Latest news with #RacialDiscriminationAct
The Advertiser
a day ago
- Politics
- The Advertiser
The key to ending racism? It's right here in these PMs' speeches
Time is the marker of everything. In a civic context, we use time to understand what policies, actions, and even words have changed our lives - for the better or worse, or not at all. This helps us find ways to make our futures safer, healthier, and more just. I want to find a way to a future free of racism. And, at this point in time, I can't help but think of the words of two prime ministers - in speeches delivered half a century apart. First, let's go back to this week in June 1975, when Australia enacted the Racial Discrimination Act (RDA). With the White Australia Policy only recently abolished, this was a landmark moment in our history. It was the first Commonwealth law that focused on human rights and discrimination, setting a new vision for Australian society that sought to shake off the racial segregation that had defined it. In a speech at the RDA's proclamation, then prime minister Gough Whitlam said our nation must "spell out in enduring form ... the principle that all Australians, whatever their colour, race or creed, are equal before the law and have the same basic rights and opportunities." But has Whitlam's aspiration to "entrench new attitudes ... in people's hearts and minds" been realised? The answer is yes and no. A legislative framework around racial equality has helped shine a spotlight on employers in workplace discrimination cases, provided remedy pathways for people who've experienced racial hatred, even invalidate laws that discriminated against First Nations peoples, such as the famous case of Mabo v Queensland. It also set a precedent for similar anti-discrimination laws around age, sex, and disability that were passed in the years that followed. Over the past 50 years, we have seen monumental progress in our society, and its shape has changed significantly. These are achievements to remember, to celebrate. But, sadly, racism remains entrenched in many parts of our society. Systems and institutions designed to serve us all are still infected by racist attitudes and practices in place well before the RDA's inception. Racism continues to affect everyday life. People are confronted with it through verbal attacks or left isolated by policies or practices that disadvantage them. This includes people with "foreign sounding" names being less likely to be selected for a job interview or having their work more scrutinised than colleagues; over-policing in some communities; and cultural biases within the medical system that can prevent people of colour receiving the same standards of care as everyone else. First Nations people still suffer the fundamental racism of a denial of self-determination. This has consistently been confirmed by consultation, research, and work led by advocacy groups. The work of the Australian Human Rights Commission confirms it too. There is no doubt that urgent reform is needed. And, half a century since Whitlam's address, a speech by another Prime Minister - our current one - touched on what I believe will help drive the solution. In his election victory speech last month, Anthony Albanese spoke of what he believed were the Australian values the majority of people had voted for. "For the strength," he said, "to show courage in adversity and kindness to those in need". Courage and kindness. For me, this has always been at the heart of who are - or who we should aspire to be. Reform takes courage. It takes kindness. Changing systems and institutions to eliminate racism requires our leaders to take courage. In November last year, I released the National Anti-Racism Framework, a roadmap for widespread government-led reform to defeat racism in 10 years. Its 63 recommendations take a whole-of-society approach to eliminating racism, across our legal, justice, health, education, media and arts sectors as well as for businesses. Courage and kindness could manifest in action by the government supporting these recommendations. This would see the principles of the RDA truly realised. But after 50 years, the RDA also needs an update. One of the framework's proposed changes is introducing a legal responsibility on employers to proactively prevent racism in the workplace. Similar to the positive duty under the Sex Discrimination Act, it means taking reasonable steps to eliminate racism, rather than only reacting once a complaint is made. Kindness is recognising privilege and the advantages bestowed by race. It means having difficult but respectful conversations, listening to uncomfortable truths without defensiveness, and finding ways to move forward together. Kindness is one of the greatest examples of strength one could show. In 50 years' time, when people look back at this moment, I hope it's seen as another landmark moment when we made an active commitment to implementing the framework to eliminate racism. The moment our leaders and community had the