Ive been keeping an eye on this story for a while, and had argued with a lefty mate that not even KRudd could be stupid enough to sign up for this particular UN treaty.
I was wrong.
Mr KRudd has effectively made 90% of Australians second class citizens in their own country. Bear with me, as I pick apart the treaty that is related to this news item, and its likely devastatingimpact on Australia.
Australia to support UN Indigenous rights declaration
Australia will next week officially back the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, reversing the Howard Government’s vote against it in 2007.
Indigenous Affairs Minister Jenny Macklin will make a statement on Australia’s change in position on April 3 at Parliament House in Canberra. ….
….Australia was a key player in drafting the declaration in the 1980s and 90s but the Howard government eventually chose to vote against it in 2007.
It was one of only four countries including the United States, Canada and New Zealand to do so.
Great weve signed up for a treaty so excremental not even Canada or New Zealand would sign it…..
Below the fold for the longer version.
Heres the link to the full treaty, I have pulled apart what I think are the worst parts, and deduced the likely impact based on past events and a bit of speculation. In the event of an activist judiciary (or one acting under the proposed bill of rights) I can safely say this treaty will trump nearly all existing Australian law/land tenure/civic rights.
This is vaguely worded, does it mean equal rights within an existing framework? Or is it advocating separatism as an inalienable right?
Indigenous peoples have the right to self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.
Interesting how “ways and means of funding” is also vague, almost like it will fall on the majority of the population to support these “functions”. This will undoubtedly lead to another body similar to ATSIC, the notoriously corrupt organisation disbanded due to its unworkability. Only this time it will have its funding mandated by treaty rather than by Parliament.
Indigenous peoples, in exercising their right to self-determination, have the right to autonomy or self-government in matters relating to their internal and local affairs, as well as ways and means for financing their autonomous functions.
This section effectively sentences children to be abandoned to abuse. Nothing more, nothing less.
2. Indigenous peoples have the collective right to live in freedom, peace and security as distinct peoples and shall not be subjected to any act of genocide or any other act of violence, including forcibly removing children of the group to another group.
This section has a nasty little sting in its tail. It effectively means the end of any negative reporting on indigenous issues. The media should be up in arms about it. A series of media reports (many by Mr Tooey, of the Australian newspaper) was a large part of what allowed the Howard government to attempt the intervention. This clause would make his reporting a hate crime.
(e) Any form of propaganda designed to promote or incite racial or ethnic discrimination directed against them.
Ready to see city names hyphenated? Millions spent on educating people in dead languages and providing interpreters for them as well. (this already happens in Australian courts).
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to revitalize, use, develop and transmit to future generations their histories, languages, oral traditions, philosophies, writing systems and literatures, and to designate and retain their own names for communities, places and persons.
2. States shall take effective measures to ensure that this right is protected and also to ensure that indigenous peoples can understand and be understood in political, legal and administrative proceedings, where necessary through the provision of interpretation or by other appropriate means.
The following is simply unworkable. Schools will be expected to provide not only schooling in dead languages, but also somehow transmit culture as well? Ludicrous crap.
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to establish and control their educational systems and institutions providing education in their own languages, in a manner appropriate to their cultural methods of teaching and learning.
2. Indigenous individuals, particularly children, have the right to all levels and forms of education of the State without discrimination.
3. States shall, in conjunction with indigenous peoples, take effective measures, in order for indigenous individuals, particularly children, including those living outside their communities, to have access, when possible, to an education in their own culture and provided in their own language.
Nicely worded, but have no doubt, this is aimed at making any criticism of Aboriginal institutions (such as local councils/ATSIC) forbidden.
2. States shall take effective measures, in consultation and cooperation with the indigenous peoples concerned, to combat prejudice and eliminate discrimination and to promote tolerance, understanding and good relations among indigenous peoples and all other segments of society.
Again the privately owned media are to be “encouraged” while the States “shall take” steps to transmit in hundreds of dialects? Are they fools or just stupid?
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to establish their own media in their own languages and to have access to all forms of non-indigenous media without discrimination.
2. States shall take effective measures to ensure that State-owned media duly reflect indigenous cultural diversity. States, without prejudice to ensuring full freedom of expression, should encourage privately owned media to adequately reflect indigenous cultural diversity.
