Universal Periodic Review – Updates from the NGO Coalition



UPR Video Update No 8 featuring the Attorney-General

A special edition of the UPR Video Updates, featuring the Federal Attorney-General the Hon Robert McClelland MP!


 



Thematic Grouping of UPR Recommendations

On behalf of the NGO Coalition, Kingsford Legal Centre has prepared a document which groups the 145 UPR recommendations into each of the 17 thematic focus areas identified by the Australian NGO Coalition.  The document is intended to assist NGOs and community organisations to use the recommendations in their policy and advocacy work.  Click here for the Thematic Grouping of UPR Recommendations.


Outcomes Document – UN Human Rights Council’s Draft Report

The Draft Report of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review of Australia is available here.

The Response of Australia to the Draft Report, delivered by Australia’s Ambassador to the UN in Geneva is here.

The Draft Report will be formally adopted at the next UN Human Rights Council in June 2011.


Monday, 31 January 2011 – Video Update No 7 on adoption of the Draft Report

Ben Schokman provides an update on the adoption of the Draft Report of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review of Australia.  The Draft Report has now been released – click here for a copy of the UN document.


 


Friday, 28 January 2011 – Video Update No 6

The NGO delegation provide a debrief of Australia’s UPR appearance and look ahead to adoption of the recommendations and follow up with the Australian Government.


 

” />

 



NGO Report on the UPR Session

Government’s Opening Statement

The Australian Government delegation opened the Universal Periodic Review session by providing a brief opening statement.  The statement outlined Australia’s strong track record on human rights but also that the Government openly acknowledges human rights challenges.  The statement addressed areas including the Close the Gap strategy, efforts relating to gender equality, the establishment of the National Congress and the National Apology, among other areas.  The statement also addressed the collaborative process adopted by Government in preparing for the UPR which involved working with the Australian Human Rights Commission and NGOs.  The Government stated that it looked forward to further consultation in implementing the UPR recommendations.

During the session, the Australian Government also took the opportunity to announce the following new commitments:

  1. appointment of full time Race and Disability Discrimination Commissioners;
  2. from 2011, Australia will table the reports and view of UN human rights bodies and mechanisms in Parliament;
  3. Australia will develop a systematic process for reviewing reservations to human rights treaties; and
  4. Australia will make a further contribution of over $2 million to the UN OHCHR for the protection of human rights the Asia Pacific region and a further $650,000 to the Asia-Pacific Forum for National Human Rights Institutions.

Other commitments identified by the Government at the conclusion of the session were the establishment of a publicly available database to enable auditing of Australia’s compliance with UN recommendations and that UPR recommendations be included in the Government’s National Human Rights Action Plan, which is currently under development.


Dialogue with Countries

In the time available, 50 countries had the opportunity to ask questions of the Australian Government, with close to 150 recommendations being made in total.  A summary of these recommendations by the 17 thematic priorities identified by the NGO coalition is set out below.


1. Constitutional and legislative framework

Australia’s failure to fully incorporate its international human rights obligations into domestic law was one of the key focuses of the NGO delegation’s lobbying with states and, very happily, this was one of the major issues addressed by states during Australia’s review.  In total, close to 40 recommendations were made by states relating to strengthening human rights protections in Australia’s domestic laws.

The Australian Government’s decision not to adopt a Human Rights Act, despite this being the key recommendation of the National Human Rights Consultation, was referred to by many countries, with around 13 countries specifically recommending that Australia adopt legislation that comprehensively protects human rights.

Other recommendations relating to Australia’s framework for protecting human rights included enhancing human rights education, funding for the Australian Human Rights Commission, follow up to UN recommendations and the adoption of a National Action Plan for human rights.

Further recommendations related to Australia ratifying outstanding human rights treaties, including the Convention on Migrant Workers and the Convention on Enforced Disappearances.  Ratification and implementation of the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture – which requires independent monitoring of places of detention – also received a large number of specific recommendations.

A number of recommendations were also made to Australia to remove its reservations to treaties to which it is a party, particularly article 4(a) of CERD relating to anti-vilification.


2. Equality and non discrimination laws

There were ten recommendations made by states that specifically referenced the need for stronger equality protections.  Six recommendations specifically addressed the current consolidation project; three related specifically to racial discrimination and other recommendations centred on minorities and hate speech.

Of those recommendations relating to the current consolidation project, there were calls for inclusion of discrimination on the basis of all prohibited grounds and promotion of substantive equality.  It was very pleasing to hear states repeatedly using our phrasing with respect to recommendations made.