courage to choose dignity, respect and fairness - to ensure we are all truly equal with the same rights and opportunities. Time is the marker of everything. In a civic context, we use time to understand what policies, actions, and even words have changed our lives - for the better or worse, or not at all. This helps us find ways to make our futures safer, healthier, and more just. I want to find a way to a future free of racism. And, at this point in time, I can't help but think of the words of two prime ministers - in speeches delivered half a century apart. First, let's go back to this week in June 1975, when Australia enacted the Racial Discrimination Act (RDA). With the White Australia Policy only recently abolished, this was a landmark moment in our history. It was the first Commonwealth law that focused on human rights and discrimination, setting a new vision for Australian society that sought to shake off the racial segregation that had defined it. In a speech at the RDA's proclamation, then prime minister Gough Whitlam said our nation must "spell out in enduring form ... the principle that all Australians, whatever their colour, race or creed, are equal before the law and have the same basic rights and opportunities." But has Whitlam's aspiration to "entrench new attitudes ... in people's hearts and minds" been realised? The answer is yes and no. A legislative framework around racial equality has helped shine a spotlight on employers in workplace discrimination cases, provided remedy pathways for people who've experienced racial hatred, even invalidate laws that discriminated against First Nations peoples, such as the famous case of Mabo v Queensland. It also set a precedent for similar anti-discrimination laws around age, sex, and disability that were passed in the years that followed. Over the past 50 years, we have seen monumental progress in our society, and its shape has changed significantly. These are achievements to remember, to celebrate. But, sadly, racism remains entrenched in many parts of our society. Systems and institutions designed to serve us all are still infected by racist attitudes and practices in place well before the RDA's inception. Racism continues to affect everyday life. People are confronted with it through verbal attacks or left isolated by policies or practices that disadvantage them. This includes people with "foreign sounding" names being less likely to be selected for a job interview or having their work more scrutinised than colleagues; over-policing in some communities; and cultural biases within the medical system that can prevent people of colour receiving the same standards of care as everyone else. First Nations people still suffer the fundamental racism of a denial of self-determination. This has consistently been confirmed by consultation, research, and work led by advocacy groups. The work of the Australian Human Rights Commission confirms it too. There is no doubt that urgent reform is needed. And, half a century since Whitlam's address, a speech by another Prime Minister - our current one - touched on what I believe will help drive the solution. In his election victory speech last month, Anthony Albanese spoke of what he believed were the Australian values the majority of people had voted for. "For the strength," he said, "to show courage in adversity and kindness to those in need". Courage and kindness. For me, this has always been at the heart of who are - or who we should aspire to be. Reform takes courage. It takes kindness. Changing systems and institutions to eliminate racism requires our leaders to take courage. In November last year, I released the National Anti-Racism Framework, a roadmap for widespread government-led reform to defeat racism in 10 years. Its 63 recommendations take a whole-of-society approach to eliminating racism, across our legal, justice, health, education, media and arts sectors as well as for businesses. Courage and kindness could manifest in action by the government supporting these recommendations. This would see the principles of the RDA truly realised. But after 50 years, the RDA also needs an update. One of the framework's proposed changes is introducing a legal responsibility on employers to proactively prevent racism in the workplace. Similar to the positive duty under the Sex Discrimination Act, it means taking reasonable steps to eliminate racism, rather than only reacting once a complaint is made. Kindness is recognising privilege and the advantages bestowed by race. It means having difficult but respectful conversations, listening to uncomfortable truths without defensiveness, and finding ways to move forward together. Kindness is one of the greatest examples of strength one could show. In 50 years' time, when people look back at this moment, I hope it's seen as another landmark moment when we made an active commitment to implementing the framework to eliminate racism. The moment our leaders and community had the courage to choose dignity, respect and