Human rights education: realising the vision of social justice
Commission – General
The role of human rights education in realising the vision of social justice
The Honourable Catherine Branson QC
Centre for Research in Education Annual Oration
24 March 2011
Acknowledgement and thankyou
I would like to begin by acknowledging the traditional owners of the land on which we meet, the Kaurna people, and pay my respects to their elders, both past and present.
I thank Dr Robert Hattam and the Centre for Research in Education at the University of South Australia for the invitation to address you all this evening. It is a great honour to deliver the Centre for Research in Education’s Annual Oration.
Introduction and Comparative Examples
This evening I want to talk about human rights education and the role it can play in advancing social justice. I’d like to do so by first drawing a comparison between one area of social justice in which Australia has certainly progressed over recent decades and other ones in which, I believe, human rights education can help us make significant inroads towards more socially just terrain.
Early in my career I rushed into my financial institution of choice to conduct some banking over my lunch hour. Many others, it seemed, had conceived a similar notion and the queue was a sizeable one. Rather than being met with a helpful smile as I triumphantly neared the teller, however, I was met with a request to step aside and make way for those hardworking men behind me who had to do their banking in their lunch hours and needed to get back to their places of employment.
Clearly, the assumption at play was that, as a woman, I had no job to get back to; indeed, nowhere of particular importance to be. The teller was somewhat surprised, then, when I explained that I, too, had to return to work and that I would appreciate their immediate help with my banking. Not to be disheartened, however, the same bank later valiantly exercised similar sorts of assumptions when - my account having become overdrawn, as I later learned, through the fault of the bank - it chose to contact my husband, rather than me, and asked him to rectify the situation. The bank was equally astonished when I expressed my displeasure at this approach. Needless to say, I soon changed banks.
Obviously nobody would suggest that Australia has since dismantled every barrier to women’s equality or eliminated every form of discriminatory treatment. Clearly many hurdles – some quite insidious – remain. Nevertheless, most Australians would be shocked if these scenarios occurred today. In other words, this area of social justice – being direct discrimination against women by financial institutions – is one in which public attitudes have undergone a seismic cultural shift.
Interestingly, however, public attitudes have not advanced as dramatically in other spheres. In fact, some may even suggest that they have retreated over recent decades in areas such as the treatment of asylum seekers and our approach to children in detention.
For it is arguable that, 30 years ago, most Australians would have found the concept of children in long term immigration detention a fairly shocking one – relatively welcoming, as we then were, of the wave of refugees arriving from war-torn South East Asia. Yet, over the past year I have personally visited several detention centres, including on Christmas Island, in Darwin and Villawood in Sydney – and what I saw and heard there provided confirmation that Australia can and must do better.
One story, in particular, sticks in my mind. In Darwin I met the parents of two young girls, each of whom had a congenital condition which made her particularly vulnerable to injury. Because of the simple fact that barely anyone else at the facility spoke their language, this family could not explain to the other children there that they needed to avoid rough play around their daughter. Consequently, the girls were confined to their room virtually all day – with no access to education, or to the simple physical and social benefits of play that are so essential to children’s well being and development.
Most Australians would see their own children as fundamentally entitled to education and to play. Similarly, most Australians would see a child’s rightful place as with their family, yet there are currently children as young as 13 in detention on their own – without family and sometimes with limited access to others who speak their language. How, then, do we reconcile the experiences of people associated with this other, more contentious, alleged ‘queue’ with Australia’s concept of itself as a nation concerned with social justice?
I do not seek to use this evening as a platform for comment on immigration policy, although the Australian Human Rights Commission has been working to promote the rights of asylum seekers detained in immigration detention for almost a decade.
I do use it, however, to highlight why we may not have progressed as far down the road to social justice in this and related areas as we might like. We can immediately see, of course, that this stems in part from our collective incapacity to relate directly to the experiences of an asylum seeker – our relative lack of information; and our feeling of powerlessness to achieve change.
