ºÚÁÏÇ鱨վ

Social Justice Report 2003

Chapter 5: Addressing family violence in Indigenous communities

In light of the significant attention being
devoted to this issue in public debate and the need for a more far reaching
response, I asked Professor Judy Atkinson and Caroline Atkinson to prepare
an overview of the existing approaches of governments to addressing issues
relating to family violence in Indigenous communities. Both are respected
Aboriginal researchers with a history of conducting research and advocating
for improved responses to family violence issues within Aboriginal communities.
This chapter is based on the report on current approaches to family violence
in Indigenous communities that they prepared for me in the second half
of 2003. ^[1] I thank them and the students
of Gnibi - the College of Indigenous Australian Peoples at Southern Cross
University - for their contribution to this report. ^[2]

This chapter provides a broad overview of
the current situation regarding family violence in Indigenous communities
in Australia from both a statistical and policy and program perspective.
It provides an Indigenous specific perspective on family violence. An
examination of the western traditional approach to domestic violence,
including its narrow interpretation, and the limitations of this approach
in addressing violence in Aboriginal communities is presented. Alternative
models for addressing family violence in Indigenous communities are also
considered. There is a particular focus on restorative justice models
and healing approaches, as well as consideration of the vital role of
community control, capacity building and governance reform in restoring
health and wellbeing to Indigenous communities.

Recent initiatives such as the Prime Minister's
family violence roundtable in July 2003 and subsequent commitment of $20
million as a 'down payment' to address family violence issues, the response
of the Western Australian government to the Gordon Inquiry's findings,
and the focus on family violence issues in several of the COAG whole-of-government
community trials, demonstrate a genuine commitment from governments to
address family violence issues. This chapter is intended to build on the
significant goodwill and commitment of governments to addressing family
violence in Indigenous communities. It is intended to promote an understanding
of the wide-ranging and multi-faceted issues that contribute to, or affect
the responsiveness of government interventions relating to, family violence
in order to improve policy responses to it.

When I started my PhD in 1993, seeking
to understand the context of this violence, and find a healing way forward,
I was asked by an academic to find words that would explain what I saw
as I sat with people who had experienced violence, as children and young
people, as adult men and women and as elders.

The word I chose was pain. Layers
and layers of pain, and in the unresolved pain the anger and grief that
ensures its continuation. We carry this pain across generations, and
we pass it down to others in our families and communities.

I came to understand that the pain of
a child or a woman, or a man, is the pain of us all. Often we deny the
pain we experience in others because it mirrors our pain. Some of us
numb ourselves with alcohol and other drugs and other addictive forms
of behaviour and some with work. Work that in no way begins to address
our needs.

Any Aboriginal person who works in the
field, and chooses not to close their eyes and hearts, is haunted by
the immensity of the pain.

While government demands statistical evidence,
we do not need to count the dead and wounded as data for institutional
archival files. We daily bury our dead and are so shell-shocked we can
neither fully grieve our losses nor properly tend our wounded.

What is important now is we truthfully
name the pain in its many shapes and forms,
and make the connections between the feelings and the behaviours that
ensure, if we do not get about the work of healing, that it will continue
across the generations. ^[3]

Indigenous perspectives on family violence

Violence is undermining our very life's
essence, it is destroying us, and there are very few Aboriginal families
that are not struggling with the debilitating effects of trauma, despair
and damage resulting from their experiences with violence. ^[4]

Indigenous concepts of violence are much
broader than usual mainstream definitions of domestic violence.^[5] For Indigenous peoples, the term family violence better reflects
their experiences.

Family violence involves any use of force,
be it physical or non-physical, which is aimed at controlling another
family or community member and which undermines that person's well-being.
It can be directed towards an individual, family, community or particular
group. In Tjunparni: Family Violence in Indigenous Australia family
violence is defined as behaviours and experiences including:

beating of a wife or other family members,
homicide, suicide and other self-inflicted injury, rape, child abuse
and child sexual abuse. When we talk of family violence we need to remember
that we are not talking about serious physical injury alone but also
verbal harassment, psychological and emotional abuse, and economic deprivation,
which although as devastating are even more difficult to quantify than
physical abuse. ^[6]

Family violence is not limited to physical
forms of abuse. It also includes cultural and spiritual abuse:

People get hurt physically - you can see
the bruises and black eyes. A person gets hurt emotionally - you can
see the tears and the distressed face - but when you've been hurt spiritually
like that - it's a real deep hurt and nobody, unless you're a victim
yourself, could ever understand because you've been hurt by someone
that you hold in trust. ^[7]

Family violence in Indigenous communities
also takes place in the broader context of violence committed at a systemic
level:

It is violence to move people forcibly
from their place of birth and to dump them in strange places... It is
violence to separate family members by policy or by designed economic
hardship and necessity. It is violence to classify people by race in
order to deny privileges to some and heap privileges on others. It is
violence to systematically deny the most basic human rights in the service
of such a system. The obvious physical violence that reaches wide attention
is the merest tip of the iceberg of such ignored, routinized, structural
violence. ^[8]

Hence, it is crucial to acknowledge the
impact of broader systemic violence when considering the impact of family
violence in Indigenous communities. It is vital that definitions of violence
incorporate not only physical dimensions, but also emotional, social,
economic, spiritual and institutional dimensions. The expansive framework
of family violence is imperative in developing and implementing broad,
holistic, prevention/intervention strategies at various levels of critical
need.

Such a frame of reference brings into focus
the interconnecting and trans-generational experiences of violence within
Indigenous families and communities. As Caroline and Judy Atkinson state:

The term Family Violence is more suitable
as it brings focus to the trauma of the interconnecting and trans-generational
experiences of individuals within families, to show the continuity between
how Indigenous peoples have been acted upon and how in turn they may
then act upon others and themselves. ^[9]

Further, family violence embraces the historical
nature of violence occurring in Indigenous communities, including the
violence perpetrated by non-Indigenous people. As Harry Blagg states:

[F]amily violence ... represents an historical
narrative about the collective suffering of a people, rather than a
simple term demarcating a discrete social problem or one specific set
of power relationships. ^[10]

A critical aspect of this broader conception
of what constitutes family violence is that it recognises the centrality
of Indigenous culture in framing the experiences, choices and ultimately
the responses to violence, of Indigenous women:

In understanding Aboriginal world views
in relation to Family Violence, it has to be understood that an Aboriginal
woman cannot be considered in isolation, or even as part of a nuclear
family, but as a member of a wider kinship group or community that has
traditionally exercised responsibility for her wellbeing as she exercises
her rights within the group. ^[11]

This factor is often overlooked by current
policies and other intervention strategies aimed at addressing violence
against women which are primarily guided and directed by a liberal feminist
framework. The major criticism of western feminist based intervention
strategies for dealing with violence against Indigenous women is that
they have evolved from the very structures that served to subordinate
and oppress Indigenous peoples. Moreover they embody white middle class
women's experiences. Indigenous women, however:

do not have a purely gendered experience
of violence that renders them powerless. They, along with their men,
experienced and continue to experience, the racist violence of the State.
Aboriginal women do not share a common experience of sexism and patriarchal
oppression, which binds them with non-Aboriginal women in a unified
struggle ...