fairness - to ensure we are all truly equal with the same rights and opportunities. Time is the marker of everything. In a civic context, we use time to understand what policies, actions, and even words have changed our lives - for the better or worse, or not at all. This helps us find ways to make our futures safer, healthier, and more just. I want to find a way to a future free of racism. And, at this point in time, I can't help but think of the words of two prime ministers - in speeches delivered half a century apart. First, let's go back to this week in June 1975, when Australia enacted the Racial Discrimination Act (RDA). With the White Australia Policy only recently abolished, this was a landmark moment in our history. It was the first Commonwealth law that focused on human rights and discrimination, setting a new vision for Australian society that sought to shake off the racial segregation that had defined it. In a speech at the RDA's proclamation, then prime minister Gough Whitlam said our nation must "spell out in enduring form ... the principle that all Australians, whatever their colour, race or creed, are equal before the law and have the same basic rights and opportunities." But has Whitlam's aspiration to "entrench new attitudes ... in people's hearts and minds" been realised? The answer is yes and no. A legislative framework around racial equality has helped shine a spotlight on employers in workplace discrimination cases, provided remedy pathways for people who've experienced racial hatred, even invalidate laws that discriminated against First Nations peoples, such as the famous case of Mabo v Queensland. It also set a precedent for similar anti-discrimination laws around age, sex, and disability that were passed in the years that followed. Over the past 50 years, we have seen monumental progress in our society, and its shape has changed significantly. These are achievements to remember, to celebrate. But, sadly, racism remains entrenched in many parts of our society. Systems and institutions designed to serve us all are still infected by racist attitudes and practices in place well before the RDA's inception. Racism continues to affect everyday life. People are confronted with it through verbal attacks or left isolated by policies or practices that disadvantage them. This includes people with "foreign sounding" names being less likely to be selected for a job interview or having their work more scrutinised than colleagues; over-policing in some communities; and cultural biases within the medical system that can prevent people of colour receiving the same standards of care as everyone else. First Nations people still suffer the fundamental racism of a denial of self-determination. This has consistently been confirmed by consultation, research, and work led by advocacy groups. The work of the Australian Human Rights Commission confirms it too. There is no doubt that urgent reform is needed. And, half a century since Whitlam's address, a speech by another Prime Minister - our current one - touched on what I believe will help drive the solution. In his election victory speech last month, Anthony Albanese spoke of what he believed were the Australian values the majority of people had voted for. "For the strength," he said, "to show courage in adversity and kindness to those in need". Courage and kindness. For me, this has always been at the heart of who are - or who we should aspire to be. Reform takes courage. It takes kindness. Changing systems and institutions to eliminate racism requires our leaders to take courage. In November last year, I released the National Anti-Racism Framework, a roadmap for widespread government-led reform to defeat racism in 10 years. Its 63 recommendations take a whole-of-society approach to eliminating racism, across our legal, justice, health, education, media and arts sectors as well as for businesses. Courage and kindness could manifest in action by the government supporting these recommendations. This would see the principles of the RDA truly realised. But after 50 years, the RDA also needs an update. One of the framework's proposed changes is introducing a legal responsibility on employers to proactively prevent racism in the workplace. Similar to the positive duty under the Sex Discrimination Act, it means taking reasonable steps to eliminate racism, rather than only reacting once a complaint is made. Kindness is recognising privilege and the advantages bestowed by race. It means having difficult but respectful conversations, listening to uncomfortable truths without defensiveness, and finding ways to move forward together. Kindness is one of the greatest examples of strength one could show. In 50 years' time, when people look back at this moment, I hope it's seen as another landmark moment when we made an active commitment to implementing the framework to eliminate racism. The moment our leaders and community had the courage to choose dignity, respect and fairness - to ensure we are all truly equal