The Challenge of Protecting the Rights and Legalization of Aboriginal People in Australia - Essay Example

? Indigenous people of Australia. Does Australia Need a Treaty? [Supervisor’s Indigenous people of Australia. Does Australia Need a Treaty? A treaty is defined as a compact agreement between two parties in which their mutual consent is included. The paper attempts to analyse the need for a treaty between indigenous and non-indigenous people of Australia and raises issues in favour and against of the treaty. The paper also provides a clear outline of the social, cultural, and political contexts facing indigenous people of Australia and the extent to which their human rights are accepted or abused. Furthermore, the paper also describes Victorian Charter and what it means for the indigenous people. Australia lacks a formal treaty with its indigenous and non-indigenous people which have been a goal for all councils that are planning to give human rights to these people. However, little or no concerns have been shown by the governing bodies of how the treaty should be accommodated with the constitution of Australia to protect the rights of indigenous and non-indigenous people (Broome, 2010). Aborigines, Torres Strait Islanders and other indigenous groups in Australia are the original dwellers of the Australian continent that has been living since 50,000 years. Great diversity is found between different communities in Australia which have different culture altogether. They have different languages and customs and are further divided into local communities that have more diversity in its form. But when the European settlement took place, they did not consider the rights of people that were originally the inhabitants of the country (Bartlett, 2002). Many people suggest that it would be unwise to form a treaty between aboriginal people because of their demands that would unlikely to be fulfilled. The indigenous people of Australia launched a book entitled ‘Treaty: Let’s get it right’ which was targeted at white people living in Australia and were trying to persuade them they need more than a treaty and reconciliation. The Aborigines have claimed to form a State which is ruled by their community setting up as a ‘Black State’ (Windschuttle, 2001). The book represented that they wanted to negotiate for the self government which seemed impossible for government to fulfil their demands. In Aboriginal politics, the people have always claimed for a separate nation but the main focus of their demand is the sovereignty of indigenous people. Many scholars do not agree with Aboriginal ideology because the whites have now outnumbered the indigenous people communities and now they have the right to rule in the country. The demands have forced many legal problems in the country (Hinton et al., 2008). Australia has never had a formal agreement on the treaty of indigenous people because Aboriginal have always been portrayed in the light of having no civilized pattern of living or government. The history has shown one sided relationship without covering the story of Aboriginals. They were termed as native savages by misleading people and make bad impressions in the mind of white people which developed hatred amongst them without realizing the truth. Indigenous people were completely overlooked by Australian justice and they did not consider them as relevant parties to compete with their rights. A treaty would eventually recognize and protect their rights that would lead to prosperous Australia (Langton, 2006). A treaty would be a final settlement between indigenous and non-indigenous people of Australia which would make things calm and would not give rise to civil war. The treaty is the best way for Aboriginal people to advance their cause for their freedom but before that a preliminary policy is needed that could give basic rights to indigenous people. The treaty is the central vision of Aboriginal people and it is an opportunity for them to brighten their future. These people would very far to achieve their vision which they have written many years before. It would allow them to control vast areas and land which was previously belonged to them alone and would help them to form a unique government in which they would have the right to command. To keep this view, the treaty would be a fair idea for these people because it would provide them their things to which they were restricted (Windschuttle, 2001). However, if the power is provided to the Aboriginal people in the treaty they would replace the ‘whites’ that ruled Australia for many years and provide them with Aboriginal leader. This would have both negative and positive outcomes. The positive outcome would show the struggle of indigenous people for their homeland and their fighting for their rights. But in the negative aspect, the Aboriginal people do not have any experience regarding controlling the people or governing the whole country. This is due to the lack of advancement of indigenous people which have restricted them from governing the State (Windschuttle, 2001). Since the settlement of British people, the settlers grabbed the land for economic purposes which gave rise to the British immigrants. Aboriginal people use to destroy their livestock’s and flocks because their rights were being neglected. There was a usual of between the two parties but someday the fight would get worst. The Europeans distributed flour amongst the Aborigines which was poisoned and brought various diseases that was harmful for their health. The Europeans had all means of restricting the Aborigines and to fight a war against them with the help of guns and warfare equipments (Marshall, 2004). The resistance of Aborigines have recently been evolved which has given true meanings for their rights. As indigenous people were deprived with their food, they came to the areas where there was a higher percentage of European settlers and presented itself as a labour. They were perceived as people who were trying to survive and merely a native savage that has no future. They became immersed in the European culture and started dwelling in those places. Considering the past history of indigenous people, they would want to regain their pride as before and it would be wise to be given their rights to which they have fought for many years (Windschuttle, 2001). The Human Rights panel has claimed that racial discrimination has been embedded in Australia and it is probably has to do with indigenous people. United Nation wants this issue to be dealt with sensitivity and care and should do more effort to integrate indigenous people and to stop the racial discrimination amongst Aborigines. It has also suggested a negotiation of a treaty with indigenous people as the only solution for providing their rights because they have fought for their freedom since the settlement of Europeans. They further suggested that the indigenous people should have access to the freedom in the Northern territory and they should be recognized as equal to the other communities regardless of any discrimination (United Nations, 2010). The different approach claims that the treaty should not be in order because Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission (ATSIC) believes that they want separate or distinct rights from the white people as they are the descendants of the land. This means that they would want to abandon the principle that states that every person is equal in the eyes of law which also means that indigenous and non-indigenous people will have different rights and Aborigines would have superior rights over them (Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies, 2003). However, others believe treaty as their right because they had been deprived from their land from many years. Since the establishment of the law that every person has equal rights regardless of their culture, religion and communities, the indigenous people are the ones that have benefited from these principles. Abandoning these principles would further deprive indigenous people and non-indigenous people (Windschuttle, 2001). It is true that the basic rights of Aborigines have been denied by Australians which is the worst crime committed by them. The people who claimed to be Aborigine’s friends did all they could to create a separatist system in which the Aborigines were incarcerated and were forced to stop their freedom activity. It is also a debate that the treaty would be socially divisive and it will create disharmony in the society. A treaty on the basis of racial grounds would create social division amongst all societies and it would create conflicts and would raise the heat between the societies. It is applicable that it would also create a political division as some people would not want Aborigines culture and their tradition to be equal than their own. This is the reason why the treaty is less likely to occur as there would be no arrangements for accepting arguments from both sides (Windschuttle, 2001). A treaty is defined as an agreement between two parties in which the mutual consent is present of both the parties. The treaty would have gains for Aboriginal party but Australia would have nothing to gain and it will lose everything (Langton et al., 2004). The Australian federation knows that the country will remain in peace if they do not have borders with any other country and it would remain in peace and stable. However, if a treaty has been made and Aborigines are to be given a new nation then the safety of the nation would be in jeopardy. The Australian government knows that if a State is established for Aborigines then they would become far stronger and would influence other points and will become far more troublesome for Australian government. It is believed through world history that societies that have claimed to be a separate nation on the basis of race and ethnicity have always been a disaster. The history reveals that it has brought bloodshed and tragedy with these societies and has developed hatred. This could be the reason that the treaty shall not take place because it would lead the nation to destruction and hatred amongst its people. (Windschuttle, 2001) People believe that it is now too late for the treaty and ask for the revival of the Aboriginal state because these indigenous people are not confined to one location, but they are widespread. The numbers have also shrunk and less than 75,000 Aborigines exist in Australia. It would be unwise to form a state which has little population but efforts should be made to give them equal rights to live in Australia. It is expected that if self government right is to be given to Aborigines, then the government would be undemocratic because there is an absence of political representative party in their community which could create concerns in Aborigines community. The political commitment for the rights of Aboriginal people is very low and any person could step up that could lead the people in a wrong direction. The reasons make up the strong declination of a treaty to be adopted with Aboriginal people (Windschuttle, 2001). Human right is essential for every democratic nation and it has to oblige the right of every human being regardless of their age, culture and religion. The Act of Parliament for the freedom and equality for indigenous people of Australia also known as the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities was developed in 2007 which was based on 20 rights for indigenous people. The Charter defined that Aboriginal people have important rights as they are the first descendant of the country. It allows all the governing and law making authorities to consider human rights for the Aboriginal people of Victoria before making any laws and policies. This Charter was greatly admired by the indigenous people of Victoria because after so many years Australian government had recognized their rights and taken some steps to appreciate their rights. The people were satisfied because it aimed to promote fair community treatments by the Victorian government (Human Rights Charter, 2012). According to this Charter, the minority group would then have their rights for what they believe and their ideas, they would have free trial and moreover, they could freely enjoy their culture. Freedom was the important thing that was the stance for indigenous people to which they were deprived for many years. Their culture was not recognized and they were not being treated equally in trails. The Charter placed obligations on public authorities to respect and recognize the rights of the Aboriginal people and gave freedom for movement, privacy and vote (Purdi et al., 2010). Therefore, the decision for making a treaty is still in consideration and would take an enormous effort to mutually accept view of both the parties. List of References Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies, 2003. Treaty: Let's Get it Right! : a Collection of Essays from ATSIC's Treaty think and authors commissioned by AIATSIS on treaty issues. 1st ed. Canberra: Aboriginal Studies Press. Bartlett, A., 2002. The Aboriginal Peoples of Australia. 1st ed. Singapore: Lerner Publications. Broome, R., 2010. Aboriginal Australians: A History Since 1788. 4th ed. Sydney: Allen & Unwin. Hinton, M., Jhonston, E. and Ringney, D., 2008. Indigenous Australians and the Law. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge. Human Rights Charter, 2012. The Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities. [Online] Viewed at: [Accessed 09 September 2012]. Langton, M., 2006. Settling with Indigenous People: Modern Treaty and Agreement-Making. 2nd ed. Sydney: Federation Press. Langton, M., Tehan, M., Palmer, I. and Shain, K., 2004. Honour Among Nations?: Treaties and Agreements with Indigenous People. 1st ed. Melbourne: Academic Monographs. Marshall, D., 2004. Aboriginal Australians. 1st ed. New York: Weigl Publishers Inc. Purdi, N., Dudgeon, P. and Walker, R., 2010. Working Together: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Mental Health and Wellbeing Principles and Practice. Research. Victoria: Commonwealth of Australia Commonwealth. United Nations, 2010. Australia should negotiate a treaty with its Indigenous people: United Nations. [Online] Viewed at: [Accessed 9 September 2012]. Windschuttle, K., 2001. Why there should be no Aboriginal treaty. [Online] Viewed at: [Accessed 09 September 2012]. Read More