The notion of patriarchy is foreign to
traditional Aboriginal communities, which were relatively separate but
equal in terms of male/female roles. While Aboriginal societies were
gendered, women were not victims of men's power, but assertively affirmed
their place and role in the community. According to Berndt & Berndt
(1964) this provided both independence yet an essential interdependence
between gender groups. ^[12]

Accordingly, Indigenous women's experience
of discrimination and violence is bound up in the colour of their skin
as well as their gender. Strategies for addressing family violence in
Indigenous communities need to acknowledge that a consequence of this
is that an Indigenous woman 'may be unable or unwilling to fragment their
identity by leaving the community, kin, family or partners' ^[13] as a solution to the violence.

As Harry Blagg notes, choosing to leave
the family 'with all its complexly embedded ties of mutual responsibility
and obligation, and connection with country and culture - is not an option'.
These 'considerable limitations on the ability of Aboriginal women to
abrogate responsibilities to family' must be accepted as 'the starting
point - rather than the problem - in victim support'.^[14]

A practical example of how this manifests
is the different way that Indigenous and non-Indigenous women use refuges
and shelters. The latter tends to use them as an exit point from abusive
relationships, whereas Indigenous women use them as a temporary respite. ^[15]

Liberal feminist approaches to domestic
violence also tend to emphasise the experience of the victim, as opposed
to the experiences of the perpetrator. This differs from an Indigenous
community-based perspective, which includes the issues of both perpetrator
and victim. Indigenous women are saying that men's issues must also be
addressed if real solutions are to be found and lasting changes are to
happen.

Overall, these factors point to the need
to recognise that:

The unique dimensions of violence against
Aboriginal women are a result of complex factors and socio-historical
and contemporary experiences and must be considered when attempting
to provide solutions that are relevant to the specific situations and
needs of Aboriginal women. Solutions to problems, no matter how well-intentioned,
can create further problems for subordinated groups within a society,
particularly when the 'solutions' are based in a systemic structure
that has functioned abusively on the subordinated group. ^[16]

Of particular concern in this regard is
that the typical 'western' response to family violence is to criminalise
such behaviour through specific domestic violence legislation, with the
strong possibility of imprisonment being the outcome for those convicted
of offences. As Caroline and Judy Atkinson note, however, 'tighter controls
from the criminal justice system in dealing with violence against Indigenous
women can in fact make their situation worse' .^[17] They argue:

Aboriginal women say that when their men
go to jail, they emerge more violent, and their voices are ignored.
Because of this, and despite having no real option apart from the criminal
justice response, these women are still hesitant to use the legislation
to its full intent. Whilst it is important to acknowledge that violence
against women is an offence, the question that needs to be asked in
relation to Aboriginal perpetrators, is how can we also recognise that
their behaviours have been influenced by the violence of the State against
Aboriginal communities, while at the same time holding perpetrators
accountable and providing programs whereby the perpetrators are able
to change their behaviour?

What has been revealed is that using Western
law in isolation is not necessarily a viable option due to issues of
access, particularly for women in isolated and rural communities, and
a general reluctance to use the criminal justice system based on past
and present experiences of abuse ... ^[18]

An emphasis on criminal justice responses
to family violence poses two main concerns for Indigenous women. The first
is that the system is generally ineffective in addressing the behaviour
of the perpetrator in the longer term. The effect of imprisonment is to
remove them from the community and then, without any focus on rehabilitation
or addressing the circumstances that led to the offending in the first
place, to simply return them to the same environment.

The second is that there are a range of
barriers in the accessibility and cultural appropriateness of legal processes
which discourage Indigenous women from using the criminal justice system
in the first place. Such barriers include an historic distrust of the
police and legal processes which has developed due to factors such as
an historically high level of police surveillance of Indigenous peoples; ^[19] a negative relationship with police
due in part to the over-representation of Indigenous peoples, including
Indigenous women, in public order and other petty offences; as well as
experiences of inaccessible and culturally inappropriate court processes. ^[20]

It is not being suggested that incidents
of family violence in Indigenous communities should be condoned or that
responsibility of perpetrators be diminished. Instead, these barriers,
highlight a failure to acknowledge the unique characteristics of Indigenous
family violence has the potential to render approaches for dealing with
this violence ineffective, with the consequence that Indigenous women
ultimately do not enjoy the protection of the law.

Accordingly, responses to family violence
in Indigenous communities need to be cognisant of these broader issues
and responsive to them. I return to current initiatives and proposals
for making the criminal justice system more responsive in protecting Indigenous
women from family violence later in this chapter.

The extent of family violence in Indigenous communities

There are significant deficiencies in the
availability of statistics and research on the extent and nature of family
violence in Indigenous communities. Data that is available tends to be
confined to situations where there has been a criminal justice or welfare
intervention, and also significantly under-counts the true extent of family
violence due to under-reporting by Indigenous peoples.

Recent reports such as the Gordon Inquiry
in Western Australia and the Cape York Justice Study in Queensland, for
example, have relied on the limited available data rather than gather
new quantitative evidence. The 2001 report Violence in Indigenous Communities,
commissioned by the Commonwealth Attorney-General's Department, provides
the most recent and comprehensive analysis of the available data and is
consistently cited by other reports on the subject.^[21] It is anticipated that the Indigenous General Social Survey, conducted
by the Australian Bureau of Statistics in 2002, will provide some new
information when it is published in mid-2004.

Despite this dearth of statistics, numerous
inquiries have concluded that rates of family violence are significantly
higher among Indigenous peoples than for other Australians. Statistics
and research dating back to the 1980s also reveal that this situation
has existed for at least the past two decades with no identifiable improvement. ^[22]

At the national level, the Steering Committee
for the Review of Government Service Provision's national report on key
indicators of Indigenous disadvantage for 2003 notes higher rates of substantiated
child protection notifications for Indigenous children, as well as higher
rates of deaths from homicide, hospitalisation for assault and of being
a victim of murder, assault, sexual assault and domestic violence for
Indigenous peoples than for non-Indigenous peoples. ^[23] The report identifies that in Western Australia the rate for substantiated
child protection notifications is 8 times higher than for non-Indigenous
children. Caution must be taken in interpreting these figures in terms
of rates of violence however. For instance, there is a clear trend for
Indigenous children to be substantiated on the basis of neglect rather
than abuse.

Significantly, there are real variations
in the pattern of substantiations for Indigenous and non-Indigenous. For
example, sexual abuse is reported at a higher rate among non-Indigenous
children, although this may simply reflect a lack of reporting in Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander communities. Similarly, the over-representation
of Indigenous children in the reporting statistics may be due to over-monitoring
of some Indigenous communities.