After all, most of us can relate to my experiences with the bank, simply because the vast majority of Australians would have had dealings with a bank at some point in their lives. We can also relate to it because it is a story of an individual, rather than an apparently unquantifiable mass. It is the story of a person with whom we can largely identify - someone we can see and hear, rather than someone whose story we simply hear about, usually only in passing. I imagine that everyone here can see themselves in that queue. It is therefore the story of an everyday Australian, which is why, over the years, this particular story has changed.
Today, then, I want to talk to you about how we might transform other stories – how we might steer other scenarios further towards real social justice and how, with leadership and with a focus on building skills, on changing attitudes, and inspiring action, human rights education is the vehicle which might take us those extra miles.
Social Justice and Australian Values
But first, what do we mean by social justice?
Whether it be moral theologian John Ryan’s idea of a ‘living wage’ – the minimum hourly wage necessary for an individual to meet basic needs; or the idea of liberal political philosopher John Rawls: that social justice is ‘about finding institutional arrangements ... a system of rules that would result in fair equality of opportunity and would be to the advantage of the least well off’,[1] the term generally refers to the creation of a society or institution based on the principles of equality and solidarity, that understands and values human rights, and that recognizes the dignity of every human being.[2]
It’s not a great stretch, then, to suggest that, at its core, the concept of social justice mirrors the beloved Australian value of the ‘fair go’. Equally, social justice requires the manifestation of other Australian values, such as a democratic system of government; an independent judiciary; the rejection of violence; and equality before the law.
Though they may not always be articulated as such in the national or political lexicon, these values are all close equivalents of universally recognised human rights and, certainly, research has found that Australian NGOs commonly understand the concepts of social justice and human rights as either interdependent or interchangeable.[3] The relationship between the two was consistently described as one where human rights are a step toward, or a way of achieving social justice - social justice being seen as the larger goal, while human rights standards were a statement of a part (perhaps a large part) of what constitutes social justice.
If this is the case, then we need to harness these tools – bringing rights, as well as education about rights, to bear in those areas that challenge our ability to reach our goal of social justice.
Challenges to a Cohesive Society – the reality and effects of racism.
Certainly, one such area is that of immigration policy, while another is the related area of racism and multiculturalism.
Recently, the University of Western Sydney released research, in which the Commission was a partner, into racism in Australia that found that 10% of people in Australia believe that some races of people are inferior; 41% of people believe that Australia is weakened by people of different ethnic origins sticking to their old ways; and 41% of people believe that there are some cultures that do not fit into Australia.[4]
Around 20% per cent of respondents, meanwhile, had experienced forms of race hate talk which included racial slurs, verbal abuse and name calling; with around 85% per cent of respondents believing that racism is a current issue in Australia.
For a nation that has long laid claim to a proud multiculturalism, these figures are sobering – not just on a theoretical or ethical level, but because of the very real effect that racism has on the daily lives of individuals and communities.
We now know that racism has been linked to reduced productivity, reduced life expectancy, and to morbidity. In fact, there are clear links between self-reported race discrimination and poor health outcomes - from high blood pressure, heart disease, diabetes, obesity and substance misuse to peer violence, and low birth weight.[5]
There is also clear indication of the tangible links between discrimination and the disadvantage experienced by particular groups, with Indigenous Australians and some culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) communities continuing to fare poorly on a number of social and economic indicators, including home ownership, employment, representation in the justice system and educational attainment.[6] Given that discrimination can limit people’s access to vital resources such as employment, health services and education, this is no great surprise.[7]
Poverty, inequality and social exclusion, then, are all closely connected,[8] with evidence suggesting that exposure to discrimination can erode community cohesion and, at worst, lead to individual and community violence.[9]
Impact of international events on Australia – Examples from Isma-Listen
How are we at this point though in 21st century Australia? The answer is obviously a complex and layered one and, to develop a better understanding of the discrimination and vilification being experienced by various communities, the Commission launched a project called Isma-Listen.[10] Through this project, the Commission heard anecdotal evidence about a rise in anti-Arab and anti-Muslim prejudice following the attacks of 11 September, 2001 and the October 2002 Bali bombings, with the majority of participants reporting various forms of prejudicial treatment because of their race or religion. Most experiences were unprovoked ‘one off’ incidents from strangers on the street, on public transport, in shops and shopping centres or on the roads.