3. Women’s rights

Pleasingly, there were more than 25 recommendations made relating to women’s rights.  These recommendations centred on:

  • doing more to reduce violence against women, including implementing the National Plan with an independent monitoring mechanism to ensure accountability;
  • promoting equality in the private sector, including better representation of women on boards;
  • equal pay;
  • implementation of the recommendations of the report on the Sex Discrimination Act;
  • enacting legislation prohibiting the use of non-therapeutic sterilisation of children, regardless of whether they have a disability and of adults with disability in the absence of their fully informed and free consent;
  • better protections in equality law, including promoting substantive equality and ensuring protection against all forms of discrimination;
  • specific protection against discrimination on ground basis of sexual orientation and gender identity (raised several times);
  • strengthening protections against family violence;
  • increasing legal services for Indigenous women; and
  • measures to address human trafficking including particularly focusing upon victims of trafficking.


4. People with disability

One of the major issues relating to people with disability that arose during the review was on the issue of sterilisation of women and children.  The UK, Belgium, Germany and Denmark all issued strong recommendations that Australia cease this practice.

The other major issues raised on the rights of PWD related to the draft National Disability Strategy, with recommendations made that Australia increase its efforts in this area.  Disability rights also received attention in the context of strengthening Australian anti-discrimination laws.


5. Children’s rights

The major focus of recommendations relating to children was on the establishment of an office of Children’s Rights Commissioner.  Specific reference was also made to implementation of the Concluding Observations made by the UN CRC regarding sterilisation of children, in addition to the recommendations referred to above under the people with disability section.  Reference was also made to enhancing protection for children in the context of discrimination laws.  Russia also made a specific recommendation regarding the prohibition of corporal punishment.


6. Sexual and gender identity

GLBTI rights received around 4 specific recommendations, particularly in relation to the strengthening of equality laws and the recognition of same-sex marriage.  New Zealand recommended that Australia legislate to protect discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation “as a high priority”.  Norway specifically recommended that Australia amend the Marriage Act to recognise same sex marriage.


7. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples

During speaking time, most states made specific references to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander issues and expressed concern about continuing racism.  In usual diplomatic approach, the Australian Government was commended for the national apology to the ‘Stolen Generations’, the ‘Closing the Gap’ policies, the sign-on to the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the commitment to the National Congress of Australia’s First Peoples.  In these matters the government has shown itself to be supporting a human rights approach.

However, many countries were also well informed on the problems being faced by the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.  There were recommendations that more should be done under the policies and services to increase efforts by the government and to remove all discriminatory provisions in laws, programs and service delivery.  Increased efforts to close the gap were recommended.  More resources to the Aboriginal legal services were needed, especially for women and remote populations to have reasonable access to legal protections.

While states were aware that the Racial Discrimination Act had recently been reinstated to apply to the Northern Territory emergency response they were not convinced that the continuing administrative measures were in compliance with Australia’s international human rights obligations.  Noting earlier reports received from the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination a number of States called for a review of the procedures and the laws applying to the Northern Territory intervention.  One State proposed that the government should refer to the guidelines developed by the Australian Human Rights Commission and consult with the local Aboriginal people before any further policy proposals are implemented in the Northern Territory.  Another State noted that the lands of the Aboriginal people were being wrongly taken under lease by the government in exchange for housing and basic services.

Almost all recommendations called for greater powers to the Aboriginal people in decision making. The States consistently cited the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples as the basis for government laws, policies and programs.  A few States recommended that the Declaration be enshrined in the Constitution while other States called for a review of the Constitution and laws to ensure they uphold the rights contained in the Declaration.  There were also recommendations that Australia sign and ratify ‘Convention No 169′ of the International Labour Organisation (ILO) dealing with the rights of Indigenous and Tribal Peoples.  Most States expected that the Government would consult directly with the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples to design new strategies.

The States making recommendations on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander issues included Austria, Belgium, Bolivia, Bosnia, Canada, Columbia, Denmark, France, Ghana, Guatemala, Indonesia, Jordan, Malaysia, Mexico, Morocco, Norway, Russia, Slovenia and United Kingdom.


8. Refugees and asylum seekers

Significant recommendations were made relating to the rights of refugees, with many of the 13 recommendations focusing on mandatory immigration detention.  Recommendations were made to cease the practice of mandatory detention and put time limits on detention, with others also specially referring to off-shore processing facilities and the conditions of detention.  Two recommendations specially referred to children in immigration detention.

