Tony Abbott's Summit on Constitutional recognition a Pinochet or Hitler type moment for Aboriginal Peoples

This Recognise campaign is about securing the head of power to govern over Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples. It is not about securing our rights or freeing us from racial discrimination.
 
The government knows that they are committing a major crime against Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples when they put us all in the one basket, falsely promoting a single homogenous community. They know that is wrong but the Australian public does not. This is our last stand as independent Nations and Peoples holding ancient Law and cultures. We are on a precipice. Let's not have these false pretenders make decisions for the rest of us.

7 July 2015

Ghillar Michael Anderson responds to mainstream media referring to PM Tony Abbott's suggestion he would deal with any right wing opposition to including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in the Constitution 'with love' – a Mandella type moment. Instead Anderson calls PM Tony Abbott's Summit on Constitutional recognition with 40 Indigenous 'leaders' a Pinochet or Hitler type moment for Aboriginal Peoples.

Ghillar, Michael Anderson, Convenor of the Sovereign Union, co-founder of the Aboriginal Embassy and Head of State of the Euahlayi Peoples Republic said today from Sydney:

For mainstream media to refer to PM Tony Abbott's suggestion that he would deal 'with love' any right wing opposition to include Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in the Constitution – a 'Mandella type moment' is taking media spin to a ridiculous extreme. [ABC News 24 7 July 2015] . In reality PM Tony Abbott's Summit on Constitutional recognition with 40 Indigenous 'leaders' is more like a Pinochet or Hitler type moment for Aboriginal Peoples, so much so that the mainstream media refuses to deal with any oppositional point of view for Aboriginal Nations and Peoples.

This Recognise campaign is about securing the head of power to govern over Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples. It is not about securing our rights or freeing us from racial discrimination.

Whether this is by design or construction from PM Tony Abbott, it is a far cry from a democratic process when opposing and critical opposite views are rejected and suppressed. As one of the placards from yesterday' s protest stated: "Decolonise not recognise!"

Prime Minister Tony Abbott and the Leader of the opposition Bill Shorten appear to be working closely together to undermine the First Nations and Peoples, Shorten is even wearing the 'Liberal Party' branded blue tie.

We can come up with all sorts of critical words and viewpoints to describe this oppressive state of affairs, but the central tenet of the Vote 'No' campaign opposing arguments can be directed at one significant point from the communique of the Summit on Constitutional recognition released yesterday and that is:

'.... Further we agree with the Joint Select Committee (Interim Report July 2014) that a successful referendum proposal must:

This statement now confirms PM Menzies advice in 1965 when the Commonwealth Parliament debated the Bills for the 1967 referendum, when he said that if Aboriginal people are taken out of the Constitution then the Parliament will have to make laws specifically for the Aboriginal race.
[See below in Background and at http://nationalunitygovernment.org/content/governments-attempting-counte... ]

That is why Indigenous Land Corporation legislation is specifically for the members of the Aboriginal race. That is also why government has mainstreamed medical services etc to take away that independence and to assimilate us without our people understanding the real truth behind it.

If we look at the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Act 2005 it can be seen that all our rights are, in fact, guaranteed because of the international law on human rights and self-determination was imported into the common law of Australia through this Act.
[see below in Background and http://nationalunitygovernment.org/content/decolonisation-be-or-not-be-i... ]

Our people are being completely mislead by the Aboriginal elite and some middle class educated Aboriginal people and the Recognise campaign. This is a despicable act on the part of the government selected so-called 'Indigenous leaders'. We must ask ourselves do they truly believe they are doing the right thing, when they forego all that we, and those who have gone before us, have been fighting for in favour of empty symbolism and feudal rhetoric.