For example, one participant stated: ‘My Aunty was walking on the street in Granville and this guy drives past in his car and threw stones at her and she fell to the ground...That happened right after September 11 and till this day she is afraid of leaving the house....It’s scary because you don’t expect to get stones thrown at you’.[11]
Another stated: ‘It is common that people who used to be nice to you before September 11 changed the way they react to you after. Before September 11 and after September 11, we are the same Muslims, we haven’t changed’.[12]
What had changed, quite obviously, was the new ‘information’ some people felt that they possessed about Muslim Australians – that is, the ‘information’ that some Muslims – isolated and extremist though they might be – were, accurately, laying claim to responsibility for terrorist attacks. Similarly, what had developed was an acute feeling of powerlessness to do anything about this new perceived reality. Consequently, to some, Muslim Australians were people with whose values and behaviours they could identify even less – they had become more ‘other’ than perhaps they had been before.
Clearly, our ambition for social justice means that these perceptions and behaviours need to change. The Federal Government has certainly identified multiculturalism and cultural diversity as an area in need of renewed attention. To my mind, this suggests it is an area ripe for human rights education. This is because of the capacity of human rights education to impart information and develop skills; to change attitudes and build empathy; and to motivate a sense of agency and participation – active citizenship, if you like. All of these can help to realise our shared vision for Australian social justice, particularly when we begin to get a better grasp of the way in which attitudes and behaviours change over time.
Human Rights Education As a Solution - Changing Attitudes and Behaviours
An early step along the path to change is taken, of course, when we defy conventional wisdoms and stereotypes. Just as women confronted the assumptions of banks about our employment and financial status, human rights education is about learning to challenging the myriad of assumptions which we regularly fail to question.
Obviously we can do this on an individual basis, though it would take considerable time to dismantle all stereotypes in this way! On an organisational level, however, we can debunk myths by providing the community with relevant information and one of the ways that the Commission does this is through our publication Face the Facts.[13]
Focusing on information about Indigenous Australians, migrants, asylum seekers and refugees, it details current research that shows, for example, no evidence of a causal connection between crime and ethnicity. In reality, the crime rate of the overseas-born population has been lower overall than that of the Australian-born population, with Face the Facts revealing that unemployment, education, socioeconomic disadvantage and lack of access to services have more bearing on crime rates than ethnicity.
Meanwhile, almost a century of public health research and decades of health promotion programs have demonstrated the relationship between community education and behaviour change. One only needs to consider the ‘SLIP SLAP SLOP’ skin cancer campaign and the extent to which this has become common parlance in Australia; while cervical and breast cancer screening, Quit smoking, and Sudden Infant Death education campaigns have similarly resulted in increased awareness, attitudes altered and lives saved.
When people are exposed to the facts in this way, we can then proceed to more fruitful debates about how to address the particular challenges before us. Some of these debates occur, of course, during the development and passage of legislation; law reform being another way in which we can bring about change.
The introduction of the Federal Sex Discrimination Act in 1984, for example, made it unlawful to discriminate on the basis of sex, marital status, pregnancy or potential pregnancy in many areas of public life. It also prohibits sexual harassment and dismissal from employment on the basis of family responsibilities. Consequently, we now have basic equal employment opportunity requirements, with agencies and business now generally aware of - and trained in - their obligations.
As a combined result, then, of assumptions being challenged on an individual and organisational level; and of legislation both leading and cementing that change, my experiences with that particular bank all those years ago would now be seen as wholly unacceptable. The assumptions now built into our culture, our economy and our legal framework are different – the vast majority of Australians now recognised as equal to all others in that interminable, lunch hour queue.