A further key concern highlighted in the
Steering Committee's report was the high rates of hospitalisation experienced
by Indigenous Australians. Data collected by the Australian Institute
of Health and Welfare (AIHW) revealed that per 1000 Indigenous people
entering hospital 13.3 were admitted due to an assault, whereas the figure
is only 1 in 1000 for non-Indigenous people. The figures for Indigenous
females were highest in Western Australia (27.2 per 1000) and the Northern
Territory (25.7). These rates are approximately 10 times higher than those
of the non-Indigenous female population. These figures may, however, reflect
a number of factors of which family violence is but one. ^[24]

The available statistics for the Indigenous
adult population equally presents a grave picture. The Australian Institute
of Criminology analysis of Indigenous and non-Indigenous homicides in
Australia found that between 1989 to 2000 Indigenous persons comprised
15.1% of all homicide victims and 15.7% of all homicide offenders, even
though Indigenous people make up only 2.1% of the total population of
Australia. ^[25] In relation to family violence
54.2% of Indigenous homicides occurred between family members, in contrast
with 38.1% of non-Indigenous murders occurring between family members.

Available statistics also suggest that there
is a clear link between alcohol and drug misuse and violence within Indigenous
communities, with between 70 and 90 percent of all assaults being committed
while under the influence of alcohol or drugs. ^[26]

In Queensland, the Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander Women's Violence Task Force Report on violence in Indigenous
communities (the Robertson report) from 1999 identifies the following
statistics which relate to Queensland Indigenous communities:

• In 1988, the Queensland Domestic
  Violence Task Force estimated that domestic violence affects 90 per
  cent of Indigenous families living in Deed of Grant in Trust (DOGIT)
  communities; ^[27]

• Barber, Punt and Albers reported over 70 per cent of
  all assaults on Palm Island were committed against females, and most
  of these involved 'boyfriends or husbands who were said to be drunk
  at the time'; ^[28]

• In another North Queensland community, with a total female
  population of 133 women over 15 years of age (107 were over 20 years
  of age), there were 193 cases of injuries due to domestic assault in
  a twelve-month period to 30 June 1990; ^[29]
• The Study of Inquiry in Five Cape York Communities in 1997 found that 86 per cent of domestic violence injuries affected
  people in the 16-44 years age group and that 91 per cent of these injuries
  were suffered by women; ^[30] and
• The Queensland Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions
  (DPP) 1997 report Indigenous Women within the Criminal Justice System found sufficient evidence to suggest that the degree of violence being
  experienced by Indigenous women was much higher than the statistics
  recorded. ^[31]

The key findings of the Robertson report into violence in
Indigenous communities in Queensland concluded that:

• Dispossession, cultural fragmentation and marginalisation
  have contributed to the current [family violence] crisis in which many
  Indigenous people find themselves;
• A more rigorous understanding of the impact of high unemployment,
  poor health, low educational attainment and poverty on the incidence
  of family violence is warranted;
• Family violence in Indigenous communities has a critical
  issue for many years which is continually recognised by Indigenous communities
  as being a problem;
• At times, government representatives appeared to regard
  violence as a normal aspect of Indigenous life, therefore, interventions
  were dismissed as politically and culturally intrusive in the newly
  acquired autonomy of Indigenous communities;
• Violence in all its forms, whatever its locale and in
  any circumstances, is unacceptable, and both Indigenous and non-Indigenous
  peoples must work together to help in its eradication;
• While governments have made funding available to address
  the issues pertinent to violence in the lives of Indigenous peoples,
  only minimal intervention has occurred to date;
• Violence in Indigenous communities must be stopped through
  proactive intervention as opposed to prevention alone; and
• A whole of government approach to tackling violence is
  required along with Indigenous people taking responsibility to repair
  the broken lives as a result of violence. ^[32]

The Cape York Justice Study similarly noted
that up to 90% of families living in DOGIT communities are affected by
violence. This Study also revealed that abuse of Elders is increasing:

Research in the Rockhampton area concluded
that abuse of older people is a relatively recent phenomenon in Aboriginal
communities following colonisation, and is related to the loss of traditional
culture and values, including respect for elders. ^[33]

In Western Australia, the Gordon Inquiry
into the Response by Government Agencies to Complaints of Family Violence
and Child Abuse in Aboriginal Communities in Western Australia identifies
the situation as follows:

Family violence and child abuse occur in Aboriginal
communities at a rate that is much higher than that of non-Aboriginal
communities. The statistics paint a frightening picture of what could
only be termed an epidemic of Family Violence and child abuse in Aboriginal
communities. Aboriginal women account for 3 percent of the population
but 50% of domestic violence incidents reports to police. Aboriginal
children were the subject of substantiated child abuse at more than
7 times the rate of non-Aboriginal children. These figures stand within
the context of under reporting. ^[34]

An earlier study on domestic violence in
Western Australia concluded that:

The rates of domestic violence amongst
Aboriginal women were staggering. Although these women make up only
3% of the adult female population in WA, they accounted for half of
the domestic violence incidence reported to the police in 1994. Based
on police figures Aboriginal women are more than 45 times more likely
than non-Aboriginal women to be victims of domestic violence. ^[35]

That study also noted that it was not only
Indigenous men who were the perpetrators of violence against Indigenous
women but increasingly Indigenous women are becoming violent against other
Indigenous women.^[36] It has also been suggested
that the violence perpetrated by Indigenous women against Indigenous women,
comes in part from the sexual and psychological violence they themselves
have experienced. ^[37]

Statistical data from the NSW Bureau of
Crime Statistics and Research (BOCSAR) shows that in New South Wales:

• Aboriginal females are four times more likely than other
  females to be a victim of murder;
• Aboriginal females are four times more likely to be a
  victim of an assault or domestic violence;
• Aboriginal females are seven times more likely to be
  a victim of grievous bodily harm;
• In 73 percent of sexual assaults where the victim was
  Aboriginal the offender was also Aboriginal;
• In 80 percent of assaults where the victim was Aboriginal,
  the offender was also Aboriginal; and
• In 85 percent of domestic violence related assaults,
  where the victim was Aboriginal, the offender was also Aboriginal. ^[38]

In a 2001 discussion paper, the NSW Aboriginal
Justice Advisory Council (AJAC) also cited statistics compiled from BOSCAR
which reveal that:

