Interculturality, identity, and self-determination in an Aboriginal cultural centre (original) (raw)
Related papers
Indigenous Rights and the Politics of Indigenous Identity and Knowledge
In considering Indigenous agency this paper explores the challenges to scientific interpretations of Indigenous experience. A powerful critique of scientific interpretations of Indigeneity is presented by Indigenous decolonisation theories that aim to achieve an authentic representation of Indigenous experience. These are examined in the context of the academy, and then, certain philosophical, legal and cultural foundations of human rights are examined alongside the historical development of Indigenous rights within human rights frameworks. An investigation is made of the various Enlightenment discourses that were brought to bear on popular attitudes regarding Indigenous peoples and an exploration is made of those concepts that have contributed to the systematic denials of Indigenous rights in Australia. Finally, it surveys the ways in which such conceptions have influenced western knowledge production and appraises Indigenous life-stories, testimony and art narrative as decolonising method.
Australian Journal of Public Administration
The papers in this symposium are further iterations of most of the papers that were presented to a symposium on 21 st February 2018. This symposium was a joint initiative of the Whitlam Institute within Western Sydney University and Nura Gili Indigenous Programs, UNSW Sydney. Along with Heidi Norman (UTS), we were the convenors of this event. The title of the symposium-taking 'a rightful place in our own country'-comes from the Uluru Statement from the Heart. The symposium was designed as an event that could lead and provoke public conversation about the implications of the Uluru Statement from the Heart and the Referendum Council's Final Report for the entire Australian political community. It drew very deliberately on a wide range of perspectives: Indigenous and non-Indigenous, academics and practitioners, established and emerging. 1 We saw it as important that that the current challenge for constitutional recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples was contextualised in relation to previous historical moves in the direction of institutionalising democracy and self-determination for the First Nations of Australia. We also sought the opportunity to reflect on the myriad forms that self-determination takes, and can take, in the Australian polity, at all levels of governance and policy-making. In editing the papers for this symposium, we have been as deliberately non-interventionist as possible, wishing to facilitate as well as trust the idiom and perspective of each author. For this reason, we have left the issue of how to refer to the First Peoples of Australia unresolved. While the Uluru Statement uses the language of 'First Nations', there is no settled usage, and it is clear that this question of usage is inevitably both historical as well as political. The Commonwealth Government uses the language of 'Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people,' to designate Indigenous Australians, while Haylene Grogan in her paper says that, ideally, people want to be recognised as 'Wiradjuri, Gamillaraay, Bundjalung or Gumbaynggiir, not Indigenous, NOT Aboriginal.' We think it best that in reading these papers, readers become aware of the political significance, complexity and variation of terminology used to refer to Indigenous Australians, there being no one term that can suffice. The Whitlam Government provided the first opening in the settler state of Australia for both the idea and the practice of Indigenous self-determination. Jenny Hocking's contribution sets out the path-breaking initiatives of this government in this area. Two other papers in this symposium-Perheentupa's and Ganter's-also address both the significance and the complexity of the Whitlam era for Indigenous self-determination with particular reference to Aboriginal-led policy and program initiatives in Redfern, the urban heart of the Aboriginal self-determination movement in the 1970s (Perheentupa), and to the question of how to integrate Indigenous presence and voice into the administration of the Australian state (Ganter). The distinctive virtue of these two papers resides in how they S2
2006
I am so pleased and honored to be part of this Symposium on "Protecting Indigenous Identities: Struggles & Strategies Under International and Comparative Law." I want to extend my deepest thanks and appreciation to Dean Aviam Soifer, Professor Mark Levin, Professor Jonathan Osorio and all of the members of the Asian-Pacific Law & Policy Journal for treating me so well and making my visit to Hawai'i so enjoyable. I am inspired by the work that is taking place here, and I am very honored to be in the presence of the leaders who are here this evening, on the panel, and out in the audience. Thank you. My topic this evening concerns the concept of "nationhood" for indigenous peoples. In particular, I would like to explore the notion of self-determination which, I think, is understood quite differently under domestic U.S. law than it is under contemporary international law. What is happening in Hawai'i, including the controversy over the Akaka bill, exemplifies the tensions between domestic and international law. Hawai'i is a vitally important site for the articulation of self-determination because of its unique history and
"Preface" to Restoring Indigenous Self-Determination
E-International Relations Publishing, 2015
What are the sources of self-determining authority for Indigenous nations and peoples? How one responds to this question reveals competing narratives and worldviews relating to the self-determination discourse. These are some of the topics addressed in Woons’ edited volume, which also serves as an important primer on the global self-determination discourse.
Self-Determination as Foundation to Indigenous Peoples’ Rights
Developed in the 15th Century through a series of pontifical writings, the “The doctrine of discovery” helped western countries to put in place a domination system depriving indigenous peoples’ rights, most especially the rights to a land and access to their resources. That article tries to show that, it is through the self determination that indigenous people can do away with a segregationist system that has kept them into a state of alienation, defend their rights and fight against all sorts of discrimination due to the fact that they belong to a group different from the majority. However, The declaration of the United Nations on the Rights of indigenous people, it acknowledges the right to self-determination enable the indigenous people to get organized to improve their situation on political, economic, social and cultural plans and end all kinds of discrimination and oppressions wherever it is operates. The self-determination can the make it possible to obstruct the forced assimilation policy and makes cultural diversity possible as values of human dignity. The rationale behind this study was to demonstrate that it is only through auto determination that indigenous people can do away with a segregationist system that keep them in an alienation state. It enables them defend their rights and fight against all kinds of discrimination caused by their belonging to a group different from the majority.
Indigenous peoples’ human rights, self-determination and local governance – Part 1
Commonwealth Journal of Local Governance, 2021
This is the first of two articles exploring the international human rights framework as it relates to Indigenous peoples' land rights and interests, with a focus on Australia. Over the past 30 years, the international community has increasingly recognised that special attention needs to be paid to the individual and collective rights of Indigenous peoples, as they are among the world's most marginalised peoples. For a long time, the Indigenous peoples of the world have used the international human rights system to tackle discrimination and abuses of their rights, and the United Nations has increasingly become a place for them to voice their concerns. In Australia, there has been a long-running debate about the lack of recognition of the First Peoples in Australia's Constitution. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are increasingly demanding that the full suite of international human rights norms and standards are applicable to their affairs and to dealings with them, including the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. This first article discusses the international human rights framework as it relates to the Indigenous peoples of Australia. The second article will take a closer look at how the land rights and interests of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are being recognised at the national and state jurisdictional levels within Australia, with reference to recent comparable actions in Canada and New Zealand.
Indigenous peoples’ human rights, self-determination and local governance – Part 2
Commonwealth Journal of Local Governance
Part 1 of this article explored the relevance of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples of Australia, particularly the key principles of self-determination and free, prior and informed consent; how the international human rights framework applies in Australia; and Australia’s lack of compliance with it. Part One concluded by discussing the Uluru Statement from the Heart, presented to all the people of Australia in 2017, and how it marked a turning point in the struggle for recognition by Australia’s Indigenous peoples. Part 2 explores recent developments since the release of the Uluru Statement, especially at sub-national levels, in relation to treaty and truth-telling. It draws some comparisons with Canada and New Zealand, discusses the concept of coexistence, and presents a set of Foundational Principles for Parity and Coexistence between two culturally distinct systems of land ownership, use and tenure.