, recognised the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, made significant investments in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health and education, established a national indigenous representative body, committed to a process of constitutional recognition of indigenous Australians and, at least in part, reinstated the Racial Discrimination Act in relation to the Northern Territory Emergency Response. However, these efforts are at times undermined by past and present policies that fail to recognise the rights outlined in the Declaration, including the need for free, prior and informed consent, not only consultation, and self-determination for indigenous people. It will be important to ensure the processes for determining what will follow the Northern Territory Emergency Response are based on these principles, in order to progress indigenous rights and reconciliation in the country.

Beyond the domestic realm, Australia could also consider using the UPR to apply human rights considerations in its foreign policy by integrating the UPR recommendations from partner country reviews into its foreign and aid policies. This would be a practical way for Australia to ensure that it promotes human rights globally in a consistent and applied manner.

The year 2011 has seen positive progress in Australia on human rights issues, with significant parts of the Framework being implemented and a constructive approach to its UPR review. It will be important for Australia to show that it can respond to the most difficult issues and bring its practice in line with international standards, particularly on the treatment of asylum seekers and equality for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

*Matilda Bogner is the Regional Representative for the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) Regional Office for the Pacific, based in Suva, Fiji.

ENDS