Further recommendations related to issues including non-refoulement, the legal protections afforded to asylum seekers and community education about refugees and asylum seekers.

The issue of human trafficking was also on a number of occasions, with five countries making recommendations including particularly on Australia’s role in the region to combat trafficking.


9. Culturally and linguistically diverse communities

Multiculturalism was a specific focus of many comments and recommendations made by other states to Australia.  This issue was particularly relevant given the side-event that was hosted the previous day by the Australian Government on combating racism through sport.  Specific recommendations related to the development of a multicultural policy, issues relating to attacks against Indian students and recognition and respect for cultural values.


10. Administration of justice

The issues raised relating to access to justice included recommendations relating to incarceration rates of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.  Both Austria and Russia made recommendations to reduce the over-representation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in prisons.  Significantly, Bolivia also recommended an increase in access to legal services, particularly for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women in remote communities.


11 and 12.  Poverty and Homelessness

A significant number of countries made recommendations regarding poverty, social inclusion and reducing socio-economic disadvantage, particularly for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.  In particular, it was recommended that Australia develop a ‘comprehensive anti-poverty and social inclusion strategy’ and also enhance efforts to ‘close the gap’ in Indigenous disadvantage, including in the areas of housing, health and education.


13. Mental health care

Unfortunately, the issue of mental health care was not specifically raised in recommendations by any states.  However, the issue did receive mention in the general context of immigration detention, as well as conditions in prisons.


14. Counter–terrorism

There were a number of strong recommendations made regarding Australia’s counter-terrorism laws.  Issued raised included reviewing Australia’s counter-terror laws to ensure compliance with international human rights standards, as well as the appointment of an Independent Security Legislation Monitor.  The specific issue of torture in the context of counter-terrorism was also raised.


15. Police

Most of the recommendations relating to police and law enforcement focused on better regulation of use of force and the issue of Tasers.  Specific recommendations also made reference to the importance of independent accountability and oversight mechanisms for investigating police, better human rights training for law enforcement officials, as well as reference to human rights standards.


16. Prisoners and prison conditions

Along similar lines to recommendations relating to oversight and accountability of police, recommendations relating to prison also focused on independent mechanisms to monitor prisons.  In particular, many countries recommended that Australia speed up its process of ratification and implementation of OP-CAT and the establishment of independent monitoring and oversights bodies.  The issue of detention in prisons also received attention, including concerns about overcrowding and investigation of Aboriginal deaths in custody.


17. Extra-territorial obligations

A number of states made recommendations that Australia strengthen efforts to combat global poverty, including by protecting overseas development assistance from budgetary cuts and increasing ODA to 0.7% of GDP in accordance with the MDGs.  The Maldives made a specific recommendation that Australia adopt a rights based approach to climate change and reducing green gas emissions to ensure full enjoyment of human rights.  Numerous states also recommended that Australia ratify the Convention on the Rights of Migrant Workers and their Families.

There were no recommendations made in relation to business and human rights.


18. Additional recommendations

Pleasingly, a handful of important recommendations were made by states in addition to the thematic areas identified by the NGO coalition.  These recommendations included:

  • As referred to above, the Maldives made a specific recommendation relating to climate change and human rights.
  • Israel made a specific recommendation that Australia remove restrictions on the rights of workers to strike.


Replay of the UPR Session

You can watch a reply of Australia’s UPR session by visiting http://www.un.org/webcast/unhrc/archive.asp?go=110127#pm1.

You can also follow our comments from during the UPR session on Facebook or Twitter using #OzUPR.


Wednesday, 26 January 2011 – Video Update No 5

An update from our secret panel (apologies for the lighting!) on the list of countries that will ask questions and recommendations to Australia, the arrival and composition of the Australian Government delegation, last minute NGO lobbying and advocacy and a joint event hosted by the Australian Government and AFL on combating racism through sport.

(Shout outs and bloopers also included in this one!)


 

” />

 


Tuesday, 25 January 2011 – Further Advance Questions Released

Australia has received further Advance Questions about its human rights record ahead of its Universal Periodic Review examination in Geneva on Thursday.

A total of 10 further questions have been asked by France, Germany, Norway and Slovenia on issues including the need for a Human Rights Act, Australia’s policy of mandatory immigration detention and offshore processing, violence against women and gender inequality, Aboriginal health and housing, the compulsory acquisition of Indigenous land under the NT Intervention, and the expulsion of asylum seekers to situations of possible torture or persecution.

