Site navigation

Restoring identity - achieving
justice for the stolen generations

Remarks by Dr Bill Jonas at
the launch of Restoring identity, a report on consultation and research
for a reparations tribunal for the stolen generations. Launched in Sydney
on Friday 27 September.

Acknowledgement of
traditional owners.

It is now more than
5 years since the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission completed
its national inquiry into the separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander children from their families with the publication of Bringing
them home.

Those five years
have seen a wave of emotions for the stolen generations ranging from feelings
of vindication as their experiences have finally been publicly recognized,
right through to great distress due to the acrimonious debate that has
taken place about the report and the experiences of the stolen generations.

That debate has thankfully
died down over the past nine months, but rather than leading to resolution
and peace of mind for the stolen generations it has largely been replaced
by silence and disinterest from the broader community.

The injustice of
the response of all governments to the report and experiences of the stolen
generations remains, yet it is slowly fading from the public agenda as
a matter of priority and concern. And perhaps ironically, as debates continue
about dealing with issues of abuse within the churches, there has been
even less focus on the role of churches in responding to the experiences
of the stolen generations. The lack of focus on the role of the churches
in making reparation to the stolen generations is a particularly scandalous
silence of recent years.

The report that we
are launching here today, Restoring identity – the final report
of the Moving Forward consultation project, faithfully reflects the
ongoing dimensions of the distress and lack of healing that continues
to exist for those forcibly removed from their families and communities.

In recognition of
the deficiencies of the public policy responses to the impact of forcible
removal policies the Public Interest Advocacy Centre proposes an all-encompassing
tribunal process to provide a package of reparations measures to affected
individuals and communities. There are three main things to be said about
this proposal.

The first is that
I support. It is a manifest truth that issues of great importance to people
forcibly removed from their families have not been dealt with through
the package of practical measures adopted at the federal level. What we
are missing in the current approach is humanity. This tribunal process
seeks to provide such humanity and dignity to the way that we respond,
as a society, to one of the most ill-conceived and destructive policies
ever introduced by governments in Australian history.

The second is that
this model is innovative. It poses a great challenge to governments at
all levels to address outstanding issues of grief and trauma head on,
rather than turning the process into an administrative and legal nightmare
or – as is currently being done – simply doing very little at
all. The pivotal features of this model are that it is based on acknowledgment,
recognition; atonement; and healing. It recognizes that the process of
telling your story is one of the most powerful and important to the stolen
generations. It is not merely a matter of empty symbolism, it is a vital
component of the reparation process. Until that is understood there will
be no peace or settlement for the stolen generations.

The third is that
perhaps tribunal is the wrong word for this process as it immediately
conjures an image of a process dominated by legalism. This image has been
mischievously used by the federal government to reject the tribunal approach
in the past. So again, there is a need to see beyond a black letter law
approach and instead enter the realm of justice. It is patently clear
that our legal system as it currently stands is not equipped to deal with
the claims of the stolen generations. Rather than restate this unjust
truth, let’s do something to change it.

To conclude, in supporting
the recommendations of the report, I want to make some comment specifically
on the first two recommendations of the report. These relate to the monitoring
framework for government responses to forcible removal policies. I have
argued for some years that the monitoring framework that has been agreed
for the implementation of Bringing them home is inadequate due to the
lack of accountability and transparency of the process.

It is now at least
18 months, possibly longer, since it was announced that the Ministerial
Council of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs – or MCATSIA
– would be providing a monitoring role for Bringing them home.
Work has thankfully commenced on this task, but the delay is wholly unacceptable.
From what I have seen of the monitoring process is seems to replicate
problems of implementation of the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths
in Custody in that it is not rigorous, independent or proactive in its
approach. And yet, at the same time, serious allegations have been raised
by stolen generations groups that existing funding is not reaching those
in greatest need and is being allocated without any sense of partnership
or collaboration with stolen generations people.

This monitoring framework
needs to be reviewed through regular, public reporting; and with full
participation and consultation of stolen generations groups. The current
process makes a mockery of the federal government’s rhetoric on practical
reconciliation – as deficient as that approach already is.

Thank you.

Last
updated 27 September 2002