What, though, of the assumptions made about those associated in the public mind with that other alleged ‘queue’ to which I’ve referred? I’ve spoken already of our collective inability, on the whole, to identify with those seeking asylum – of our deficit of imagination and therefore empathy for those whom we consider different; those from whose experiences we remain distant and seemingly powerless to change.
Yet, when images of Seena, a 9-year-old Iranian boy orphaned by the tragic shipwreck on Christmas Island, were released to the media, public support swung noticeably towards the needs of children in detention. This, then, is human rights education in action. These images altered public opinion in a way that the words of public figures or politicians could not. The public put a face to the experience and saw their own child - perhaps even themselves – looking back.
Attitudes change, then, as a result of law reform, of disseminating accurate information, of challenging assumptions and raising awareness. Generally, they alter as a result of a combination of all of the above. I now want to turn, however, to more formal approaches to human rights education.
Formal Human Rights Education
Following the National Human Rights Consultation in 2009, the Committee recommended that the highest priority be given to human rights education as the path for improving and promoting human rights in Australia. Consequently – and very positively - education about human rights is the centre-piece of Australia’s Human Rights Framework announced by the Attorney-General in April 2010.[14]
In the Framework, the Government commits to strengthening human rights education in primary and secondary schools. It also commits to investing in education and training programs for the Commonwealth public sector.
Before turning to examine these areas, however, I’d first like to explore what is generally meant by ‘human rights education’.
In 1948 the United Nations affirmed in the preamble to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) that respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms are to be advanced through teaching and education.[15] More recently, the United Nations World Programme for Human Rights Education stated that ‘human rights education aims at developing an understanding of our common responsibility to make human rights a reality in every community and in society at large...’[16].
It is, the UN declared, ‘a long-term and lifelong process...’[17], one not only about providing knowledge about rights and the mechanisms that protect them, but also about imparting the skills needed to promote, defend and apply rights in daily life.
Broken down further, there are three major elements of human rights education: [18]
- first, the acquisition of knowledge and skills,
- second, the development of respectful values and attitudes and changed behaviour, and
- third, the motivation of social action and empowerment of active citizenship.
(a) Knowledge and skills
Imparting knowledge about human rights is certainly an important first step, yet it needn’t be academic and abstract. In fact, as helpful as a solid theoretical grounding in any discipline may be, the challenges of all educative tasks is to make that theory resonate – to make the information real to the relevant audience.
This is particularly essential in the area of human rights – a topic still seen by too many as the province of the academy; as spoken of by the elite and as exercised for the benefit of minority or special interests.
Those conveying information about human rights, then, also need the skills to translate them into the everyday – to explain a particular point of view while exhibiting a willingness to listen to others; to analyse a situation to determine whether or not it is just and fair; and to demonstrate how to live and work cooperatively with others from diverse backgrounds.[19]
(b) Values, attitudes and behaviours
Similarly, human rights educators must be capable of testing their own values, as well as those of others. A useful way of expressing it is that human rights education must make us look within and without[20] - encouraging us to critically examine our own attitudes and behaviours so that we may encourage others to do the same. Being mindful of the values within and around us, then, we can consciously employ them to advance respect for the rights of all.[21]
(c) Active citizenship and taking action
The third element of a human rights education strategy is that it should promote action. The mid-term global evaluation of the United Nations Decade for Human Rights Education (undertaken by the OHCHR and UNESCO) found, in fact, that one of the major obstacles to the effective implementation of human rights education was that an emphasis on awareness often came at the expense of action.[22]
The goals of human rights education, then, must also be about inspiring action in the protection and promotion of human rights. Once we know what human rights are and where they come from, we can use a human rights framework to analyse a situation, to discuss it with others, and to build a coherent argument for change. Equipped with human rights knowledge and skills, and motivated by human rights values and attitudes, individuals and communities can find the confidence to lay claim to their own rights, as well as to defend the rights of others.