with the same rights and opportunities. Time is the marker of everything. In a civic context, we use time to understand what policies, actions, and even words have changed our lives - for the better or worse, or not at all. This helps us find ways to make our futures safer, healthier, and more just. I want to find a way to a future free of racism. And, at this point in time, I can't help but think of the words of two prime ministers - in speeches delivered half a century apart. First, let's go back to this week in June 1975, when Australia enacted the Racial Discrimination Act (RDA). With the White Australia Policy only recently abolished, this was a landmark moment in our history. It was the first Commonwealth law that focused on human rights and discrimination, setting a new vision for Australian society that sought to shake off the racial segregation that had defined it. In a speech at the RDA's proclamation, then prime minister Gough Whitlam said our nation must "spell out in enduring form ... the principle that all Australians, whatever their colour, race or creed, are equal before the law and have the same basic rights and opportunities." But has Whitlam's aspiration to "entrench new attitudes ... in people's hearts and minds" been realised? The answer is yes and no. A legislative framework around racial equality has helped shine a spotlight on employers in workplace discrimination cases, provided remedy pathways for people who've experienced racial hatred, even invalidate laws that discriminated against First Nations peoples, such as the famous case of Mabo v Queensland. It also set a precedent for similar anti-discrimination laws around age, sex, and disability that were passed in the years that followed. Over the past 50 years, we have seen monumental progress in our society, and its shape has changed significantly. These are achievements to remember, to celebrate. But, sadly, racism remains entrenched in many parts of our society. Systems and institutions designed to serve us all are still infected by racist attitudes and practices in place well before the RDA's inception. Racism continues to affect everyday life. People are confronted with it through verbal attacks or left isolated by policies or practices that disadvantage them. This includes people with "foreign sounding" names being less likely to be selected for a job interview or having their work more scrutinised than colleagues; over-policing in some communities; and cultural biases within the medical system that can prevent people of colour receiving the same standards of care as everyone else. First Nations people still suffer the fundamental racism of a denial of self-determination. This has consistently been confirmed by consultation, research, and work led by advocacy groups. The work of the Australian Human Rights Commission confirms it too. There is no doubt that urgent reform is needed. And, half a century since Whitlam's address, a speech by another Prime Minister - our current one - touched on what I believe will help drive the solution. In his election victory speech last month, Anthony Albanese spoke of what he believed were the Australian values the majority of people had voted for. "For the strength," he said, "to show courage in adversity and kindness to those in need". Courage and kindness. For me, this has always been at the heart of who are - or who we should aspire to be. Reform takes courage. It takes kindness. Changing systems and institutions to eliminate racism requires our leaders to take courage. In November last year, I released the National Anti-Racism Framework, a roadmap for widespread government-led reform to defeat racism in 10 years. Its 63 recommendations take a whole-of-society approach to eliminating racism, across our legal, justice, health, education, media and arts sectors as well as for businesses. Courage and kindness could manifest in action by the government supporting these recommendations. This would see the principles of the RDA truly realised. But after 50 years, the RDA also needs an update. One of the framework's proposed changes is introducing a legal responsibility on employers to proactively prevent racism in the workplace. Similar to the positive duty under the Sex Discrimination Act, it means taking reasonable steps to eliminate racism, rather than only reacting once a complaint is made. Kindness is recognising privilege and the advantages bestowed by race. It means having difficult but respectful conversations, listening to uncomfortable truths without defensiveness, and finding ways to move forward together. Kindness is one of the greatest examples of strength one could show. In 50 years' time, when people look back at this moment, I hope it's seen as another landmark moment when we made an active commitment to implementing the framework to eliminate racism. The moment our leaders and community had the courage to choose dignity, respect and fairness - to ensure we are all truly equal with the same rights and opportunities.
