267:
serious finding of breach under section 18C with the subsequent finding of reasonableness under section 18D", and that "obviously the adverse findings made of the
Commission could have been relied upon to defeat the respondent's claim to have acted reasonably and in good faith. It appears that the complainants were placed under an impossible burden of proving explicit motive and intent.... roper remedies are being denied by the responsible bodies." A similar point is made by Anna Chapman, who argues that "the result of the case was a reification of dominant racial values... in prioritising non-indigenous racial narratives over Indigenous perspectives."
71:. The commission's ruling, which found the cartoon to be an "artistic work" published "reasonably and in good faith", has been the subject of academic debate, with some commentators expressing concern about the broad interpretation of the exemption provided under the Racial Discrimination Act. This decision was upheld upon appeal to the
22:
194:
rejected that finding, and asked for the case to be referred to the commission for public inquiry. A public hearing was held on 29 April 1999, and the findings released on 12 April 2001. The
Commission found that the cartoon was in breach of s18c of the Act; specifically, it found that the cartoon:
193:
On 4 March 1998, the Race
Discrimination Commissioner discontinued her inquiry into the case on the grounds that the cartoon was "an artistic work" that was published "reasonably and in good faith", and was therefore exempt from the s18c conditions under s18d of the Act. The Nyungar Circle of Elders
161:
was published on 6 September 1997. It was critical of the fact that the return of Yagan's head had become a source of conflict between
Noongars instead of fostering unity, and it lampooned the conduct of those involved in the conflict. It could also be interpreted as insulting aspects of Indigenous
139:
in
September 1997, but organisation of the handover "was accompanied by a degree of sometimes undignified acrimony over who had the appropriate cultural claims, by descent, to bring the remains back". These conflicts within the Noongar community were publicly aired, and at one point even involved
266:
According to McGlade, a number of academic commentators have expressed concern about the ruling, in particular that the protections offered under section 18c were being undermined by a broad interpretation of the s18d exemption. McGlade has argued that "it is extremely difficult to reconcile the
94:. The cartoon was seen as critical of these conflicts and was interpreted by some as insulting aspects of Indigenous Australian culture and casting aspersions on the motives and legitimacy of Indigenous Australians with mixed racial heritage.
236:
The commission also found, however, that the cartoon was exempt under s18d of the Act, because it was done reasonably and in good faith. The reasoning was based partly on the overall coverage of the issue by
178:
on behalf of a group of people calling themselves "The
Nyungar Circle of Elders", and comprising Albert Corunna, Richard Wilkes, Violet Newman, Mingli Wanjurri, Leisha Eatts,
241:, which "provided a balance report... and an opinion which... encouraged unity in, and support of, the Aboriginal community". In such a context, the decision by then
254:
then sought a judicial review of the commission's finding, but his application was dismissed on 4 December 2002. Bropho then appealed against that decision in the
171:
64:
226:
provided intimate details of the ancestry of individuals, in some cases "where the intercourse was not a matter of choice for the
Aboriginal women concerned";
428:
368:
Chapman, Anna (2004). "Australian Racial Hatred Law: Some
Comments on Reasonableness and Adjudicative Method in Complaints Brought by Indigenous People".
90:. The repatriation process was marked by internal conflicts within the Noongar community, which were publicly aired and even led to litigation in the
418:
63:
and three
Indigenous Australian children, sparked controversy due to its content, leading to a racial discrimination complaint lodged with the
413:
141:
91:
352:
162:
Australian culture, and casting aspersions on the motives and legitimacy of
Indigenous Australians with mixed racial heritage.
433:
68:
136:
403:
67:. The commission ruled that while the cartoon made inappropriate references to Noongar beliefs, it did not violate the
408:
393:
255:
72:
127:. He was shot dead by a settler in 1833, and his head was removed and sent to the United Kingdom for display in a
170:
On 24 September 1997, a complaint about the cartoon was lodged with the Race Discrimination Commissioner of the
245:
398:
324:
157:
provided coverage of the repatriation of Yagan's head, including the conflict within the Nyungar community.
135:. The Noongar community began efforts to locate and repatriate the head in 1990. Yagan's head was finally
120:
322:
McGlade, Hannah (2001). "Race Vilification Before the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission".
258:. On 6 February 2004, the Federal Court dismissed the appeal and ordered Bropho to pay all costs.
153:
51:
30:
343:
McGlade, Hannah (2004). "Race Discrimination in Australia: A Challenge for Treaty Settlement".
348:
124:
83:
42:
423:
287:
232:
reinforced a negative stereotype of Indigenous people taking advantage of government grants.
