Australia and Forest Carbon Partnerships : Indigenous Land Rights

One of the ways in which indigenous communities seek justice is through the formal recognition of their sovereign rights to land. Such recognition allows indigenous groups to maintain a physical and spiritual connection with their land and continue customary management of their land. Indigenous groups world over face significant hurdles in getting their customary rights to land recognized by legal systems. One of the main difficulties for indigenous groups in claiming customary land rights is the existence of a range of conflicting legal entitlements attaching to the land in question. In Australia, similar to New Zealand and Canada legal recognition to customary land is recognized through a grant of native title rights or through the establishment of land use agreement. In other jurisdictions such as Indonesia and Papua New Guinea a form of customary land title has been preserved and is recognized by the legal system. The implementation of REDD+ and other forms of forest carbon investment activities compounds the already complex arrangements surrounding legal recognition of customary land rights. Free, prior and informed consent of indigenous groups is essential for forest carbon investment on customary land. The attainment of such consent in practice remains challenging due to the number of conflicting interests often associated with forested land. This paper examines Australia’s experience in recongising indigenous land rights under its International Forest Carbon Initiative and under its domestic Carbon Credits (Carbon Farming Initiative) Act (Australia) 2011. Australia’s International Forest Carbon initiative has a budget of $273 million dollars. In 2008 the governments of Australia and Indonesia signed the Indonesia-Australia Forest Carbon Partnership Agreement. This paper will examine the indigenous land tenure and justice lessons learned from the implementation of the Kalimantan Forest and Climate Partnership (KFCP). The KFCP is $30 million dollar project taking place over 120,000 hectares of degraded and forested peatland in Central Kalimantan, Indonesia. The KFCP project site contains seven villages of the Dayak Ngdu indigenous people. In 2011 Australia established a domestic Forest Carbon Initiative, which seeks to provide new economic opportunities for farmers, forest growers and indigenous landholders while helping the environmental by reducing carbon pollution. This paper will explore the manner in which indigenous people are able to participate within these scheme noting the limits and opportunities in deriving co-benefits for indigenous people in Australia under this scheme.

e-Technology v t-Engagement : a snapshot of Australia's digital economy readiness

Before e-Technology’s effects on users can be accurately measured, those users must be fully engaged with the relevant systems and services. That is they must be able to function as part of the digital economy. The paper refers to this ‘user functionality’ as t-Engagement. Not all users are t-Engaged and in many instances achieving t-Engagement will require assistance from external sources. This paper identifies the current state of Australia’s regional digital economy readiness and highlights the role of Local Government Authorities (‘LGAs’) in enabling t-Engagement. The paper analyses responses to the 2012 BTA, NBN and Digital Economy Survey by LGA and other regional organizations within Australia. The paper’s particular focus is on the level of use by Local Government Authorities of federal, state and other programs designed to enable t-Engagement. The analysis confirms the role of LGAs in enabling t-Engagement and in promoting Australia’s digital economy. The paper concludes by reinforcing the need to ensure ongoing meaningful federal and State support of regional initiatives, as well as identifying issues requiring specific attention.

The story behind the stories: Qualitative criminology research in Australia

Qualitative Criminology: Stories from the Field brings to life the stories behind the research of both emerging and established scholars in Australian criminology. The book’s contributors provided honest, reflective, and decidedly unsanitised accounts of their qualitative research journeys - the lively tales of what really happens when conducting research of this nature, the stories that often make for parenthetical asides in conference papers but tend to be excised from journal articles. This book considers the gap between research methods and the realities of qualitative research. As such, it aims to help researchers and students who conduct qualitative criminological research reflect upon their role as researchers, and the practical, ideological and ethical issues which may arise in the course of their research. It is also a call to criminologists to make public the ‘failures’ and missteps of their research endeavours so that we can learn from one another and become better informed and more reflexive qualitative criminologists.

Juveniles’ contact with the criminal justice system in Australia

This report presents the first collection of data on juveniles’ contact with the criminal justice system as both alleged/convicted offenders and complainants/victims in New South Wales, the Australian Capital Territory, Victoria, Queensland, Western Australia, South Australia and the Northern Territory. Its primary objectives are to outline data from each of these jurisdictions on juveniles’ contact with the policing, courts and correctional systems and to determine what we do and do not know about juveniles’ contact with the criminal justice system.

Juveniles in detention in Australia, 1981-2008

The Australian Institute of Criminology’s (AIC’s) national Juveniles in Detention Monitoring Program was established to contribute to the evidence base on juvenile detention in Australia, with a particular focus on Indigenous juveniles. Findings date back to 1981 and have been reported annually. This report provides an overview of the numbers and rates of juveniles in detention in Australia since 1981 and juveniles in detention for the financial year 2007–08. As with the AIC’s previous report on juveniles in detention (Taylor 2009), it also provides contextual information on young people sentenced in the children’s courts. The collation of data for these reports is supported by statutory juvenile justice agencies in each of Australia’s jurisdictions, as well as the NSW Department of Corrective Services. As described in more detail in this report, the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW) administers the Juvenile Justice National Minimum Data Set and also reports annually on juveniles in detention. Given this development, the AIC is conducting a review of the Juveniles in Detention Monitoring Report in 2010–11, to ensure that AIC’s research and monitoring does not duplicate the AIHW’s work and that it makes a useful contribution to the field and enables more in-depth analysis of key issues.