The Age
2 days ago
- Politics
- The Age
Islamic preacher ‘dehumanised' and ‘humiliated' Jewish community, court told
A series of speeches given by a controversial Islamic preacher in the wake of the October 7 attacks was intended to insult, humiliate, intimidate and offend Jews and dehumanised members of the Jewish community, the Federal Court has heard. Islamic preacher Wissam Haddad, who refers to himself as Abu Ousayd on his social media accounts, is being sued over comments he made during five speeches that were delivered at the Al Madina Dawah Centre in Bankstown in late 2023 and subsequently published on social media. The Executive Council of Australian Jewry's co-chief executive, Peter Wertheim, and its deputy president, Robert Goot, launched the legal action in October last year, claiming Haddad's speeches, in which he called Jews a 'vile' and 'treacherous' people and referred to them as 'apes' and 'pigs', breached the Racial Discrimination Act and were antisemitic. Wertheim and Groot have asked the Federal Court for an injunction banning Haddad and his centre from publishing similar content online in the future, and for the court to order the publication of a 'corrective notice' on the centre's social media pages. The pair filed a complaint with the Human Rights Commission in March 2024, but had taken legal action after mediation was unsuccessful. They have applied for the cost of their legal action to be covered, but have not sought any damages. In his opening submissions, Peter Braham, SC, acting for Wertheim and Goot, said Haddad's speeches meant to intimidate Jewish people. 'It's threatening, it's humiliating, and it's offensive,' Braham said. In his defence, Haddad said the speeches were not directed at, and did not refer to Australian Jewish people, and were derived, in substance, from the Qur'an. Haddad's barrister, Andrew Boe, argued that the speeches were given to a private audience at the Al Madina Dawah Centre and intended to be viewed only by members of the Muslim community, and therefore did not amount to a breach of the Racial Discrimination Act.
Sydney Morning Herald
2 days ago
- Politics
- Sydney Morning Herald
Islamic preacher ‘dehumanised' and ‘humiliated' Jewish community, court told
A series of speeches given by a controversial Islamic preacher in the wake of the October 7 attacks was intended to insult, humiliate, intimidate and offend Jews and dehumanised members of the Jewish community, the Federal Court has heard. Islamic preacher Wissam Haddad, who refers to himself as Abu Ousayd on his social media accounts, is being sued over comments he made during five speeches that were delivered at the Al Madina Dawah Centre in Bankstown in late 2023 and subsequently published on social media. The Executive Council of Australian Jewry's co-chief executive, Peter Wertheim, and its deputy president, Robert Goot, launched the legal action in October last year, claiming Haddad's speeches, in which he called Jews a 'vile' and 'treacherous' people and referred to them as 'apes' and 'pigs', breached the Racial Discrimination Act and were antisemitic. Wertheim and Groot have asked the Federal Court for an injunction banning Haddad and his centre from publishing similar content online in the future, and for the court to order the publication of a 'corrective notice' on the centre's social media pages. The pair filed a complaint with the Human Rights Commission in March 2024, but had taken legal action after mediation was unsuccessful. They have applied for the cost of their legal action to be covered, but have not sought any damages. In his opening submissions, Peter Braham, SC, acting for Wertheim and Goot, said Haddad's speeches meant to intimidate Jewish people. 'It's threatening, it's humiliating, and it's offensive,' Braham said. In his defence, Haddad said the speeches were not directed at, and did not refer to Australian Jewish people, and were derived, in substance, from the Qur'an. Haddad's barrister, Andrew Boe, argued that the speeches were given to a private audience at the Al Madina Dawah Centre and intended to be viewed only by members of the Muslim community, and therefore did not amount to a breach of the Racial Discrimination Act.