Human rights education, however, cannot be reduced to the simple introduction of human rights content in an already over-burdened curriculum.[23] Instead, it requires a profound reform of education including textbooks, methodology, classroom management, and all aspects of school life.[24] n the community at large, it requires making human rights relevant to people’s day to day reality. When human rights values are embedded in content and in pedagogy, this is when they will translate into our attitudes, behaviours and actions.[25]
Human Rights Education in different learning environments
(a) Schools
How does this apply, though, in different learning environments? This audience knows well that our mindset, attitudes and behaviours are set early in life, which demands that we engage children in discussion around their rights and the rights of others at a very young age.
In fact, children have a great capacity to engage in and understand human rights. Very young children can learn that it’s not acceptable to pick on the child who is different – be that in colour, race, religion or ability. They are open to difference and to concepts of fair play until they are taught to be otherwise, which is also why it is not sufficient to teach children about respect for human rights in the abstract, if what they witness around them is a disrespectful environment.
Children can smell disingenuousness a mile away, just as they will sense inherent injustice if their own rights to voice their opinions and participate in decisions are not respected. In other words, it is just as essential that the methods and processes of education are conducive to learning about human rights. As human rights educators, then, it is our job to use practical examples and activities to instil an understanding of what human rights values mean in children’s daily lives – and to make rights a part of their own lived experience.
UK UNICEF Program
In just one example of the benefits that this approach can bring, in the United Kingdom, UNICEF has been pioneering a program called the ‘Rights Respecting Schools Awards’ (Program).[26] The Program uses the Convention on the Rights of the Child to award schools that have incorporated it into their planning, practice and ethos. This includes teaching and learning about the Convention; creating a rights-respecting culture and empowering children to become active citizens.
The Program has helped children to understand the consequences of their actions and how those consequences might affect the rights of others. It has taught them more than just to recite the articles of the Convention; it has shown them how those rights are relevant to their lives and experiences. In doing so, it has improved self-esteem, behaviour and relationships; reduced bullying and discrimination; increased discussion and engaged children in planning and reviewing their own learning. Moreover, it is has provided schools with a framework of common values.
In many ways, this is simply common sense. We all teach our children about fair play from an early age, while ‘values’ are touted as a crucial aspect of our public discussions around education, though arguably with a different agenda. Until recently, however, a formal understanding of these concepts has not been sufficiently addressed in what our children learn at school.
In 2008, the Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians affirmed education as an essential element in the building of a democratic, equitable and just society.[27] By this Declaration, all Australian Education Ministers made a commitment to ensuring that Australian students are active and informed citizens, who act with moral and ethical integrity, are committed to national values of democracy, equity and justice, participate in Australia’s civic life and are responsible global and local citizens.
While all these values are essentially human rights values, regrettably, the Declaration makes no specific reference to human rights. What is lost, then, is the opportunity to infuse in young people those values and attitudes that will prevent bullying, discrimination and build a human rights respecting culture in Australia.
I believe that the current development of a national school Curriculum is a unique opportunity to ensure that all young Australians develop an understanding and appreciation for human rights. That is why the Australian Human Rights Commission is working with the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority, education departments, and teachers associations to integrate human rights education into the national school curriculum.
Meanwhile, the Commission is also seeking to work with teacher training institutions and professional teacher associations to identify ways in which we can support teachers in shaping human rights promoting environments in the classroom.
(b) Training of Public Service – State and Local Government Examples
Traditional educational environments, however, are just one forum in which to conduct human rights education. Public authorities, after all, make decisions every day that impact on people’s lives, which is why respect for human rights should also be incorporated into public sector practices and procedures.
This is occurring in Victoria where, under that state’s Charter of Rights and Responsibilities, public servants across the state are receiving ongoing training in human rights that then informs the development of policy, the provision of services and the making of decisions. A human rights-based approach means that public servants must design and implement policies which demonstrate that the needs of real people have been considered, rather than expecting that all individuals will fit within an immutable administrative system.