Even though Britain rid itself of feudalism in 1660, colonial Australia is still governed under the feudal land system of escheat. This is why the Commonwealth government introduced the Native Title Act because they seek for us to prove we have connection to country as the original owners, courtesy Noel Pearson and the Magnificent Seven. These people were wrong then and they have it wrong now. I recall Pat Dodson making an oral submission to the Senate Standing Select Committee on Constitutional & Legal Affairs in 1981 in Alice Springs, when he said we need our land rights recognised first, before we go to the next step of Aboriginal Sovereignty, that one we can put in the too hard basket. They failed to give us Land Rights; they failed to articulate what Reconciliation is other than to shake hands, say G'day and walk across the Harbour Bridge. These people failed us then and they are failing us now.

But there is one significant point in our favour that must always be remembered - the ability of our people to rise to the occasion when we need to fight for our rights.

The government knows that they are committing a major crime against Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples when they put us all in the one basket, falsely promoting a single homogenous community. They know that is wrong but the Australian public does not. This is our last stand as independent Nations and Peoples holding ancient Law and cultures. We are on a precipice. Let's not have these false pretenders make decisions for the rest of us.

Another very significant and telling point that has to be considered by our people is a statement by the Chair of the committee who introduced the Final Report of the Joint Select Committee on Constitutional Recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people dated June 2015, which is available for all to read at - http://apo.org.au/files/Resource/report_8.pdf ]:

Full list of attendees at the Prime Ministers Kirribilli House Constitutional Recognition Summit 6 July 2015 - (not in order) Government: Prime Minister Tony Abbott, Leader of the Opposition Bill Shorten, Minister for Indigenous Affairs Nigel Scullion. Delegates: Mr Shane Phillips, Ms Robynne Quiggan, Mr Justin Mohamed, Mr Shane Duffy, Prof Ngiare Brown, Mr Sean Gordon, Ms Charlee-Sue Frail, Mr Richard Ah Mat, Ms Leah Armstrong, Ms Josephine Cashman, Mr Bruce Martin, Prof Lester Irabinna Rigney, Mr Samuel Bush-Bianasi, Mr Jason Glanville Ms Kirstie Parker, Mr Robert Les Malezer, Mr Geoff Scott, Mr Kenny Bedford, Mr Maluwap Nona, Ms Djapirri Mununggirritj, Ms Gail Mabo, Ms Jill Gallagher, Mr Selwyn Button, Ms Rachel Perkins, Mr David Ross, Mr Jason Mifsud, Prof Patrick Dodson, Mr Warren Mundine, Ms Tanya Hosch, Mr Mick Gooda, Mr Noel Pearson, Prof Marcia Langton, Prof Megan Davis, Mr Djawa Yunupingu, Ms Pat Anderson, Mr Tom Calma, Mr Joe Morrison, Mr Aden Ridgeway, Ms Pat Turner and Ms Shannon Dodson.

'...When the Constitution was drafted, the exclusion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples was unremarkable for the time, as Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples were not considered citizens and had minimal rights and protections. ...'

We have always been outside the Constitution. Now the Commonwealth is coercing our people to consent to be governed by a colonial power with a genocidal intent and is actively suppressing the dissenting voices.

The dictatorial suppression that I speak of is demonstrated by the pulling of yesterday's 5.30pm NITV News bulletin. Yesterday's protest against recognition in the colonial Constitution was one of the biggest Aboriginal stories to unfold in recent times. It was filmed by NITV video journalists at Circular Quay, on the ferry to Kirribilli and outside the secret meeting. About half an hour before the NITV news bulletin was about to go to air at 5.30pm, a NITV journalist from the news team called me to confirm whether I preferred to be called Ghillar Michael Anderson or Michael Anderson as the Sovereign Union organiser of the demonstration in opposition to the secret meeting on the referendum. But NITV failed to run the news story at 5.30pm, instead the station controller pulled the news bulletin by playing the Pan Pacific games. So much for our own news service.

NB: Some mainstream media briefly reported our protest, but highlighted the one arrest of a person who was totally unconnected to our protest. He seemed to be an agent provocateur arriving just before the riot squad.