• Approximately 270 per 100,000 of alleged sexual assault
  offenders in NSW are Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders in comparison
  with only 90 per 100,000 of the general NSW male rate. That is, Aboriginal
  men are 3 times more likely than the general population to be sexual
  assault offenders.
• At least 130 per 100,000 Aboriginal and Torres Strait
  Islander men are alleged child sexual assault offenders compared to
  only 50 per 100,000 of the general population. That is, Aboriginal men
  are 2.6 times more likely than non-Aboriginal men to be child sexual
  assault offenders.
• Approximately 3400 per 100,000 Aboriginal and Torres
  Strait Islander men are alleged domestic violence assault offenders
  compared to 550 per 100,000 of the general population. That is, Aboriginal
  men are 6.2 times more likely than non- Aboriginal men to be the offender
  of (domestic) violence. ^[39]

The NSW Aboriginal Justice Advisory Council
observe that:

The facts indicate a significant level
of over representation of Aboriginal males in the criminal justice system
for family violence related offences and [in rates] of Aboriginal victimisation... ^[40]

The discussion paper further claims that:

• 68% of Aboriginal women surveyed said they had been abused
  as a child, and approximately 75% of those women said they were sexual
  assaulted as children. Over 82% of those women did not tell anyone what
  had happened. In some instances the women revealed that the survey was
  their first point of disclosure.
• Approximately 68% of women abused as children said they
  still need counselling and or support to deal with the abuse they had
  suffered as children.
• Over 73% disclosed that they were victims of abuse as
  adults. Of those women who were assaulted as adults, 42% had been sexually
  assaulted, 6% of those disclosed they were sexually assaulted by a relative,
  79% were physically assaulted (including family/domestic violence).
• 61% of those women abused as adults said that they did
  not tell anyone what was going on at the time. ^[41]

The paper comments that:

at least 80% of the women surveyed said
that their experience of abuse was an indirect cause of their offending.
Some women revealed that the underlying cause of their drug and criminal
habits was to avoid dealing with, or because they had not been able
to address, the abuse that they had suffered as a child, in particular
child sexual assault. A significant number of women interviewed suggested
appropriate ways to deal with abuse, nearly all which included Aboriginal
healing programs, in particular involvement with Elders. ^[42]

In 2003 AJAC conducted research into the
experiences of Aboriginal women in New South Wales prisons which revealed
that:

• 70% of the women participating in the survey said that
  they been sexually assaulted as children;
• Of this group 98% say they now have a drug problem;
• 78% said they had been victims of abuse as adults;
• 44% said they had been sexually assaulted as adults and
  5% said they had been sexually assaulted by a family member; and
• Approximately four in five said they had experienced
  domestic violence. ^[43]

In 2000, the South Australian report Reshaping
Responses to Domestic Violence detailed that:

• 90% of Aboriginal families are affected by family violence;
• Aboriginal men are four times more likely to die a violent
  death than non-Aboriginal men, and women are six and half times more
  likely to die a violent death than non-Aboriginal women;
• The incident rate of domestic violence for Aboriginal
  women is 45 times higher than for non-Aboriginal women;
• Aboriginal women are more likely to be killed as a result
  of family violence as compared to non-Indigenous women - their rate
  of homicide is 10 times that of all Australian women; and
• South Australian Government statistics suggest that the
  instances of family violence are 'likely to be between seven and 16
  times higher than rates among non-Aboriginal people'. ^[44]

The Northern Territory Law Reform Committee
noted in 2003 that 'family violence is a major concern for Indigenous
people, eclipsing issues such as property crime'.^[45] They summarise research on family violence as follows:

• rates of violence in Aboriginal communities are significantly
  higher than in non-Aboriginal communities;
• improving the situation for Indigenous victims requires
  a whole of government approach;
• programs need to be delivered within a cultural framework as only Indigenous people can challenge the myth of Aboriginal
  male entitlement to violence;
• strategies must include recognising Aboriginal law as
  fundamental to the long term health of Indigenous communities;
• Aboriginal youth are the most vulnerable gourp in society
  to become the direct or indirect witnesses of violence. ^[46]

The 2002 Tasmanian report on family violence
- ya pulingina kani - Good to See You Talk -documents in a narrative
form the stories of experiences of Tasmanian Aborigines with violence.
It demonstrates the devastation of family violence in Indigenous communities
in Tasmania and most importantly, the desires of the community to take
responsibility for it, work in partnership with government to address
and to heal.^[47] The report recommends:

• Reciprocity through the government forming an Indigenous
  Violence Working Party to enable healing of Indigenous Tasmanians, the
  provision of adequate funding to implement the strategies the community
  wants and that the stories contained within ya pulingina kani are protected;
• Healing by training Aboriginal participants in the grief
  and healing work;
• Partnerships between the Aboriginal community, government
  and community service providers; and
• Funding of Indigenous art, performance and culture to
  bring out the stories of ya pulingina kani to mainstream Tasmania. ^[48]

The findings of these reports, and of the
available statistical data, indicate the existence of serious problems
relating to family violence in Indigenous communities and the need for
governments to address these issues as a matter of the highest priority,
in partnership with Indigenous peoples.

Government Responses to Family Violence in Indigenous
communities

Addressing family violence is a shared responsibility
between all levels of government with prime responsibility resting with
health and community service agencies in federal, state and territory
governments. A list of recent inter-governmental, federal, and state/territory
initiatives follows.

1) Commonwealth Initiatives

The main program at the federal level for
responding to family violence issues is the Partnerships Against Domestic
Violence (PADV) scheme administered by the Department Family and Community
Services. This was launched in 1997 at the National Domestic Violence
Summit. The federal government has allocated $50 million to PADV over
the 1999-2003 quadrennium, including $6 million for the Indigenous Family
Violence Grants Program. ^[49]

The Ministerial Council of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander Affairs (MCATSIA) Working Group on Family Violence
established a set of principles for funding community-based organisations
addressing family violence. These principles have now been incorporated
into the design of the National Indigenous Family Violence Grants Program
under the PADV. ^[50]

In 2000, 30 Indigenous organisations from
across Australia received funding of $2.2 million for 31 projects addressing
family violence. Three of these were funded through ATSIC, with the majority
of the remaining initiatives funded through the Department of Family and
Community Services. ^[51]

There was no new funding for Indigenous
family violence in the 2001-02 or 2002-03 Budgets. It was revealed, however,
that the Office for the Status of Women underspent by $4.3 million in
administering its programs for domestic violence in 2001-02. ATSIC claimed
they could easily have spent this funding on programs to improve community
safety for Indigenous women and children. ^[52]

There was new funding in the 2003-04 Budget
to ATSIC under its 'working for families' initiative. This funding was
for the wages component of 1000 additional places in the CDEP program
over 4 years ^[53] at a cost of $61.5 million
to address family violence and substance abuse issues. ATSIC is providing
on-costs components for the initiative from its existing budget allocation.
The focus of the initiative is on remote Indigenous communities.