As previously mentioned, the Australian Human Rights Framework commits the Government to investing in education and training programs for the Commonwealth public sector. I am pleased that the Australian Human Rights Commission is able to work with the Attorney General’s Department to ensure that the development and delivery of the human rights education and training program for the Commonwealth public sector is of the highest quality and creates a public service that puts people first.[28]
This need not be limited, of course, to state or Commonwealth level. Local Government is often the level at which most people have contact with authority – and the one which is most likely to make a difference to their daily lives. In this spirit, in 2005 the City of Hume in Victoria supplemented its existing Social Justice Charter with a Citizen’s Bill of Rights – building, as we have previously examined, on its articulation of social justice through a recognition of the value of human rights.[29]
Through the development of a framework for decision making, Action Plans to provide information and encourage participation from certain target groups; and through the establishment of accountable governance indicators, a human rights-based approach has been a catalyst for all kinds of change.
For example, Hume City Council funded the Banksia Gardens Community Centre, a neighbourhood centre operating in a public housing estate, to deliver a human rights project Stand Up And Be Counted.[30] The project aimed to educate, inspire, empower and work towards creating a strong culture of human rights education and, through it, young people were able to explore the negative effects of discrimination and develop strategies to address the injustices they experienced in their daily lives – in turn, building a stronger and more resilient community.
Motivating Action – Bystanders and Technology
These, then, are just some of the ways in which human rights education can develop knowledge and skills, and encourage respectful attitudes and behaviours.
As I indicated, however, human rights education is not complete without also motivating action or empowering active citizenship. An exciting avenue through which the Commission is seeking to do this is our recent focus on bystanders – one which offers a chance to translate values into behaviour – to convey a message that human rights are a shared language and responsibility.
For, if we cannot relate to the perpetrator or the victim of an injustice – if we are too far removed, for whatever reason, from that person in the queue – we can still find agency as a bystander. Focusing on the role of the bystander allows us not only to say that we have the right to be treated fairly, but also to help ensure that others are treated fairly too, like the community nurse who used human rights arguments to ensure that a directive stating all asylum seekers were to be given free medical services was implemented. Previously, the hospital had been turning away refugees and asylum seekers who did not have access to Medicare and could not pay.[31]
There are many safe ways in which, as bystanders to discriminatory or other unfair behaviour, we can all act to protect and promote a culture of respect for rights. We can challenge stereotypical judgments and discrimination in our workplaces; we can show respect in the face of disrespect in all sorts of environments.
It is the Commission’s hope that, by identifying a role that everyone can play in defending human rights, we can turn this defence into a collective human task.
What do we mean, though, by ‘bystander action’? If we define a bystander, as the Oxford Dictionary does, as someone present at, or witness to, an event, we know that there are different ways in which a bystander can respond.[32] In order to develop effective strategies, we need to understand these responses. Consequently, the Commission is examining recent studies[33] which have considered precursors to action or inaction when bystanders witness bullying. The studies divide these witnesses into four groups:[34]
- Assistants as those who join the ring leader bullies
- Reinforcers who provide positive feedback to bullies (laughing or cheering)
- Outsiders who withdraw from bullying situations
- Defenders who comfort and support victims.
Although this work is still at a preliminary stage, the Commission is using it to examine the role that ‘bystanders’ to cyber-bullying can play when they offer cyber support to those targeted and show their rejection of bullying tactics.
It’s hard to imagine better terrain, after all, than the realm of new technology to consider the role of the bystander. Cyberspace makes us all bystanders – exposed, as we are, to more information than ever before; observing, at least in passing, and aware of more than any previous generation. This is the largest arena for active citizenship we have ever had at our disposal and we need to make it work in the interests of social justice and human rights. In cyberspace lies the capacity to meet all the goals of human rights education – to disseminate and clarify information; to change values and build empathy; to inspire action as both necessary and possible.