175:
116:
87:
387:
251:
179:
183:
60:
46:
202:
21:
213:
132:
242:
56:
55:
on 6 September 1997. The cartoon, consisting of eight panels featuring
345:
Honour Among Nations?: Treaties and Agreements with Indigenous People
128:
78:
The cartoon was published in the wake of the return of the head of
289:
Bropho v Human Rights & Equal Opportunity Commission FCAFC 16
229:
implied a diminishing of the race by the resultant racial mix; and
220:
209:
112:
103:
79:
20:
190:
had breached "s18c of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975".
131:. In 1964, it was buried in an unmarked grave in a local
82:, a Noongar warrior who resisted European settlement of
308:
Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (2001).
16:
Cartoon resulting in a racial discrimination complaint
347:. Melbourne University Publishing. pp. 273–287.
248:to publish the cartoon was found to be reasonable.
174:. The complaint was made by human rights lawyer
223:in a manner offensive to Indigenous Australians;
119:. Yagan was a Noongar warrior who resisted the
205:regarding alcohol and Indigenous Australians;
172:Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission
65:Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission
8:
310:Corunna v West Australian Newspapers (2001)
304:
302:
300:
298:
186:. The complainants alleged that Alston and
282:
280:
111:was published shortly after the return of
49:and published in the Australian newspaper
198:contained a demeaning portrayal of Yagan;
276:
208:contained derogatory references to the
7:
429:Anti-indigenous racism in Australia
286:Federal Court of Australia (2004).
142:Supreme Court of Western Australia
92:Supreme Court of Western Australia
14:
419:Indigenous Australian politics
69:Racial Discrimination Act 1975
1:
414:History of Western Australia
370:Monash University Law Review
34:, Saturday 6 September 1997
450:
312:EOC 93-146. 12 April 2001.
256:Federal Court of Australia
101:
73:Federal Court of Australia
325:Indigenous Law Bulletin
201:reinforced a negative
35:
434:Cartoon controversies
24:
404:Australian case law
239:The West Australian
188:The West Australian
154:The West Australian
52:The West Australian
31:The West Australian
409:Editorial cartoons
140:litigation in the
36:
394:1997 in Australia
292:. 6 February 2004
125:Western Australia
115:'s head from the
84:Western Australia
43:editorial cartoon
441:
378:
377:
365:
359:
358:
340:
334:
333:
319:
313:
306:
293:
284:
449:
448:
444:
443:
442:
440:
439:
438:
384:
383:
382:
381:
367:
366:
362:
355:
342:
341:
337:
321:
320:
316:
307:
296:
285:
278:
273:
264:
168:
159:Alas Poor Yagan
150:
109:Alas Poor Yagan
106:
100:
39:Alas Poor Yagan
26:Alas Poor Yagan
17:
12:
11:
5:
447:
445:
437:
436:
431:
426:
421:
416:
411:
406:
401:
399:Australian art
396:
386:
385:
380:
379:
360:
353:
335:
314:
294:
275:
274:
272:
269:
263:
260:
234:
233:
230:
227:
224:
217:
206:
199:
176:Hannah McGlade
167:
164:
149:
146:
123:settlement of
117:United Kingdom
102:Main article:
99:
96:
88:United Kingdom
15:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
446:
435:
432:
430:
427:
425:
422:
420:
417:
415:
412:
410:
407:
405:
402:
400:
397:
395:
392:
391:
389:
375:
371:
364:
361:
356:
354:0-522-85106-1
350:
346:
339:
336:
331:
327:
326:
318:
315:
311:
305:
303:
301:
299:
295:
291:
290:
283:
281:
277:
270:
268:
261:
259:
257:
253:
252:Robert Bropho
249:
247:
244:
240:
231:
228:
225:
222:
218:
215:
211:
207:
204:
200:
197:
196:
195:
191:
189:
185:
181:
180:Robert Bropho
177:
173:
165:
163:
160:
156:
155:
147:
145:
143:
138:
134:
130:
126:
122:
118:
114:
110:
105:
97:
95:
93:
89:
85:
81:
76:
74:
70:
66:
62:
58:
54:
53:
48:
44:
40:
33:
32:
27:
23:
19:
373:
369:
363:
344:
338:
329:
323:
317:
309:
288:
265:
250:
238:
235:
192:
187:
169:
158:
152:
151:
108:
107:
77:
50:
38:
37:
29:
25:
18:
246:Paul Murray
184:Ken Colbung
148:Publication
86:, from the
61:Ken Colbung
47:Dean Alston
45:created by
388:Categories
271:References
203:stereotype
98:Background
214:religious
166:Complaint
59:activist
376:: 27–48.
262:Analysis
219:treated
133:cemetery
121:European
424:Noongar
216:figure;
137:exhumed
57:Noongar
28:, from
351:
243:editor
129:museum
41:is an
221:death
210:Wagyl
113:Yagan
104:Yagan
80:Yagan
349:ISBN
332:(7).
212:, a
182:and
390::
374:30
372:.
328:.
297:^
279:^
144:.
75:.
357:.
330:5
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
