The First Nations Advisory Committee (FNAC) supports the Uluru Statement from the Heart and commend it to the Institute as a whole.
Furthermore, the Australian Institute of Architects Board support the Statement and have permanently enshrined a voice within the Institute’s governance structure through the First Nations Advisory Committee.
The First Nations Advisory Committee strongly supports the enshrinement of First Nations peoples in the Constitution, and the yes campaign.
The Uluru Statement from the Heart
The Uluru Statement from the Heart (the Statement) was issued after more than six months of consultation by the First Nations National Constitutional Convention with over 1200 First Nations peoples across 12 different locations around the continent.
Those meetings resulted in consensus between those attending about constitutional recognition. In May 2017, over 250 First Nations peoples gathered from across the continent in Mutitjulu near Uluru, and added their signatures to the Statement.
The Statement is an invitation to the broader Australian population to create a better future via proposing some key reforms.
The Statement calls for three actions of Voice, Treaty and Truth addressed as follows in the Statement:
- Voice: We call for the establishment of a First Nations Voice enshrined in the Constitution.
- Treaty and Truth: We seek a Makarrata Commission to supervise a process of agreements between
governments and First Nations, and truthtelling about our history
The Voice
The Voice is a means of representation for First Peoples after more than two hundred years of dispossession and marginalisation. By being enshrined in the Constitution, the Voice would aim to bring a sustainable method of advocating and advising that is outside of political cycles. The Voice is being developed as a response to the circumstances in Australia, specifically the lack of any formal agreement (such as a treaty) or formal recognition of First Nations peoples.
The Voice is both practical and symbolic. Practically, the Voice is a mechanism designed to improve decisions, policies and laws that are of relevance to First Nations peoples, through First Nations input on matters that affect them. Symbolically, the Voice also recognises Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in the Constitution of the nation as the First Nations peoples who inhabited the continent. With Constitutional recognition, as has happened with previous First Nations bodies that have been established, it cannot be dissembled and disregarded.
Referendum Question
The proposed referendum question is: A proposed law: to alter the Constitution to recognise the First Peoples of Australia by establishing an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice. Do you approve this proposed alteration?
Draft Words to Enshrine a Voice in the Constitution
The draft words to be added to the Constitution are:
Chapter IX Recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples 129 Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander Voice.
In recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as the First Peoples of Australia:
- There shall be a body, to be called the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice.
- The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice may make representations to Parliament and the
Executive Government on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. - The Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws with respect to the
composition, functions, powers and procedures of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice.
The Voice will enshrine in the Constitution the obligation of Parliament to create a body made up of First Nations peoples, with the form and function being determined by Parliament. The Voice will be able to speak not only to Parliament (all levels of government) but also to Cabinet (including ministers and the public service) about concerns held by First Nations peoples.
The Voice can initiate advice without needing to wait to be asked, meaning it can be proactive. The Parliament, while it is obligated to have a Voice and hear the Voice, it is not obligated to act on the Voice.
Tom Calma and Marcia Langton Report
Tom Calma and Marcia Langton authored a 272-page report to begin to answer questions about the potential composition, remit and powers of the Voice. They proposed 35 regions decided by “factors such as cultural groupings, existing regional arrangements, demographics and geography.” The views from the regions would feed to a national Voice with 24 members – two from each state and territory, five positions for people in remote communities plus representing Torres Strait Islanders living on the mainland. They would serve four-year terms with a limit of two consecutive terms.
Reference List of Readings, Watchings and Listenings
First Nations and non-Indigenous authors, designers, solicitors, legal experts and thinkers answer questions and make comment about The Voice.
First Nations Voices
Perspective on the Referendum for a Voice – Rueben Berg
Reconcile what? Why white Australia needs to rectify its wrongs – Teela Reid
Many of my own people tell me they don’t understand the Voice – Stan Grant
Turning words into actions: the next steps for the Indigenous voice – Lorena Allam
What is the Indigenous voice to parliament, how would it work, and what happens next? – Lorena Allam
Liberals that opposing Indigenous voice could add to ‘perceptions’ party is ‘racist’ – Ken Wyatt
The voice referendum is a turning point. A yes vote will save lives. A no vote will invalidate them – Josie Douglas
The Voice: what is it, where did it come from, and what can it achieve? – Gabrielle Appleby and Eddie Synot
Your questions answered on the Voice to Parliament – Carissa Lee (and Amanda Dunn – non-Indigenous)
What’s Indigenous sovereignty and can a Voice extinguish it? – Jack Latimore
Non-Indigenous Voices
Answers to Dutton’s 15 questions on the Voice – Michael Pelly and Tom McIlroy
We now know exactly what question the Voice referendum will ask Australians. A constitutional law expert explains – Anne Twomey
With 11 Indigenous politicians in parliament, why does Australia need the Voice? – Shireen Morris
Grattan on Friday: A ‘No’ vote in the Voice referendum would put a serious dent in Australia’s image abroad – Michelle Grattan
Key Documents
First Nations peoples have been working towards a Voice like entity for many years, and likewise politicians have promised to recognise First Nations peoples. Here are some key documents they have produced in earlier efforts.