We’re all familiar with those first hand images or stories that have ‘gone global’ in a matter of hours or days – prompting public support or outcry in a way that traditional media cannot. For example, we recently witnessed the capacity of mobile phone technology to disseminate images and stories from Egypt and Libya. Closer to home, Vindaloo Against Violence, for example, was a campaign designed to show support for Australia's Indian community in the wake of a series of racially motivated attacks. From humble beginnings as a 100-person event on Facebook, this grassroots campaign went viral and had over 17,000 people eating out at Indian restaurants.
We must seize the potential to reach the geographically and demographically diverse audience of the internet. Research indicates that social media such as Facebook, YouTube and Twitter are used by 97% of people in the 18 to 30 age range, 81% for 31 to 50 and 56% for people over 50.[35] Further, between 1998 and 2008, household access to the internet quadrupled, making web-based platforms a tool of choice.[36]
That is why the Commission joined with Government agencies and state human rights commissions to create Play by the Rules[37], an online resource for sporting coaches, parents and teachers which uses audio-visual scenarios and problem-solving to build the necessary understanding and skills to address discrimination and create an inclusive sporting environment. As at 30 June 2009, over 7000 people had voluntarily completed the Play by the Rules online courses, while the website had received more than 3.5 million hits and 110 000 visitor sessions.[38] The website has since been significantly redeveloped to include new resources, content and interactive elements, which makes its potential to influence positive change even greater.
Where to from here?
The sporting arena and cyberspace, then, are two useful contexts in which to conduct human rights education. We must continue to identify and explore other avenues for making these connections, for helping rights to resonate, for helping us to build greater social justice into other spheres.
Certainly, the momentum is there, with a more formally developed interest from Government than at any other time; and the Commission duly charged with a very tangible task. The challenges are great and our years of experience mean that the Australian Human Rights Commission does not for a second underestimate their size. Experience also tells us, however, that human rights education can take us a considerable way towards our goals – imparting information, developing skills, building empathy, changing values and making action seem not only necessary but possible. By completing each of these steps, we can, I believe, cover that ground that lies between our ability as a nation to relate to my experience in the bank years ago, and the experience of those in other, less familiar, queues.
After all, we know that a lack of information contributes to discrimination against certain cultural or ethnic groups; as well as to fear of the unknown. Distribution of factual information can help erode this fear, as can the development of empathy for individual stories. Similarly, the new articulation of the role of an active bystander can help those who previously felt disengaged to step up and take some sort of action.
Human rights education can help us make connections – with that elderly woman on the street in Granville; with the new kid in the class; with the recent arrival seeking medical services; with those young girls in Darwin just wanting to go out to play.
Put another way, human rights education is about making two collective mental shifts – finding the everyday within the theory; then finding the ‘everyone’ – as well as ‘the everywhere’ - within the everyday. That is the task of the Commission and I invite each person here to join with us in meeting it.
[1] D Arthur, ‘Hayek and Rawls: An Unlikely Fusion’ Evatt Foundation Paper 191 (2007). (viewed 21 March 2011).
[2] J Zajda, S Majhanovich and V Rust, Education and Social Justice (2006).
[3] S Rice and S Calnan, Sustainable Advocacy: Capabilities and attitudes of Australian human rights NGOs (2007), p 69. (viewed 21 March 2011).
[4] University of Western Sydney, Challenging Racism: The Anti-Racism Project, (viewed 21 March 2011).
[5] Victorian Health Promotion Foundation (VicHealth) and the Victorian Office of Multicultural Affairs, More than tolerance: embracing diversity for health (2006) p 28. (viewed 21 March 2011).
[6] Victorian Health Promotion Foundation (VicHealth), Building on Our Strengths: A framework to reduce race-based discrimination and support diversity in Victoria, A Summary Report (2009) p 10. (viewed 21 March 2011).
[7] Victorian Health Promotion Foundation (VicHealth) and the Victorian Office of Multicultural Affairs, More than tolerance: embracing diversity for health, A Summary Report (2006) p 19. (viewed 21 March 2011).