Interjurisdictional water issues in Australia : Challenges for the future

For more than a hundred years water rights were granted in accordance with the legislation of the states and territories. Until recently, this legislation conferred a relatively unlimited discretion on the relevant regulatory institutions. Over the past 15 years, the Commonwealth has taken a greater interest in how water resources should be managed: first by formulating and funding policies and strategies through COAG, and then by enacting the Water Act 2007. This Act has created a much more prescriptive regime for planning and managing Australia’s water resources while at the same time entrusting its operational implementation to the states and territories. This has the potential to create tensions between the legal regimes of the Commonwealth and those of the states and territories. This article seeks to examine some of these issues.

Withholding and withdrawal of ‘futile’ life-sustaining treatment : unilateral medical decision-making in Australia and New Zealand

This article examines the law in Australia and New Zealand that governs the withholding and withdrawal of ‘futile’ life-sustaining treatment. Although doctors have both civil and criminal law duties to treat patients, those general duties do not require the provision of treatment that is deemed to be futile. This is either because futile treatment is not in a patient’s best interests or because stopping such treatment does not breach the criminal law. This means, in the absence of a duty to treat, doctors may unilaterally withdraw or withhold treatment that is futile; consent is not required. The article then examines whether this general position has been altered by statute. It considers a range of suggested possible legislation but concludes it is likely that only Queensland’s adult guardianship legislation imposes a requirement to obtain consent to withhold or withdraw such treatment.

Understanding the operational structure of Southeast Asian drug trafficking groups in Australia

This thesis examined the operational structure of Southeast Asian drug trafficking groups operating on the eastern seaboard of Australia by testing the validity and application of organised crime and drug trafficking typologies using data obtained from 159 drug trafficking cases in three Australian states: New South Wales; Queensland; and Victoria. Key findings indicated that the usefulness of typologies is limited when classifying and analysing organised crime groups. In particular, Southeast Asian drug trafficking groups operated largely in small, informal, family-based hierarchies or groups that were better conceptualised using theoretical perspectives from network and cultural studies. The study recommended that replicating previous empirical research in the field is an effective approach that will contribute towards building a cumulative body of knowledge on organised crime structures.

The judiciary in contemporary society : Australia

In Australia the appointment of judges is, by constitution or statute, universally the responsibility of the executive branch. The federal government handles all such matters relating to the High Court, the Federal Court, the Family Court and other federal judicial bodies. State governments exercise similar authority over the state supreme courts, district and magistrates' courts. All appointments are formally made by the Governor-General, or the Governor, in Council...

Private lawyers in contemporary society : Australia

Admission to practice law in Australia falls under the general supervisory power of supreme court judges in the various jurisdictions. The degree of supervision varies among jurisdictions, but the judiciary generally is responsible for setting the educational requirements for admission. A variety of admission boards perform a number of administrative and supervisory functions; for example, determining whether a particular law school's degree satisfies educational requirements for admission...

Australia's mining interests within Nigeria and Libya : policies, corruption and conflict

Crude petroleum remains the single most imported commodity into Australia and is sourced from a number of countries around the world (Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT), 2011a). While interest in crude petroleum is widespread, in recent years Australia's focus has been drawn to the continent of Africa, where increased political stability, economic recovery and an improved investment climate has made one of the largest oil reserves in the world increasingly more attractive. Despite improvement across the continent, there remain a number of risks which have the potential to significantly damage Australia's economic interests in the petroleum sector,including government policies and legislation, corruption and conflict. The longest exporters of crude petroleum products to Australia – Nigeria and Libya – have been subject to these factors in recent years and, accordingly, are the focus of this paper. Once identified, the impact of political instability, conflict, government corruption and other risk factors to Australia's mining interests within these countries is examined, and efforts to manage such risks are discussed.

From rights to responsibilities : reconceptualising carbon sequestration rights in Australia

Biosequestration of carbon in trees, forests and vegetation is a key method for mitigating climate change in Australia. To facilitate this, all States have enacted legislation for carbon sequestration rights, separating commercial rights in carbon from ownership of the land, trees and vegetation in which the carbon is sequestered. Ownership of carbon sequestration rights under state law is a prerequisite for the issue of carbon credits to proponents of ‘eligible sequestration offsets projects’ under the Carbon Credits (Carbon Farming Initiative) Act 2011 (Cth) (‘Carbon Farming Act’). This article examines the extent to which current State carbon sequestration rights support the offsets regime established by the Carbon Farming Act. The Commonwealth Act is concerned with allocating responsibilities to ensure the maintenance of the carbon sequestration, while the State Acts confer commercial rights in the carbon and leave the responsibilities to be allocated by private agreements. The carbon sequestration rights as defined by state laws do not confer the rights of access and management over land that a project proponent needs in order to discharge its responsibilities to maintain the carbon sequestration.

Health complaints commissions in Australia : Time for a national approach to data collection

Health complaint commissions in Australia: Time for a national approach • There is considerable variation between jurisdictions in the ways complaint data are defined, collected and recorded by the Health complaint commissions. • Complaints from the public are an important accountability mechanism and an indicator of service quality. • The lack of a consistent approach leads to fragmentation of complaint data and a lost opportunity to use national data to assist policy development and identify the main areas causing consumers to complain. • We need a national approach to complaints data collection by the Health complaints commissions in order to better respond to patients’ concerns