In July 2003, the Prime Minister held a
national roundtable on Indigenous family violence. Following the roundtable,
a working group was established to advise the Prime Minister on ways of
advancing strategies to address family violence in Indigenous communities.
ATSIC Commissioner Alison Anderson, Lowitjia O'Donoghue, Jackie Huggins
and Ian Anderson were selected from the national roundtable to form this
working group to draft a family violence strategy with the aid of government
representatives. ^[54] At the time of forming
the working group it was envisioned that the draft family violence strategy
would inform the public about the violence crisis as well as be discussed
and supported by COAG . ^[55]

Subsequent to the roundtable, the Prime
Minister announced a commitment of $20 million as a 'down payment' to
address the consequences of violence in Indigenous communities. ^[56] It is anticipated that there may be further budget announcements in the
2004-05 budget. The approach to addressing family violence in Indigenous
communities proposed by the Prime Minister includes focussing on support
for non-government organisations; diversion programme for alcohol and
drugs; communities in crisis; and community initiatives to combat sexual
assault. ^[57]

The Prime Minister advised the community
that he will seek COAG's support for his approach to family violence.
COAG has not yet endorsed his family violence approach. However, despite
the absence of COAG's support, in December 2003, the new Minister for
Immigration, Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs renewed the government's
commitment to addressing family violence when she announced that in 2004
she will be focussing on Indigenous governance and family violence with
a particular emphasis on harnessing women's leadership. ^[58]

2) ATSIC initiatives

As the peak advisory body for Indigenous
affairs, ATSIC provides another major avenue for Commonwealth funding
of Indigenous Family Violence programs and policy advice in this area.
Historically, approximately 70 percent of ATSIC's budget has been quarantined,
with the remaining discretionary funds to be spread across a range of
social, cultural and economic programs, including family violence.

In recent years, ATSIC's expenditure on
family violence initiatives has increased from $4.9 million for the financial
year 2001-02 ^[59] to $8.2 million in the
financial year 2002-2003. ^[60]

In 2002-2003 this included $4.69 million
through its Legal and Preventative Program on 13 Family Violence Prevention
Legal Services (FVPLS) to provide support to the victims of violence and
sexual assault and to work with the families and communities affected
by violence. The services provided by the FVPLS include:

• legal assistance;
• information and referral (eg medical help, food, clothing
  and accommodation);
• crisis counselling and ongoing support;
• court support and other support and awareness raising
  activities;
• community education, consultation and planning;
• production of publications and other resources; and
• advocacy.

These FVPLS are located in Kempsey, Moree
and Walgett in NSW; Cairns (Cape York) and Mt Isa in Queensland; Port
Augusta in South Australia; Kalgoorlie, Fitzroy Crossing, and Geraldton
in Western Australia; Darwin, Katherine and Alice Springs in the Northern
Territory; and Melbourne in Victoria. A further FVPLS will be established
in 2003-04 in Victoria, and each service will also receive additional
technical and administrative support, with an emphasis on specialised
training to increase capacity in sexual abuse services.

$3.4 million was also spent on Regional
Council family violence projects in 2002-03. ^[61] The type of initiatives supported includes alcohol restriction trials;
family violence prevention/outreach workers providing support and referral
to women escaping violence; safe houses for women and children; youth
and children's services; men's and women's counselling and support groups;
night patrols; men's, women's and youth conferences; service evaluation;
and strategic planning.

During 2001-02, ATSIC also convened a series
of roundtable meetings on family violence in accordance with commitments
it had made to the Ministerial Council for Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander Affairs (MCATSIA). ^[62] These roundtables
included separate men's and women's roundtables, in October 2001 in Adelaide
and September 2001 on Palm Island respectively, as well as a combined
roundtable to consider culturally appropriate responses to family violence. ^[63]

As a result of these roundtable meetings,
ATSIC has created a National Indigenous Working Group on Violence to lobby
for the coordination of programs and the resourcing of community-driven
approaches to violence based on Indigenous self-determination. The NIWGOV
operated from February to December 2002 and played an integral role in
informing the development of the ATSIC Family Violence policy. ^[64]

The most significant development from ATSIC
on family violence to date is the adoption by the ATSIC Board of a national
family violence policy statement and action plan in March 2003. The ATSIC
Commissioner's national statement is reproduced on the next page.

This policy includes a Family Violence Action Plan ^[65] which identifies the following three guiding principles:

• Interventions must focus on children and young people
  and provide protection;
• Women and children have the same rights as men before
  the law and their interests must be represented equally in public policy;
  and
• Adults deserve to be supported to break the pattern of
  violence by working with victims and perpetrators to prevent and reduce
  family violence.

The Action Plan also recognises that:

• All individuals have the right to be free from violence;
• All forms of family violence are unacceptable;
• Most forms of family violence are against the law and
  must be dealt with accordingly;
• The safety and wellbeing of those subjected to family
  violence must be the first priority of any response;
• Those who commit family violence must be held accountable
  for their behaviour;
• Those who commit family violence are in need of appropriate
  interventions; and
• The community has a responsibility to work toward
  the prevention of family violence and to demonstrate the unacceptability
  of all forms of family violence.

The Action Plan identifies four key areas for action to
address family violence in Indigenous communities:

• Develop an overarching family policy framework that incorporates
  prevention of violence in families.
• Take a lead role in identifying and promoting new initiatives
  to reduce family violence.
• Engage with Commonwealth and State government agencies,
  non-government agencies and communities to work in partnership on family
  violence strategies.
• Support and strengthen the capacity of ATSIC Regional
  Councils to develop, implement and monitor family violence action plans.
• Enhance the capacity of ATSIC to develop and implement
  (appropriately resourced) initiatives at the national and local level.

Over the past six months various regional
councils have endorsed the national family violence policy by announcing
their region-specific action plans to combat family violence. In particular,
the Yilli Rreung Regional Council in the Northern Territory, the Many
Rivers and Kamilaroi Regional Councils in New South Wales and the Central
Queensland Regional Council have all expressed support for the national
policy and announced plans to address family violence in their respective
regions. ^[66]

3) Inter-governmental initiatives

The Council of Australian Governments (COAG)
has made a commitment to address family violence and other forms of social
dysfunction in Indigenous communities in its communique on reconciliation
of 3 November 2000. It committed itself to an approach based on partnerships
and shared responsibilities with Indigenous communities, program flexibility
and coordination between government agencies, with a focus on local communities
and outcomes.

Family violence is to be considered within
the priority action area of 'reviewing and re-engineering programs and
services to ensure they deliver practical measures that support families,
children and young people'.^[67] As discussed
in chapter 2 of this report, COAG also agreed to take a leading role in
driving changes, with the various Ministerial Councils to develop action
plans, performance reporting strategies and benchmarks.

Reconciliation Australia stated in their Reconciliation Report Card for 2002 that progress had been slow
in addressing family and community violence, despite the COAG commitment
of November 2000. ^[68] Progress in responding
to Reconciliation Australia's call for an audit of services, capacity-building
and identification of best practice models for addressing violence had
been particularly slow. COAG itself also reported that ministerial councils
progress in developing action plans under the reconciliation framework
has been slower than expected. ^[69]

In April 2002, COAG commissioned the Steering
Committee for the Review of Government Services to produce a regular report
against key indicators of Indigenous disadvantage. The finalised framework
is discussed in detail in chapter 2 of this report. Issues relating to
family violence are included within the headline indicators and strategic
change indicators of the framework.