[8] United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Expert Group Meeting: Promoting Social Inclusion, Draft Aide Memoire (2008) p 5. (viewed 21 March 2011).
[9] Victorian Health Promotion Foundation (VicHealth), Note 6, p 10.
[10] Australian Human Rights Commission, Isma-Listen (2004). (viewed 21 March 2011).
[11] Australian Human Rights Commission, note 10, p 48.
[12] Australian Human Rights Commission, note 10, p 43.
[13] Australian Human Rights Commission, Face the Facts (2008), p 34. (viewed 21 March 2011).
[14] Commonwealth of Australia, Australia’s Human Rights Framework, 21 April 2010. (viewed 21 March 2011).
[15] Universal Declaration of Human Rights, GA Resolution 217A(III), UN Doc A/810 (1948), preamble, (viewed 21 March 2011).
[16] General Assembly, Revised draft plan of action for the first phase (2005-2007) of the World Programme for Human Rights Education, UN Doc A/59/525/Rev.1 (2005), Introduction. (viewed 21 March 2011).
[17] United Nations General Assembly, above.
[18] United Nations Human Rights Council, Draft plan of action for the second phase (2010-2014) of the World Programme for Human Rights Education, A/HRC/15/28, 27 July 2010. (viewed 21 March 2011).
[19] M Stobart, Deputy Director of Education, Culture and Sport (Council of Europe) as quoted in C Lohrenscheit ‘International Approaches in Human Rights Education’ Centre for South-North Cooperation in Educational Research and Practice (2000). (viewed 21 March 2011).
[20] Equitas International Centre for Human Rights Education, International Human Rights Training Program, Training of Trainers: Designing and Delivering Effective Human Rights Education Training Manual Resource Manual (2007). (viewed 21 March 2011).
[21] Equitas International Centre for Human Rights Education Play it Fair: Human Rights Education Resource for Children, (2008). (viewed 21 March 2011).
[22] K Frantzi ‘Human Rights Education: The United Nations Endeavour and the Importance of Childhood and Intelligent Sympathy’ in International Education Journal, Vol 5, No 1 (2004) p 3.
[23] C Newell and B Offord ‘Introduction’ in Activating Human Rights in Education: Exploration, Innovation and Transformation (2008) p 12.
[24] C Newell and B Offord, above.
[25] Equitas International Centre for Human Rights Education, note 21.
[26] UNICEF United Kingdom, (viewed 21 March 2011).
[27] Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs, Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians, December 2008, (viewed 21 March 2011).
[28] Commonwealth of Australia, note 14
[29] Hume City Council, Social Justice, (viewed 21 March 2011).
[30] Banksia Gardens Community Centre, Stand up and be counted! – Human rights innovation project. (viewed 21 March 2011).
[31] Human Rights Law Centre, Case Studies: How a Human Rights Act can Promote Dignity and Address Disadvantage. (viewed 21 March 2011).
[32] Oxford Dictionary Online, Bystander, (viewed 21 March 2011).
[33] C Salmivalli ‘Bullying and the Peer Group: A Review’, Aggression and Violence Behavior 15 (2010) p.113. (viewed 21 March 2011).
[34] C Salmivalli, above.
[35] The Australian Psychological Society, ‘The Social and Psychological Impact of Online Social Networking’ National Psychology Week Survey (2010). (viewed 21 March 2011).
[36] For example, ABS statistics reveal that between 1998 to 2008-09, household access to the internet at home has more than quadrupled from 16% to 72%, while access to computers has increased from 44% to 78%. Of the 2.0 million children accessing the internet at home in 2009, educational activities (85%) and playing online games (69%) were the most common activities Australian Bureau of Statistics, ‘Household Use of Information Technology, Australia, 2008-09’. (viewed 21 March 2011).
[37] Play by the Rules, (viewed 21 March 2011).
[38] Australian Sports Commission, Annual Report 2008-2009, p 34. (viewed 21 March 2011).