Reconciliation has brought acquiescence to Australia, parties, organizations and the citizens that have had a difference in views and general disputing opinions. This article review will detail on the Australian reconciliation in relation to the indigenous population that is presented with reference to the period of English colonization over Australia and is retrieved from the formal instructions to Lieutenant James Cook. The detailed instruction emphasize on the consent of the natives as a formal procedure to making peace. The circumstances of the 1768 consent can clearly indicate the reconciliation process and allocate provisions of the Australian indigenous population as illustrated by Garth Nettheim.
In the current times, many reconciliatory bodies have been created to conduct the violation of human rights is concerned in various parts of the world. In South Africa, there was a reconciliatory body formed known as the truth and reconciliation team and there are many more such commissions. The main purpose of such commissions is to bring light to counties where darkens have always covered the people and the reconciliation works not only for the present occurrences but also for the past. Garth Nettheim tries finding the questions that can be used to create a better truth and reconciliation commissions who can explore deeply into what the Aboriginal group in Australia faced during the colonial period by the British Colonists. To understand the question surrounding the circumstances, Garth Neitthem tries to take a deeper look into the governmental bodies that have tried to look into the circumstance including the way the commissions have conducted the reconciliation. Garth also looks into the achievements and challenges the commissions have incurred during the inquiry processes. He furthers explores on the citizenships and the rights of the people there to see if there are equality on how the indigenous and the citizens in Australia are treated (SHORT, pg 217, 2008).
According to Garth, the human rights and reconciliation process in Australia entailed a series of detailed phases that marked the beginning of transformation between the natives and the general population. The difference of the year of change adds up to 40years since the transformation period of the indigenous population in Australia. The common interests of the large population were protected by two eminent lawyers who had served as the country’s leaders. The process on Australia’s reconciliation emerges from a period in which the referendum addresses the commonwealth amendment and the general change in the direction of the Australian constitutional constitute. The begging of the commonwealth amendment is marked by the anniversary in 1967 and is related to the indigenous population of Australia. The period of change and final conclusion of the reconciliation period is dated to 1992 and the Mabo decision is a characteristic feature prevalent in the transition period (SHORT, pg 237, 2008).
In the Human rights and reconciliation in Australia article, Garth points that the Australian change on the indigenous population is determined by a drastic change that has major contributions to the general opinion and made significant proposals which have impacted on the leaderships systems. Garth is quick to display important proposals to the entire human rights article has noted evident lack of bipartisan support that revolved around the treaties. The document has embraced individuals that had immediate proposals on the treaty approaches and drafted significant approach to the process of reconciliation (SHORT, pg 317, 2008).
According to Garth, the reconciliation process is to be excluded from open political forums and demanded an independent body that could monitor the entire process. The independent body had the mandate to execute consultation process, involve necessary negotiations with workable agreements to the other parties and make necessary change with specific relation to the recommended opinions. The suggestion on an independent body involved the establishment of the Aboriginal recognition authority and the opinion revolved around the entire process of making immediate change to the reconciliation process in Australia. The Aboriginal commission would be entitled to the major responsibilities of drawing the intended reconciliation charters and account for all the particular functions related to governmental mandate. The aims of starting up the independent commission were to counteract any misleading governmental actions and act on behalf of the involved parties and the body it is protecting. The Aboriginal commission is a project that the author of the article, Garth, has displayed as means to defend the human rights law in Australia (CAMPBELL, GOLDSWORTHY, & STONE, pg 301, 2003).
Relating the Indigenous Rights to Human Rights in Australia
The indigenous Australians wanted their rights be sorted out just like the normal human rights. The Keating government therefore asked ATSIC and the council for Aboriginal Reconciliation to curry out wider consultation so that they identify the needs of the indigenous people and also to see how the indigenous problems could be properly addressed.
The indigenous rights as addressed by the two bodies include:
1) They wanted to be acknowledged as the rightful and legal owners of the land they were staying in.
2) They wanted to see that the indigenous people also enjoyed themselves, find ‘good protection for both the rich and the poor just like any other person in Australia.
3) The indigenous wanted to have the freedom to express their life the way they pleased determining their affairs as they pleased.
4) The indigenous also wanted freedom to social justice and to be freed from racism.
5) The indigenous also wanted to a freedom to exercise enjoy the full benefits of the international covenants.
The Prime Minister, John Howard, is right in his concept of what reconciliation entails, then the realistic reconciliation corresponded with the indigenous agenda of the unfinished business which is the Citizenship and Equality rights. The Citizenship and the Equality rights are very important factors and need serious addressing. On the other hand, if the Royal Commission Into Aboriginal Deaths in custody is right in its concern for the underlying issues and also if Dr William Jonas is correct in his critique in social justice report that’s is released in 2001, then the broader range of indigenous rights needs to be addressed at the same time. Both of these rights find great support in the international rights law (CAMPBELL, GOLDSWORTHY, & STONE, pg 201, 2003).
According to Garth, the commonwealth government has rejected most of the reconciliatory agenda but has given priority to the practical reconciliation. In the author’s opinion, the commonwealth governments have partnered with other governments to work towards achieving the practical reconciliation. Even though there is practical reconciliation Garth feels that little implementation have been put into place to curb the disadvantages seen by the indigenous groups. Problems have risen regarding benchmarks, data and indigenous participation. There is little being achieved on health issues by the commonwealth governments. The royal commission that probed into the death in custody in the year 1991 saw that it is very important to find the cause of the death which is an underlying issue. Elliot Johnston who is the chairman of the Garth feels that the Aboriginal Deaths in Custody has done great work together with the other members of the team. The commission proposed the reconciliation process sixteen years ago and awaits to see it being implemented, but although it has not got very satisfactory yields, there are still more hopes for the future and Garth believes in the future change.
The range of papers that we write comprises essays, research papers, book and film reviews, term papers, thesis statements, dissertations, cover letters, resumes and a lot of other types. Order any paper you need at OrderCustomPaper.