30 years on: Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody recommendations remain unimplemented (original) (raw)
Related papers
2018
The Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research (CAEPR) undertakes high-quality, independent research to further the social and economic development and empowerment of Indigenous people throughout Australia. For more than 25 years, CAEPR has aimed to combine academic and teaching excellence on Indigenous economic and social development and public policy with realism, objectivity and relevance. CAEPR maintains a substantial publications program, including Research Monographs, Discussion Papers, Working Papers and Topical Issues. Topical Issues present a broad range of documents relating to contemporary issues and debates, and are produced for rapid distribution to enable widespread discussion and comment. They are subject to internal peer review. All CAEPR publications are available in electronic format for free download from CAEPR's website: caepr.cass.anu.edu.au CAEPR is located within the Research School of Social Sciences in the College of Arts & Social Sciences at the Australian National University (ANU). The Centre is funded from a range of sources, including ANU, the Australian Research Council, industry and philanthropic partners, and Australian state and territory governments.
CRITICAL REFLECTIONS UPON AUSTRALIA'S ROYAL COMMISSION INTO ABORIGINAL DEATHS IN CUSTODY
Over a decade after the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody (RCIADIC) tabled its National Report, the report and its 339 recommendations are still cited whenever suggestions are made or policies are introduced which target the over-representation of Indigenous people in custody. It is therefore timely and relevant that its appropriateness in dealing with Indigenous over-representation, and with Indigenous marginalisation generally, be critically reassessed. In particular, there is a need to consider whether the investigative procedures undertaken by the RCIADIC and the political constraints surrounding its inception resulted in non-orthodox information and perspectives being excluded. This paper uses data collected from interviews with 48 people associated with the RCIADIC in order to critically reflect upon the way in which the inquiry was established and conducted to determine whether it was constrained in its ability to fully consider the problems confronting Indigenous Australians when dealing with the Australian justice system.
Futures, 2002
This article applies the futures research methodology called Causal Layered Analysis to the Australian Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody. Specifically the method is used to analyse the 339 recommendations of this Royal Commission that examined the causes of some 99 Aboriginal Deaths in Custody during the nine-year period from 1/1/1980. Spanning a generational period of 20 years, 10 of which since the multi million dollar Royal Commission and multi-multi million-dollar implementation process were put in place, aboriginal deaths in custody remain at the same rate. Conclusions are drawn about the inquiry, its inability to access deeper layers of cross-cultural causation and the separate implementation process. Further the failure of public administration in implementing the recommendations are also explored. Finally an 'act of recovery' is proposed to help us learn to prevent this happening again.
Missing Subjects: Women and Gender in The Royal Commission Into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody
2018
Although the Australian Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody (RCIADIC) tabled its National Report over a decade ago, its 339 recommendations are still used to steer Indigenous justice policy. The inquiry is viewed by many policy makers and scholars as an important source of knowledge regarding the post-colonial lives of Indigenous people. It began as an investigation into Indigenous deaths in custody, but its scope was later broadened to encompass a wide range of matters affecting Indigenous Australians. There have been numerous criticisms made about the way the investigation was conducted and about the effectiveness and appropriateness of the recommendations made. Of particular relevance to this thesis are those criticisms that have highlighted the failure of the RCIADIC to consider the problems confronting Indigenous women. It has been claimed that although problems such as family violence and the sexual abuse of Indigenous women by police were acknowledged by both t...
Submission to the Australian Law Reform Commission Inquiry into Indigenous Incarceration Rates
2017
The ongoing social injustices faced by Indigenous Australians comprise one of the greatest tragedies and failures of successive Australian governments. While commending the efforts of many individuals and institutions over the years in addressing this issue, including the Attorney- General in calling for this inquiry, we want to highlight that this area has been consistently and severely under-resourced both in a fiscal and culturally appropriate context. Australia has been built on the blood, sweat and tears of our Indigenous peoples. Our hospitals and public infrastructure have been funded by wages owed to unpaid Indigenous workers.1 And yet, First Nations peoples today are still not the primary agents behind many of the policies that affect them.
Another Aboriginal death in custody: uneasy alliances and tensions in the Mulrunji case
Legal Studies, 2008
The death of an Aboriginal man, Mulrunji, in an Australian police cell in 2004 precipitated an extraordinary response from the community. The usual distinctions between the roles of police, coroner, prosecutors and politicians became confused and merged in the media maelstrom that followed the death. Uneasy alliances developed which qualified the binary response of right versus wrong. Could the coroner's findings be reconciled with the decision of the prosecutor not to try the police officer involved? Was the government's response of overriding the decision of the independent prosecutor justified? What does this case tell us about the adversarial and inquisitorial approaches to evidence? This paper examines the tensions at play in the response to the death of Mulrunji and explores the wide reaching implications for law and justice in death in custody cases.