Separate government? Or treaty backed ATSIC on steroids?
Indigenous peoples have the right to participate in decision-making in matters which would affect their rights, through representatives chosen by themselves in accordance with their own procedures, as well as to maintain and develop their own indigenous decision-making institutions.
Yup ATSIC on steroids, no doubt.
Indigenous peoples have the right to determine and develop priorities and strategies for exercising their right to development. In particular, indigenous peoples have the right to be actively involved in developing and determining health, housing and other economic and social programmes affecting them and, as far as possible, to administer such programmes through their own institutions.
This section basically finishes what MABO started. There is no longer secure land tenure in Australia. To pretend this does anything other than transfer massive amounts of crown land to a tiny minority of Australians is to be fooling yourself.
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to the lands, territories and resources which they have traditionally owned, occupied or otherwise used or acquired.
2. Indigenous peoples have the right to own, use, develop and control the lands, territories and resources that they possess by reason of traditional ownership or other traditional occupation or use, as well as those which they have otherwise acquired.
3. States shall give legal recognition and protection to these lands, territories and resources. Such recognition shall be conducted with due respect to the customs, traditions and land tenure systems of the indigenous peoples concerned.
Again, how can this be anything other than a call for the ending of land tenure/government in Australia if you take it as read? Untold Trillions of dollars will again flow to our new feudal overlords. I cant think of anything else to call what Australians would become other than serfs.
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to redress, by means that can include restitution or, when this is not possible, just, fair and equitable compensation, for the lands, territories and resources which they have traditionally owned or otherwise occupied or used, and which have been confiscated, taken, occupied, used or damaged without their free, prior and informed consent.
2. Unless otherwise freely agreed upon by the peoples concerned, compensation shall take the form of lands, territories and resources equal in quality, size and legal status or of monetary compensation or other appropriate redress.
And a separate but equal justice system? Wont that be fun when “traditional land tenure arrangements” comes up against the existing body of law? Will spearing be allowed or no?
Indigenous peoples have the right to promote, develop and maintain their institutional structures and their distinctive customs, spirituality, traditions, procedures, practices and, in the cases where they exist, juridical systems or customs, in accordance with international human rights standards.
Heres a little sop to allow the various rent seekers to continue their government sponsored trips overseas to promote division while using the majorities money to do so. All guaranteed by a treaty.
1. Indigenous peoples, in particular those divided by international borders, have the right to maintain and develop contacts, relations and cooperation, including activities for spiritual, cultural, political, economic and social purposes, with their own members as well as other peoples across borders.
2. States, in consultation and cooperation with indigenous peoples, shall take effective measures to facilitate the exercise and ensure the implementation of this right.
Who pays for the division of Australia into Indigenous feudal lords and later arriving serfs? Why the serfs of course…
Indigenous peoples have the right to have access to financial and technical assistance from States and through international cooperation, for the enjoyment of the rights contained in this Declaration.
Again, a separate but equal justice system? Which legal system is considered the “proper” one for disputes?
Indigenous peoples have the right to access to and prompt decision through just and fair procedures for the resolution of conflicts and disputes with States or other parties, as well as to effective remedies for all infringements of their individual and collective rights. Such a decision shall give due consideration to the customs, traditions, rules and legal systems of the indigenous peoples concerned and international human rights.
The only bright lining is the treaty is backed by the worlds most useless organisation.
The organs and specialized agencies of the United Nations system and other intergovernmental organizations shall contribute to the full realization of the provisions of this Declaration through the mobilization, inter alia, of financial cooperation and technical assistance. Ways and means of ensuring participation of indigenous peoples on issues affecting them shall be established.
Then it finishes with this outright lie. How is it possibly, in light of the probable outcomes if this treaty was treated seriously, for a state to not be impaired? Or is it designed to transfer massive wealth to a tiny section of society which will effectively be living subsidised lives of massive wealth?
1. Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, people, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act contrary to the Charter of the United Nations or construed as authorizing or encouraging any action which would dismember or impair, totally or in part, the territorial integrity or political unity of sovereign and independent States.