Reparations for the Stolen Generations free essay sample

The purpose of this essay is to explore and analyse the issue of compensation or reparations for members of the Stolen Generations. First, a brief overview of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families Inquiry (referred to as the Bringing Them Home Report or the Inquiry) will be provided including the key recommendations drawn from the Inquiry. Second, current reparations that have been offered to Indigenous people within Australia and abroad will be analysed. Finally, from the information gathered the appropriateness of existing reparations will be discussed and recommendations will be made. The Inquiry was â€Å"established in response to concerns among Indigenous agencies and communities that the Australian practice of separating Indigenous children from their families had never been formally examined† (HREOC, 2007). The Inquiry gathered evidence from a number of individuals and organisations including, but not limited to, Indigenous individuals, government and church representatives, government staff (eg. We will write a custom essay sample on Reparations for the Stolen Generations or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page olice and doctors) and academics (HREOC, 2007; add more refs). The scope of the Inquiry was to address key areas of concern regarding the removal of Aboriginal children relating to the laws, policies and practices that resulted in removal and their effects, whether the (then) current laws and practices were adequate enough to help people affected by past removal, factors needing consideration regarding compensation and whether the (then) current laws and policies needed adapting or changing (HREOC, 2007; Ellis, 1996). The results of the Inquiry uncovered, among other things, cases of sexual and physical abuse, harsh institutional conditions, basic education, loss of heritage and culture. The Inquiry led to the Bringing Them Home Report (BTHR), which outlined 54 recommendations. The categories of recommendation included acknowledgement and apology, guarantee against repetition, restitution, rehabilitation, monetary compensation and implementation (HREOC 2007; add more refs). The removal of Aboriginal children from their families under the notion of ‘assimilation’ and supported by the legislation and policy referred to as ‘Protection’ and ‘Welfare’ was a blatant attempt at genocide1 which is considered by the United Nations (UN) Human Rights Committee as a gross human rights violation (Sculthorpe Mansell, 2008; Ellis, 1996; Pritchard, 1998). Compensation tends to focus on monetary compensation whereas reparation2 is an umbrella term that encompasses all of the categories mentioned above. In light of what the Stolen Generations experienced and what was denied to them they deserve more than basic monetary compensation which is still being withheld by the majority of Australia. The BTHR made clear the expectation that Indigenous people involved in the Stolen Generations be granted reparations following the aforementioned practices inflicted upon them. Not meeting the requirement of providing reparations would be contrary to Australia’s international human rights obligations (Durbach, year? add refs). Nevertheless, little has been done to implement the BTHR recommendations (ref here). Although the Howard government projected a strong focus on reconciliation, they failed to recognise the relationship between justice and reconciliation. Howard’s refusal to apologise based on previous governments wrongdoings meant that very little could be done in the way of reconciliation. Without an apology the healing process for many Indigenous people affected by the Stolen Generations were unable to progress. (Durbach, add more). The Howard government did offer restitution in the form of a $63 million fund 6 months after the BTHR was published. This was to go towards reuniting divided Aboriginal families and the setting up of a national archive in order to trace the devastated communities and preserve the minority of Aboriginal languages still spoken today (references). Although the federal government failed only expressed ‘sincere regret’ for the practices upheld by previous governments, State governments offered formal apologies to the Aboriginal people in their jurisdiction. Between May 27 1997 and October 24 2001 all States apologised for the wrongdoings of their predecessors (website, add more refs). Once Rudd was federally elected, he offered, on February 13, 2008, a formal apology to the Aboriginal people on behalf of the Australian parliament and its people (references). However, the Rudd government clearly stipulated that offering a formal apology would in no way bring forward opportunities for Indigenous people to claim compensation for the forcible removal from their families and the many detrimental effects this had on individuals, families and whole communities (references). In more recent times, the government has promised to establish the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Healing Foundation (13th February, 2009). However, it won’t provide healing services but rather â€Å"fund healing work, educating the community and evaluating healing programs to find out what works† (references). Other restitution initiatives have been implemented across different States and Territories but these initiatives have failed to assist all affected Indigenous people (references). Additionally, the government offered services to reconnect members of the Stolen Generations with their families, but in November 2009 it was announced that National Archives Australia planned on closing four offices between 2010 and 2012 (references). This will prove extremely detrimental to the efforts of services such as Link-Up that rely on these records to assist in the reconnection process. On a State level, Tasmania is the only state to implement an initiative which specifically provides compensation to victims of the Stolen Generations. The Stolen Generations of Aboriginal Children Act 2006 (Tas) was a $5 million fund set up to provide payments to eligible applicants (references). â€Å"106 Aboriginal people qualified for one-off compensation payments while 45 cases were rejected† (website reference). Other initiatives include the Queensland Redress Scheme which offered compensation to individuals who were subject to institutional abuse or neglect and Redress Western Australia (WA), individuals receive monetary compensation as well as an official apology by the state government. If evidence of abuse resulting in medical or psychological loss or injury can be provided then they may be entitled to a further payment. While the QLD and WA Redress Schemes offer compensation to members of the Stolen Generations, they were created universally for all Australians subject to abuse in care settings and therefore do not only compensate the forcible removal of those in the Stolen Generations. (references). In order to claim compensation for being removed from their families, an individual may need to pursue formal litigation. This is a non-existent option for many Indigenous people due to the lack of financial resources, evidence and supporting documents. The evidence may be ‘lost’, destroyed or not kept. Also, there is difficulty seeking lawyers from their remote locations. One successful case is that of Bruce Trevorrow. He sued the South Australian parliament for his removal from his family without their knowledge or consent which led to a life of crime, poor health, alcoholism, smoking and depression. He was awarded $450,000 for injuries and losses and a further $75,000 for his unlawful removal and imprisonment. A further $250,000 was awarded at a later date for interest accumulated over 50 years (references). Australia is not the only country with an Aboriginal population therefore it is vital to consider initiatives that were implemented in other countries to combat similar injustices. Countries that will be explored in this paper are the United State (US), South Africa and Canada. When looking at Australia’s efforts of reparations in isolation the results are disturbing. However, when you compare these to initiatives that are being implemented in other countries it is nothing less than infuriating to see how little the Australian government is doing. The US’ most successful reparations measure was preventing a repetition of human rights violations. The Indian Child Welfare Act (1978) (ICWA) was enacted in order to â€Å"promote tribal sovereignty and reverse the effects of forced assimiliation† (references). Creating an Act such as the ICWA gives credence to Native Americans that similar injustices will not reoccur as it recognised that past policies were inhuman and a violation of basic human rights (references). President Clinton offered an apology to the Tuskegee people who were made part of an overtly racist Public Health Service study between 1932 and 1972 (references). Aside from Clinton’s apology and the enactment of the ICWA, the US’ biggest downfall is their disregard for the need of a formal national apology to the Native Americans (references). South Africa has made many measures to offer reparations to the victims (more info ) So far only acknowledgement and apology and restitution have been offered. Minimal compensation (generally not for simply being ‘stolen’ but for the abuse they received. No guarantees – signatory to UN Declaration, current intervention in NT, while restitution is offered in healing programs etc etc not much funding towards mental health, parenting etc etc. Implementation has been suggested but rejected by government.. blah blah blahn