William Cooper Petition 1937
Sir William Cooper’s letter to the king calling for more federal First Nations voices at the decision-making table.
Petitions from the Yolngu people of Yirrkala seeking the recognition of the Commonwealth Parliament of rights to their traditional lands on the Gove Peninsula in Arnhem Land.
A petition to the Queen for land rights.
A call on the Australian Government and people to recognise the rights of First Nations peoples.
Constitutional Recognition mentioned by John Howard 2007
In his 2007 pre-election commitments former Prime Minister John Howard committed to a referendum to recognise First Nations peoples.
Issued by forty senior First Nations peoples after meeting with the Prime Minister and the Opposition Leader to ask for a new process of consultation of First Nations communities.
Indigenous Voice Co-design Process Final Report to the Australian Government
Tom Calma and Marcia Langton Report.
References
Key references used to bring this document together.
Australian Human Rights Commission 2021, Implementing UNDRIP, https://humanrights.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-10/implementing_undrip_-_australias_third_upr_2021.pdf
Australian Human Rights Commission n.d., Right to self determination, https://humanrights.gov.au/our-work/rights-and-freedoms/right-self-determination
Parliament of Australia 2017, Uluru Statement: a quick guide, https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp1617/Quick_Guides/UluruStatement
Reconciliation Australia 2020, Reconciliation: Moving beyond Acknowledgement of Country, https://www.reconciliation.org.au/reconciliation-moving-beyond-acknowledgement-of-country/
The Uluru Statement 2017, Uluru Statement from the Heart, https://ulurustatement.org/the-statement/
United Nations 2007, United Nations Declaration On The Rights Of Indigenous Peoples, https://www.un.org/development/desa/indigenouspeoples/declaration-on-the-rights-of-indigenous-peoples.html
Appendices
Appendix 1: United Nations Declaration of the Rights on Indigenous Peoples
The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) was adopted by the General Assembly on Thursday, 13 September 2007, by a majority of 143 states in favour, 4 votes against (Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States) and 11 abstentions (Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Burundi, Colombia, Georgia, Kenya, Nigeria, Russian Federation, Samoa and Ukraine). UNDRIP recognises the right of Indigenous peoples to self-determination and sets global human rights standards for them. A few key articles include:
- Article 3: Indigenous peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.
- Article 5: Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain and strengthen their distinct political, legal, economic, social and cultural institutions, while retaining their rights to participate fully, if they so choose, in the political, economic, social and cultural life of the State.
- Article 8: Indigenous peoples and individuals have the right not to be subjected to forced assimilation or destruction of their culture.
- Article 10: Indigenous peoples shall not be forcibly removed from their lands or territories. No relocation shall take place without the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous peoples concerned and after agreement on just and fair compensation and, where possible, with the option of return.
- Article 11: Indigenous peoples have the right to practice and revitalize their cultural traditions and customs. This includes the right to maintain, protect and develop the past, present and future manifestations of their cultures, such as archaeological and historical sites, artefacts, designs, ceremonies, technologies and visual and performing arts and literature.
- Article 31: Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain, control, protect and develop their cultural heritage, traditional knowledge and traditional cultural expressions, as well as the manifestations of their sciences, technologies and cultures, including human and genetic resources, seeds, medicines, knowledge of the properties of fauna and flora, oral traditions, literatures, designs, sports and traditional games and visual and performing arts. They also have the right to maintain, control, protect and develop their intellectual property over such cultural heritage, traditional knowledge, and traditional cultural expressions.
- Article 37: Indigenous peoples have the right to the recognition, observance and enforcement of Treaties, Agreements and Other Constructive Arrangements concluded with States or their successors and to have States honour and respect such Treaties, Agreements and other Constructive Arrangements.