In 2003, northern Tasmania was identified
as a trial site for the COAG whole-of-government community trials. This
trial is particularly focussing on family violence issues. This focus
arose out of the report commissioned by the Tasmania government on Indigenous
family violence, ya pulingina kani - Good to see you talk. The
COAG trials are discussed in detail in Chapter 2 and Appendix 2 of this
report.

On 28 July 2001, MCATSIA was addressed for
the first time by an Indigenous delegation, which consisted of representatives
from the ATSIC Indigenous Women's Roundtable. MCATSIA agreed to conduct
an audit of existing Indigenous family violence strategies, and to a seven-point
strategy for addressing Indigenous family violence by focusing on:

• reducing alcohol and substance abuse;
• child safety and well-being;
• building community capacity (including cultural strength);
• improving the justice system;
• creating safe places in communities;
• improving relationships (focusing on perpetrators and
  those at risk of offending); and
• promoting shared leadership. ^[70]

Two and half years after the commitment
to conduct the audit of family violence strategies, MCATSIA has not finalised
or released the audit.

4) Significant State and Territory initiatives

New South Wales

The New South Wales Aboriginal Justice
Advisory Council and the New South Wales Attorney General signed an Aboriginal
Justice Agreement on 13 June 2002. The overall aims of the Aboriginal
Justice Agreement are to improve Aboriginal access to justice and improve
the quality and relevance of justice that Aboriginal people receive. ^[71] It provides a framework for ongoing partnership in addressing justice
issues and allows Aboriginal people to take leadership and make key decisions
in solving their own justice problems.

The Justice Agreement includes among its
key actions local community justice forums, which provide a mechanism
for addressing local justice concerns through local solutions, the implementation
of circle sentencing and Aboriginal community justice groups. These ensure
Aboriginal communities can be actively involved in taking some control
over local justice issues, especially for offenders and victims.

The NSW Aboriginal Family Health Strategy
is a framework for immediate government action to family violence and
sexual assault. This strategy:

is the first step in the Department's
commitment to work in conjunction with Aboriginal communities to put
in place a range of services and other resources to alleviate the factors
leading to violence, the suffering occurring daily as a consequence
of that violence and the long term effects of family violence on the
wellbeing of Aboriginal communities. ^[72]

The strategy acknowledges that the success
of any proposed solutions to family violence is hinged upon Aboriginal
community control of responses to family violence.

In December 2001 and March 2002 the NSW
Department of Aboriginal Affairs co-hosted two roundtable meetings which
brought together a number of Aboriginal community workers from across
the State and relevant government agencies to discuss appropriate ways
toward addressing Family Violence. A committee has been established to
manage the implementation of the roundtable actions.

Northern Territory

The Northern Territory government has
committed to the development of Aboriginal Law and Justice Strategies
in communities across the Territory. These aim to provide a whole-of-community
and whole-of-government approach to addressing community justice issues
within a law and justice planning process. This approach was originally
implemented at Ali-Curung in 1996 and in Lajamanu in 1999 and emerged
from initiatives of these communities. Representatives from both communities
are engaged in peer modelling with the Yuendumu community.

The Tangentyere Night Patrol and Social
Behaviour Project (Central Australia) has become a best practice example
of community solutions for addressing substance abuse, public order issues
and family violence in Indigenous communities. Funding for night patrols
is now available from a mixture of Commonwealth and State agencies.

Queensland

The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Women's Task Force on Violence (the Robertson report), established in
December 1998 at the instigation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
women, finalized its report in December 1999. The report made 123 recommendations
regarding actions required by the government to address family violence
in Indigenous communities. ^[73]

The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Advisory Board (ATSIAB), formed in 1999 to advise the Queensland Government
on Indigenous matters, was responsible for monitoring Queensland Government
responses to the Robertson report. Part of the response was to include
an audit of what the Queensland Government is currently doing to address
issues associated with family violence.

Family violence was identified as one of
eight key priority areas under the Queensland government's Ten Year
Partnership with Indigenous peoples, which aims to reduce the incidence
of family violence in Indigenous communities over the next decade. It
was also a significant focus of the Cape York Justice Study into
alcohol and violence in Cape York.

In April 2002, the Queensland Government
introduced a new whole-of-government policy called Meeting Challenges,
Making Choices (MCMC) which is designed to address the alcohol
and violence issues in Indigenous communities, such as those highlighted
in the Cape York Justice Study. ^[74]

MCMC focuses on the key areas of
alcohol intervention, economic development, healthier people, education
and training and land and sustainable natural resource management. MCMC is hinged upon the premise that alcohol and violence are inextricably
linked. Therefore, within this framework, strategies to combat violence
in communities, concentrate on alcohol abuse intervention.

South Australia

The state vision for domestic and family
violence prevention is set out in the State Collaborative Approach for
the Prevention of Domestic Violence. Preventing domestic and Indigenous
family violence has been identified as an area of core business of the
Justice Portfolio planning documents, Strategic Directions and Priorities
for Action. Prevention of domestic and Indigenous family violence
has also been identified as a key result area for the Crime Prevention
Unit in its Strategic Plan 2001-2004.

Victoria

An Indigenous Family Violence Task
Force has been appointed to lead the Victorian Indigenous Family Violence
Strategy, which aims to resource and support an Indigenous-led
approach to prevent, reduce and respond to violence in Victorian Indigenous
communities. The key components of the strategy are:

• establishment and operation of the task Force;
• establishment and resourcing of nine Indigenous family
  Violence Action Groups;
• employment of a state-coordinator and nine family violence
  support officers; and
• establishment of an Indigenous Family Violence Community
  Initiative Fund. ^[75]

This Indigenous community-led approach is
endorsed by the Victorian Government and is part of a parallel and complementary
whole-of-government approach.

The successful implementation of the strategy
requires maintenance of a partnership between the Indigenous community
and the Government through the establishment of appropriate structures
to oversight implementation and to monitor progress. The Victorian Aboriginal
Justice Agreement, which formalised arrangements under the Aboriginal
Justice Plan, is a likely model.

Western Australia

In December 2002, the Western Australian
government tabled in Parliament - Putting People First - the Government's
implementation plan in response to the findings of the Western Australian
government's Inquiry into Response by Government Agencies to Complaints
of Family Violence and Child Abuse in Aboriginal Communities (the Gordon
Inquiry).