The Guardian
04-04-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
No playing favourites with ABC journalists as Dutton vows to slash broadcaster's 'waste'
It's only week one of the election campaign but Peter Dutton has made it abundantly clear how he feels about the ABC's funding and its journalists. Pressed repeatedly by 2GB broadcaster Ben Fordham to name his favourite ABC journalist, Dutton came up with no one. 'My favourite ABC journalist, I might have to go back a fair way, Ben, to identify that,' he told the Nine-owned Sydney radio station. 'But I think there are some who, frankly, are just partisan players, and people see that on their TV screens every night. And again, the ABC is using taxpayers' money.' This barb came the day after the opposition leader hinted he may cut the ABC's funding, and he repeated his line to Fordham. 'Nobody at the ABC gets $1 of pay without it being funded by Australian taxpayers. And as I've said before, if we find waste in the ABC, then we won't support that, and I think Australian households and businesses would expect nothing less.' The ABC is almost certainly facing yet another efficiency review if the Coalition is elected, and chair, Kim Williams, said at the Melbourne Press Club it was 'game on'. It will be another review to add to the many. We counted 14 ABC efficiency reviews between 2003 and 2018 alone. The ABC Alumni chair, Jonathan Holmes, told Weekly Beast it's standard play by conservative governments to have an efficiency review of the ABC. 'And almost always they've come to the conclusion that in programming terms, the ABC is really an efficient organisation,' he said. Following the success of Netflix drama Adolescence, the Australian Women's Weekly has republished an earlier feature on toxic masculinity, men's rights activists and the radicalisation of young men. The article included a profile of self-proclaimed misogynist and alleged rapist Andrew Tate. Tate and his brother Tristan were arrested in late 2022 amid accusations of sex trafficking. The brothers have denied all wrongdoing. 'If you're wondering why this man's words are being printed in the pages of the Weekly, it's because Tate and the 'manosphere' he's a part of have become impossible to ignore,' the Weekly said. We thought it was to showcase Tate's style, as his red silk robe, chunky silver watch and boxer shorts in three glamorous photographs were so fetching the magazine accompanied them with a 'Shop This Image' advertising feature. With just one click readers could buy similar items from local retailers to emulate Tate's fashion sense. We asked the editor of the Australian Women's Weekly, Sophie Tedmanson, if she thought this was appropriate and we didn't hear back. It's been 17 years since former SBS newsreader Mary Kostakidis filed for breach of contract in the federal court, later reaching an amicable out-of-court settlement with the broadcaster. Kostakidis will soon be back in the federal court after the head of the Zionist Federation of Australia, Alon Cassuto, filed a statement of claim on Monday under the Racial Discrimination Act after mediation in the Human Rights Commission failed. Last year Cassuto accused Kostakidis of breaching racial discrimination laws in two social media posts on X. Kostakidis has been a vocal critic of the Israeli government over the Gaza war. She rejected the central accusation, which was related to two posts sharing a speech by the secretary general of Hezbollah, Hassan Nasrallah, in which he used the phrase 'from the river to the sea the land of Palestine is for the Palestinian people – and the Palestinian people only'. The chief executive of the Zionist federation, Alon Cassuto, said it was 'irresponsible and dangerous' for Kostakidis to repeat 'calls by a terrorist for Jews to be ethnically cleansed'. Kostakidis said the complaint was 'completely misconstruing' her posts sharing the speech. 'Of course, I wasn't promoting it. I was informing people. That's what I'm supposed to do,' she previously told Guardian Australia. 'As a journalist, it's my responsibility to show people what one side is saying. Is it not in our interests to know that?' Kostakidis has characterised his lawsuit as an attempt 'to silence people like myself'. No date has been set down for the case to be heard by Justice Stephen McDonald in Melbourne. Just weeks after A Current Affair reporter Seb Costello resigned from Nine after 13 years with the network, the enterprising son of the company's former chair and former federal treasurer Peter Costello is back with not one but two ventures. The first is a podcast, with a fellow Nine reporter who recently left the fold, Allan Raskall. Raskall & Costello is coming soon, the pair announced on Instagram via a video of Raskall driving a vintage car. Sign up to Weekly Beast Amanda Meade's weekly diary on the latest in Australian media, free every Friday after newsletter promotion On LinkedIn Costello announced his other plan. 'For almost two decades on TV & radio, I've fought for everyday Aussies facing up against big, careless institutions,' he wrote. 