Prime Minister John Howard’s government opposed the declaration due to the references to self-determination, and on the grounds it elevated customary law above national law. When Prime Minister Kevin Rudd was elected the UNDRIP was endorsed in 2009. Since then, while the federal government has committed to take actions to implement UNDRIP and promote First Nations rights on an equal basis, they have not:
- Taken steps to implement UNDRIP into law, policy and practice
- Negotiated with First Nations peoples a plan to implement UNDRIP
- Audited existing laws, policies and practice for compliance with UNDRIP
While the federal government established Closing the Gap in 2007 and its key policy platform is to give effects to UNDRIP, so far there have not been significant improvements.
Appendix 2: Uluru Statement from the Heart
We, gathered at the 2017 National Constitutional Convention, coming from all points of the southern sky, make this statement from the heart: Our Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander tribes were the first sovereign Nations of the Australian continent and its adjacent islands, and possessed it under our own laws and customs. This our ancestors did, according to the reckoning of our culture, from the Creation, according to the common law from ‘time immemorial’, and according to science more than 60,000 years ago.
This sovereignty is a spiritual notion: the ancestral tie between the land, or ‘mother nature’, and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples who were born therefrom, remain attached thereto, and must one day return thither to be united with our ancestors. This link is the basis of the ownership of the soil, or better, of sovereignty. It has never been ceded or extinguished, and co-exists with the sovereignty of the Crown.
How could it be otherwise? That peoples possessed a land for sixty millennia and this sacred link disappears from world history in merely the last two hundred years?
With substantive constitutional change and structural reform, we believe this ancient sovereignty can shine through as a fuller expression of Australia’s nationhood.
Proportionally, we are the most incarcerated people on the planet. We are not an innately criminal people. Our children are aliened from their families at unprecedented rates. This cannot be because we have no love for them. And our youth languish in detention in obscene numbers. They should be our hope for the future.
These dimensions of our crisis tell plainly the structural nature of our problem. This is the torment of our powerlessness.
We seek constitutional reforms to empower our people and take a rightful place in our own country. When we have power over our destiny our children will flourish. They will walk in two worlds and their culture will be a gift to their country.
We call for the establishment of a First Nations Voice enshrined in the Constitution.
Makarrata is the culmination of our agenda: the coming together after a struggle. It captures our aspirations for a fair and truthful relationship with the people of Australia and a better future for our children based on justice and self-determination.
Makarrata is the culmination of our agenda: the coming together after a struggle. It captures our aspirations for a fair and truthful relationship with the people of Australia and a better future for our children based on justice and self-determination.
In 1967 we were counted, in 2017 we seek to be heard. We leave base camp and start our trek across this vast country. We invite you to walk with us in a movement of the Australian people for a better future.
Appendix 3: Self-determination and Sovereignty
Self Determination
Everyone has the right of self-determination, meaning they may freely determine their political status and freely pursue their social, cultural, and economic needs. For First Nations peoples, the right of self-determination is not necessarily about creating a separate state (though this may be an aspiration or outcome); it is based on the acknowledgement afforded by the Mabo judgement that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island peoples are the First Nations peoples of the continent called Australia.
Self-determination rights, such as those contained in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, are officially recognised and protected in common law.
The loss of the right of self-determination through colonisation is at the centre of the disadvantage experienced by First Nations peoples. As such, self-determination is critical to overcoming the impacts of colonisation and dispossession.
Sovereignty
Sovereignty can have a variety of meanings, from the formulation of rights, to reversing the continuing experiences of colonisation, to preservation of cultural practices and knowledge, to repossession of ancestral lands and resources, to self governance. Sovereignty represents an accumulation of legal, cultural, social, economic, and political rights. Sovereignty, from a First Nations’ perspective, is the inherent rights held inherently by First Nations peoples of the continent derived from historical and spiritual connections to land and can represent a position of power.
First Nations sovereignty was not extinguished by colonisation, invasion, discovery, force, dominance, etc. First Nations peoples have never ceded sovereignty, the continent was taken by force and is being retained by force. There is no way any government can pass laws to impact First Nations sovereignty, it is only something First Nations peoples can give up themselves.
According to constitutional and international law experts, First Nations peoples being recognised through enshrinement in the Constitution cannot cede or extinguish sovereignty; only a formal agreement such as a treaty can cease sovereignty, and this cessation would be dependent on the wording of the treaty mechanism – no-one other than First Nations peoples, nations, clans, language groups, tribes can cede their own sovereignty.