The Gordon Inquiry was established as a
direct result of a coronial inquest into the death of a 15 year-old Aboriginal
girl in the Swan Valley, Western Australia. The coronial inquest found
that the deceased girl had experienced sexual abuse, violence and drug
and alcohol misuse, which led to her death despite government department
intervention. ^[76] One of the aims of the
inquiry was to examine how government departments could better deal with
family violence and child abuse in Indigenous communities.

The Gordon Inquiry made 193 recommendations
in relation to the prevention of violence, service delivery and development,
alternative models for service delivery, best practice principles for
addressing family violence as well as recommendations regarding the implementation
of the report's findings. ^[77]

In June 2003, the WA government released
its first progress report on implementation of Putting People First.
This identified a range of specific priority initiatives which are designed
to strengthen responses to child abuse and family violence; responses
to vulnerable children and adults at risk; the safety of communities;
and the governance, confidence, economic capacity and sustainability of
communities. ^[78]

The Western Australian government has committed
$75 million to implementing initiatives to address family violence. Examples
of the specific priority initiatives include:

• Establishing an independent Child Death Review Committee;
• Employing 25 additional Child Protection workers;
• Developing culturally appropriate counselling services;
• Funding community-based initiatives to strengthen families
  and communities;
• Provision of remote policing services and multi-function
  facilities;
• Recruiting domestic violence liaison officers within
  the police service;
• Expanding Victim Support and Child Witness Services;
• Extending community based offender programs;
• Expanding Sexual Assault Resource Centre services; and
• Developing the Community Futures Foundation to provide
  financial assistance to support creative initiatives to develop Aboriginal
  leadership. ^[79]

To date 15 out of the 25 new child protection
workers, 8 of whom are Indigenous, have been employed as part of the government's
commitment to implementing the recommendations of the Gordon inquiry. ^[80] Additionally, the government contributed
$26,000 towards the development of a brochure which uses Aboriginal artwork
to highlight the issue of family violence ^[81] and an educational video aimed at sending the message 'babies break if
you shake them' to Indigenous parents which was launched in September
2003. ^[82]

Australian Capital Territory

In response to MCATSIA's request for States
and Territories to assess their respective models for addressing family
violence, the ACT government commissioned the Report on the Extent
of Family Violence in the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Communities
in the ACT, which was completed in August 2001.

This report made 23 recommendations regarding
the issues of funding, legal issues, men's programs, government agencies,
training, housing and accommodation, community development and data collection
with respect to family violence. The overall thrust of this report emphasised
the importance of holistic approaches to addressing family violence which
are determined by the community and supported by the government. Of these
recommendations, the government supported 15, seven were given in principle
support and one recommendation was not supported. Specifically, the government
acknowledges the importance of working in partnership with the Indigenous
community to address family violence in the ACT. ^[83]

During 2001-2003, in response to the supported
recommendations, a number of activities to address family violence have
been undertaken by a range of ACT Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
service providers. These activities include a Boys to Men program, run
by Gugan Gulwan Aboriginal Corporation, which deals with the impact of
family violence on young Indigenous boys as well as a series of young
women's, parenting and gambling programs, discussion groups and the development
of young women's hostel and policy statement against family violence by
the Winnunga Nimmityjah Aboriginal Health Service.

Tasmania

Recent developments in Tasmania were discussed
above in relation to the COAG whole-of-government community trial.

Improving the programmatic responses to family violence
in Indigenous communities - Future challenges

The range of recent initiatives identified
in the previous section of this chapter reflects an increasing level of
attention to addressing family violence in Indigenous communities at all
levels of government. Despite this, there remain a number of challenges
to be addressed to ensure that adequate and appropriate attention is paid
to addressing family violence. The remainder of this chapter identifies
concerns with the existing programmatic response of governments to family
violence issues, and also identifies approaches which could be furthered
to respond to family violence in an holistic, coordinated way.

Promoting greater coordination and an holistic approach
to family violence programs

There are a patchwork of programs and approaches
to addressing family violence in Indigenous communities among federal,
state and territory governments. There remains a lack of coordination
and consistency in approaches to addressing these issues between governments
and among different government agencies. Significant gaps also exist.

Existing family violence programs that are
available to Indigenous peoples are limited in number, ad hoc and
often of limited duration. Due to the inter-connections between family
violence and other issues faced by Indigenous peoples, work being done
at a grass roots level may also be overlooked and programs may not necessarily
be identified or identify themselves as violence prevention programs.
Proposed programs may also have difficulty obtaining funding, on either
a pilot or ongoing basis, due to the overlap in jurisdictional and departmental
responsibilities.

In Violence in Indigenous Communities,
Memmott, Stacy, Chambers and Keys identified 130 Indigenous family violence
programs that had been implemented or were planned for implementation
in Indigenous communities, in the 1990s. ^[84] They
categorised these programs into the following broad areas of intervention:

• Support programs - including one-on-one
  counselling and advice services, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
  Legal Aid Services and strategic advice for actual or potential victims
  to prevent or avoid violence, including referrals to other programs
  and centres. ^[85] Issues relating to
  the provision of legal advice and access to justice for Indigenous
  women relating to family violence are discussed in more detail shortly.

Accessible and appropriate counselling
is essential, not only for the victims and perpetrators of violence,
but also for family and community members who not only deal with the
issue of violence itself but to also provide post-violence counselling
to family members who have lost someone as a result of violence, suicide,
and more particularly for issues of female and male rape and child sexual
assault.

• Identity programs - Identity programs are
  those that are aimed to develop within the individual, family or community,
  a secure sense of self-value or self-esteem. ^[86] This can be achieved through diversionary programs such as,
  sporting, social and cultural activities, education and skills training
  aimed at youth and young adults and also through therapy based programs
  that focus on culturally specific psychological or spiritual healing.
  Examples of this approach include the Muramali project as well as
  the Social and Emotional Well Being Centres being established in the
  Northern Territory. All these programs may be accessed prior to, and
  after involvement with violence, and offer a longer-term response
  through attempting to change the situational factors underlying violence.

• Behavioural change (men and women's groups) - as the majority of family violence is perpetrated by men, strong
  support for men's behavioural reform programs is required. These programs
  are described as Men's Healing Programs.^[87] The Ending Domestic Violence Programs for Perpetrators study, undertaken
  by Keys Young, found that collaborative projects must be adopted that
  link Indigenous people and agencies with domestic violence services,
  to develop services appropriate to the community.^[88] It is also important that complementary groups and support services
  for Indigenous women be run parallel to men's programs and complementary
  preventative/intervention programs for youth be an integral part of
  the whole strategy. An example of this is the Rekindling the Spirit Program in Northern New South Wales which works with men, their
  partners, youth and children.^[89]

• Night patrols - which have the potential
  to build cooperation and mutual respect and support with local police.^[90] As reported by the Australian Institute of Criminology, the
  Tangentyere Night Patrol (TNP) in the Northern Territory is a best
  practice example of a properly managed program that builds on the
  cooperation and mutual respect of local police. ^[91] TNP patrolled the Aboriginal town camps on a regular basis to help
  minimise violence using non-violent methods. TNP uses and strengthens
  Aboriginal mechanisms for social control, thereby ensuring that traditional
  methods are afforded a key role in the control of anti-social behaviour,
  minor criminal infractions and potentially serious criminal incidents
  in the Aboriginal community;

• Refuges and Shelters - while an important
  part of any family violence intervention strategy, are not a sufficient
  response to the difficulties produced by high levels of violence in
  Indigenous communities.^[92] They represent
  a reactive strategy in addressing the underlying causes, thereby creating
  no possibility of a change in the pattern of violent behaviour. Refuges
  and women's shelters need to be coupled with other proactive strategies
  targeted at the perpetrators of violence and other situational factors.
  Indigenous specific shelters are essential. At the very least, Indigenous
  workers at shelters are vital.