“Will Australia adopt a Charter of Rights?” asks France.

What steps is Australia taking to increase women’s participation in positions of leadership, asks Norway, and what further measures will Australia take to reduce violence against women and children?

Will Australia change its policy of mandatory immigration detention, asks Germany, particularly in light of concerns regarding the impact of detention on asylum seeker’s health?

Norway also asks “Can Australia assure us that [offshore] immigration detention centres will be used only as a measure of last resort and for a very limited time?”

Slovenia is particularly forthright in its questions, asking in reference to the NT Intervention, ”Is it true that State-funded essential services are only available to Aboriginal communities if a community agrees to hand over control of their property for a fixed amount of time?”

Slovenia has also asked whether Australia is ”in breach of it’s obligation” under the Refugees Convention, particularly in relation to detention and the expulsion of failed asylum seekers to possible death, torture or persecution.

According to Ben Schokman of the Human Rights Law Resource Centre and a member of the Australian NGO Coalition in Geneva for the review, “The questions reflect some of the significant and serious human rights issues that persist in Australia.”  Mr Schokman said that “urgent action is needed in these areas to protect human rights and fundamental freedoms at home and to safeguard our international standing and reputation abroad.”

Each of the additional advance questions reflect issues raised in a major NGO report on Australia to the UN, together with matters discussed between NGO delegates and foreign diplomats in Geneva.

The NGO report contains more than 50 concrete recommendations which the coalition is working to ensure are reflected in the recommendations adopted on Australia during the UPR.

According to Liz Snell of Women’s Legal Services NSW, “We look forward to the Australian Government’s response to these questions during the Universal Periodic Review on Thursday.”  Ms Snell added that, “the NGO coalition is committed to working with government to improve the promotion and protection of human rights in Australia and will play an important role in holding government to account in implementing recommendations that arise from the UPR.”

A summary of NGO recommendations is available here, with further recommendations specific to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples here.

Contacts:

Ben Schokman and Phil Lynch, Human Rights Law Resource Centre, + 41 76 708 4738 or phil.lynch@hrlrc.org.au

Liz Snell, Women’s Legal Services NSW, 0450 107 667 or liz_snell@clc.net.au


Monday, 24 January 2011 – Update on Formal NGO Briefing

Phil Lynch and Ben Schokman (HRLRC), Liz Snell (Women’s Legal Service NSW) and Les Malezer (FAIRA) provide a fourth update from Geneva.  Today’s video focuses on the formal NGO briefing to foreign diplomats, which took place at lunchtime today.


 


Friday, 21 January 2011 – UPR Update 3

Les Malezer (FAIRA), and Jacqui Zalcberg (ALHR) and Liz Snell (Women’s Legal Services NSW) provide a third update from Geneva, speaking about lobbying foreign diplomats, feedback received on the NGO Coalition’s materials, and preparing for the NGO side-event on Monday.

YouTube video

 


Thursday, 20 January 2011 – Advance Questions Released

Today in Geneva, a number of countries submitted Advance Questions to Australia ahead of its UPR appearance next Thursday.  Those countries include some of Australia’s closest allies and global human rights leaders, including the United Kingdom, Sweden, the Netherlands and Denmark.

In total, Australia has been asked 30 questions in advance, including in relation to:

  • the lack of a national Human Rights Act;
  • mandatory indefinite immigration detention, including the detention of many children;
  • inadequate legal protection against discrimination, including on the grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity;
  • the severe disadvantage and discrimination experienced by Indigenous Australians, including under the NT Intervention;
  • the compliance of Australia’s counter-terrorism laws and practices with international human rights standards;
  • violence against women;
  • the non-therapeutic sterilisation of people with disability; and
  • same-sex relationship recognition and marriage equality.

It is expected that the Australian delegation respond to these questions during its review on 27 January 2011.


Wednesday, 19 January 2011 – UPR Update 2

Les Malezer (FAIRA), Ben Schokman (HRLRC) and Jacqui Zalcberg (ALHR) provide a second update from Geneva, speaking about chasing up meetings with Missions, talking about human rights with the US and fun and games with the speakers’ list.


 


Monday, 17 January 2011

Les Malezer (FAIRA) and Ben Schokman (HRLRC) report on the first few days of lobbying in Geneva for Australia’s UPR appearance on 27 January 2011.


 


Further Information

The following further information is available about Australia’s Universal Periodic Review:



Found in Content, Focus Areas - Other