Ghillar Michael Anderson
Convenor of Sovereign Union of First Nations and Peoples in Australia
and Head of State of the Euahlayi Peoples Republic
Mogila Station, Goodooga NSW 2838
ghillar29@gmail.com, 0427 292 492 - www.sovereignunion.mobi

1.
http://nationalunitygovernment.org/content/governments-attempting-counte...

http://nationalunitygovernment.org/content/decolonisation-be-or-not-be-i...

…. The Unilateral Declarations of Independence (UDIs) by five Aboriginal Nation States have caused the Commonwealth government of Australia to seriously up the ante, by deceitfully promoting the Recognise campaign as a beneficial process for First Nations Peoples. But, as discussed, in reality the referendum would confer colonial powers to legally enforce their assimilation policies. Currently, Aboriginal people are not legally within the Constitution and the Commonwealth government can only make laws for Aboriginal people under Section 51 (26) of the Constitution.

The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Act 2005 is an example of this and close reading of the Act reveals that the Commonwealth of Australia has already signed up to the decolonisation process and has imported it into domestic law. The Preamble of this Act imports international law:

The Racial Discrimination Act 1975, which imports the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination into the common law of Australia, has as Schedule 1 the incorporation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, 14 December 1960 (General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV), which calls for all United Nations State parties to begin a speedy end to the scourge of colonialism. …

2. Former PM Robert Menzies on the Race Power:

In the Australian parliamentary debates on the proposed amendment to the two sections of the constitution, Prime Minister Sir Robert Menzies expressed concern about the possible legal outcomes when he said at 533 and 534 Hansard No. 13, Thursday, 1 April 1965 TWENTY-FIFTH PARLIAMENT FIRST SESSION - THIRD PERIOD:

"... the removal of what has been called the "discriminatory provisions" of section 51. On that I would, with great respect, challenge the assumption that is made. May I read the provision to the House in order to refresh its memory. Section 51 states- The Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth with respect to:- (xxvi.) The people of any race, other than the aboriginal race in any State, for whom it is deemed necessary to make special laws: It has been suggested that that provision discriminates against the Aborigines of Australia. I would have thought that the contrary was the fact. Parliament has been given power to make discriminatory laws in relation to the people of any race-special laws which would relate to them and not to other people; laws which would treat them as people who stood outside the normal grasp of the law, enjoying its benefits and sustaining its burdens in common with all other citizens. I would have thought that the perfect state of affairs in Australia would be that any Aboriginal citizen felt that he did stand equal with every other citizen before the law, enjoyed its benefits and took his own part on a proper basis in sustaining its burdens. I have no doubt whatever that this provision in the Constitution was designed having regard to conditions that existed at that time and the possibility of having to make a special law dealing with, for example, kanaka labourers-perhaps a special law to deport them from .the country or to confine them to some particular area. There was a good deal of discussion about this at the time this provision was framed. Therefore the framers of the Constitution inserted this provision, but they left out the Aboriginal race because they did not want to discriminate against the people of the aboriginal race. All we have to do now is to cross out this reference "other than the aboriginal race" and we confer on this Parliament a power to make a special law which relates to the Aborigines and to no other people.
Mr Reynolds.- But
Sir ROBERT MENZIES.-If you do not mind I want to pursue this. I do not think it is at all out of place. There is a second point about it, and this does concern me. If the Commonwealth, as one of its heads of power under section 51, has the right to pass special laws with respect to the Aboriginal race, I wonder what limitations will be on that separate head of power. Would this enable the Parliament to set up a separate body of industrial laws relating to Aborigines or some other kind of law- health laws, quarantine laws or laws under any of the other powers of the Parliament? It may well be true that it could because, make no mistake about it; this would be a head of power standing not inferior to any other power contained in section 51. That is a matter that requires a great deal of thought. I do not want honorable members to think that I have arrived at some positive conclusion about it. I am raising it here in order to indicate that it wants a good deal of thought and that we would want to give it a great deal more investigation than we have before we favoured changing the provision in section 51. But we would be very happy to see the end of section 127."