'This time I'm fighting for myself.' Costello said he is in training with former boxing champion Sam Soliman for a competitive boxing fight in August. It can't be that much of a stretch from the foot-in-door journalism of ACA to the boxing ring. When the ABC announced it had secured 'the first free-to-air leaders' debate' on 16 April with Anthony Albanese and Peter Dutton, Sky News was triggered. The channel demanded the ABC amend its media release, claiming it was Sky that had the first free-to-air leaders' debate. 'The ABC's public relations team has falsely claimed the national broadcaster has secured the 'first free-to-air' debate of the 2025 Federal Election, when in fact Sky News Australia will beat them by a week,' a Sky News story on Thursday read. Now as far as we know, Sky News is not available free on broadcast television, except for a deal with regional broadcasters to screen in several markets across Victoria, southern NSW, Queensland and northern NSW. Sky's debate, on 8 April, will be broadcast on Foxtel and streamed on but both platforms require a subscription. 'It will also be live and free for audiences nationally on LG Channels and Samsung TV Plus through Sky News Australia's FAST channels,' Sky said. That's great but it's still not on free-to-air television, which means Seven, Nine, Ten, SBS or ABC. 'Sky News Australia has notified the ABC of the mistake and requested the press release be amended,' it thundered. The ABC did not comply. With digital, you're never wrong for long, but when a mistake makes it into print it's there for all to see. Last week the Canberra Times published a journalist's notes in the body of the story. 'Thanks mate, here tis again. three less pars,' the incongruous line said after the first paragraph of a report about the sentencing of Kristian White for the manslaughter of Clare Nowland. Clive Palmer is well known for storming out of interviews when they don't go his way. But the Trumpet of Patriot leader is so enamoured of a friendly interview he did with Paul Murray on Sky News Australia, he is using it as an election ad on YouTube. And it's seven minutes long. Palmer has forked out between $45,000 and $50,000 for the ad/interview to be shown on YouTube 1.25m times. A fishing fan was watching Step Outside with Paul Burt on 7Mate when she heard a shocking exchange during the cooking segment. In episode two of the show, the following remarks were made by a guest: 'Beat the egg like you beat the missus … that's what I do. Tie her to a tree and beat her with fencing wire.' The viewer made a formal complaint to Free TV, asking for an apology and a donation to a domestic violence service. 'Seven was appalled and shocked by the comments made by a guest in Step Outside with Paul Burt,' the Seven Television group managing director, Angus Ross, said in a statement to Weekly Beast. 'They were abhorrent and totally unacceptable. The show has been removed from 7Mate and 7Plus with immediate effect. Seven unreservedly apologises to viewers.' Sky News Australia is no stranger to classic clickbait tactics on social media. 'Rebecca Judd has announced her shock split' a post on X said alongside a photograph of Judd with her AFL player husband, Chris. But the story was about the AFL Wag parting ways with her longtime manager, Lucy Mills, and not her husband.
The Guardian
25-02-2025
- The Guardian
Australian citizen detained 32 times at Sydney airport accuses border force of systemic racism
An Australian citizen detained 32 times at Sydney airport – without allegation or charge – has told the federal circuit court he is stopped and searched almost every time he enters the country because he is black. Okungbowa Hubert Igbinoba also told a directions hearing on Tuesday that an $80,000 settlement offer from the government was an attempt to silence him. ''Take $80,000 and shut up', that is what the commonwealth is saying,' Igbinoba told the court, accusing the Australian Border Force of engaging in 'systemic racism'. 'They try to silence me by offering me money,' he said from the bar table, representing himself. 'I am treated like a criminal. This is how border force treats people who look like me. 'They have been acting illegally and it has to stop.' Igbinoba is suing the Australian government in the federal circuit court alleging border officials have breached the Racial Discrimination Act by consistently singling him out for interrogation, simply because he was black. The Australian government disputes Igbinoba's allegation. Igbinoba is a Nigerian-born Australian citizen, with relatives living in Africa, and a freight shipping business that requires regular international travel. Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email Between February 1998 and January 2020, he was detained at Sydney international airport 32 times – almost every time he entered Australia. According to his statement of claim, Igbinoba was isolated by border officials, interrogated, searched and patted down. Each time he had his luggage emptied and inspected, and his laptop and mobile phone were confiscated and searched. On some occasions he was detained for up to four hours. None of the detentions, he has told the court, discovered any evidence of a potential crime. Igbinoba, an Australian citizen since 2004, has told the court that on many of the flight entries into Sydney airport he was 'one of the only individuals with dark skin and obvious African ethnicity' and the only one segregated for what he alleges was discriminatory treatment. His statement of claim states he 'has no criminal history, convictions or associations, and has never been charged with or engaged in any customs or immigration offences'. 'During each of the entries, [Igbinoba] did not observe or see any of the Australian Border Force officers detain, question or search any of his fellow travellers who were of apparent Anglo-Saxon, Caucasian or Asian ethnicity,' his statement of claim states. '[Igbinoba's] dark skin and obvious African race and ethnicity is the only feature or characteristic that distinguished him from his fellow travellers, which often comprised a few hundred other travellers, on each of the entries.' Igbinoba's statement said his behaviour at the airport was indistinguishable from that of any other passenger and he was not 'engaging in any conduct that would ordinarily attract or justify any intervention by or attention from ABF officers'. Igbinoba said in his statement of claim he repeatedly asked border force officers why he was being 'systemically and repeatedly' targeted but officers never explained why he was being treated differently to other passengers on the same flight. The case has been before the courts since 2020. An attempt at mediation in 2022 failed to reach a resolution. In court documents, the federal government has argued there is no evidence that Igbinoba was ever discriminated against or targeted. 'There is not a skerrick of a basis to make such an allegation under the Racial Discrimination Act.' Several border force officers have told the court they stopped Igbinoba because there was an 'alert' in its border management systems. In its submissions, the federal government said 'many of the officers … say they acted because there was an 'alert' attached to [Igbinoba] as a person of interest which required them to carry out the instructions on the alert'. The government said it opposed disclosing the details of any alerts placed on Igbinoba to the court, arguing these were 'not relevant' to a case alleging racial discrimination. Government agencies have sought to keep significant tranches of information in the case secret: protected not only from disclosure in a public court hearing, but also from Igbinoba himself. The Australian federal police has made a public interest immunity claim, arguing that its submissions before the court should be kept confidential, lest it disclose 'sensitive methodology used by the AFP to prevent, detect and investigate potential offences'. The AFP also argued its intelligence information, if disclosed publicly, 'could readily be exploited by persons involved in the alleged criminal activities to undermine the AFP's future investigations'. NSW police also argued it should not be compelled to share information with Igbinoba or the court, arguing it could reveal confidential sources and cause 'serious and irreparable damage to the integrity' of police information gathering. The home affairs department said in an affidavit it held information that is 'unable to be publicly described in this proceeding, and address matters which themselves would potentially cause harm to Australia's interest if they were to be disclosed to [Igbinoba] or the public'. It also told the court that if it were compelled to reveal details about the alert management system it operates at the border, it would 'allow a person to take steps to … evade intervention'. At a discursive directions hearing before Judge Benjamin Zipser in the federal circuit court on Tuesday, Igbinoba applied for an adjournment while he sought new counsel, having parted with his previous lawyer earlier this month. He told the court he wanted to introduce new evidence from 'co-travellers' who had flown into the country with him and witnessed his treatment. He said without an adjournment he lacked the wherewithal to bring an effective case against a well-resourced government. 'I am seeking an adjournment to help shine a light on their behaviour: racism and discrimination must stop. 'The truth must come out. It's in the interests of justice.' Anthony Wall, representing the commonwealth, opposed the application for an adjournment, saying there was 'considerable public interest' in the matter being heard without delay. Wall said Igbinoba had provided 'no explanation whatsoever' as to why he had not yet engaged new counsel. Judge Zipser agreed with the commonwealth that an adjournment – in a five-year-old case – was unjustified. He dismissed Igbinoba's adjournment application and said the hearing would proceed next month.