• Justice programs - the roles of justice
  programs, which are characteristically aimed at the perpetrators of
  violence, are to mediate between people in conflict, designate appropriately
  cultural punishments for victims, for example through circle sentencing
  and the prevention of recidivism.^[93]

The NSW Aboriginal Justice Advisory Council
and the NSW Judicial Commission have recently released a joint report Circle Sentencing in New South Wales a Review and Evaluation.
The report reviewed the first twelve months of the operation of circle
sentencing in Nowra in South East New South Wales. The report found
among other things that circle sentencing helps to break the cycle of
recidivism, introduces more relevant and meaningful sentencing options
for Aboriginal offenders with the help of respected community members,
reduces the barriers that currently exist between the courts and Aboriginal
people, leads to improvements in the level of support for Aboriginal
offenders, incorporates support for victims, and promotes healing and
reconciliation and increases the confidence and generally promotes the
empowerment of Aboriginal people in the community.^[94]

• Dispute resolution - Anecdotal evidence
  suggests that flexibility within NSW Community Justice Centres, although
  not aimed at Aboriginal people specifically, has proven to be successful
  in certain Indigenous communities in NSW.^[95] Specifically, success has been achieved where impartial members
  of the Indigenous community are used as facilitators and traditional
  dispute-resolution techniques are incorporated into the overall mediation
  process.

• Education and awareness raising - Education
  and training programs are vital to raise awareness about family violence
  prevention; as well as develop the skills within communities to resolve
  conflicts and identify the need for interventions with perpetrators.^[96] The National Indigenous Legal Advocacy Courses, which are aimed at
  Indigenous peoples working in justice related fields including legal
  services and on community justice mechanisms, include competencies
  addressing awareness of family violence and conflict resolution.^[97]

Gnibi, the College of Indigenous Australian
Peoples at the Southern Cross University, has also developed undergraduate
and postgraduate degrees that are specifically designed to address the
educational needs of Indigenous Australians from an Indigenous theory
and educational practice dealing with issues of violence, trauma and
healing.^[98]

Violence in Indigenous Communities reported that there were no educational programs targeted at young children
for use in Indigenous pre-schools and schools. With the knowledge we
now have about the detrimental effects of violence on children, or witnessed
by children and the generational cycles by which violence is transmitted,
it is essential to provide violence prevention education programs within
pre-schools and schools. The Masters in Indigenous Studies (Wellbeing)
program ^[99] at Southern Cross University
has developed formal units of study for adults providing such services
to children, however these have not yet been evaluated.

• Holistic composite programs - Programs which
  are comprised of elements of the above categories. These operate to
  target different forms of violence in the community, target different
  categories of offenders or victims, or employ different methods of
  combating or preventing violence.^[100]

There is also increasing recognition of
the links between family violence and substance abuse, particularly alcohol.
A number of recent initiatives, particularly in Queensland, have focused
on restricting the availability of alcohol and introducing changes to
canteen management to promote reduced alcohol consumption.

These programs function at different stages.
Some are implemented during or immediately after the occurrence of a violent
incident (early reactive programs); some are implemented some time after
the incident and are aimed at resolving the negative impact of the violence
(late reactive programs); some aim to counter any likelihood of violence
at an early stage (early proactive strategies); and others are implemented
prior to violence occurring but triggered by signs that violence may be
imminent (late proactive strategies).^[101] This additional form of classification of programs highlights the need
for a holistic composite set of programs to be made available for communities
to address the various dimensions of family violence.

Overall, Memmott observes in relation to
existing programs and approaches that:

The classification and review of violence
programs indicated that there is a scarcity or under-representation
of programs in certain key areas of violence, and that there is clearly
a need to focus support resources into developing such programs for
wider application.

A number of omissions in the available
literature on Indigenous violence and violence programs were detected,
including (i) a failure of program designers to clearly define the forms
of violence they were targeting, (ii) a lack of program evaluation studies,
and (iii) a lack of objective studies on the nature of program failures.
The review of violence programs was also accompanied by a general finding
that there was a general lack of programs in many Indigenous communities. ^[102]

Memmott also states that a review of existing
programs and approaches reveals three recurring strategic aspects that
need to be present to address family violence in Indigenous communities,
namely that programs be community-driven; that community agencies establish
partnerships with each other and with relevant government agencies; and
that composite violence programs are able to provide a more holistic approach
to community violence. ^[103]

The report notes the importance of programs
that adopt an holistic or broad approach to violence. These:

often do not focus directly on any particular
kind of violent behaviour, rather their efforts are aimed at either
preventing at-risk people from falling prey to their vulnerability,
or they attempt to heal the emotional and spiritual injury that is causing
them to behave violently. Therefore, while the possibility of self-harming
behaviour is reduced, rates of other forms of violence such as physical
assault leading to homicide, spousal assault, rape and sexual assault
and child violence might also be influenced ... ^[104]

The implementation of composite programs,
particularly in communities displaying multiple forms of increasing
violence, is shown to be an emerging and preferred approach that reflects
a more systematic way of combating violence, combining both proactive
and reactive methods which target different age and gender groups. ^[105]

The report notes that a sensitive aspect
of governments introducing services is how to best trigger such programs
in communities where they are obviously needed while at the same time
creating a climate whereby the programs are community-originating, motivated
and controlled. Memmott recommends 'that government agencies take a regional
approach to supporting and coordinating local community initiatives, and
assisting communities to prepare community action plans with respect to
violence' . ^[106]

This approach is consistent with the approach
adopted in ATSIC's Family Violence Action Plan. The Plan, as previously
outlined in this chapter, recognises the critical need to adopt an holistic
approach to the problem of family violence and identifies the crucial
importance of engagement with Commonwealth and State government agencies
and communities to work in partnership on family violence strategies,
as well as supporting and strengthening the capacity of ATSIC Regional
Councils to develop, implement and monitor family violence action plans.

Ensuring access to justice for Indigenous women

A matter of great concern in relation to
current debates about addressing family violence in Indigenous communities
is the lack of attention paid to issues of access to justice for Indigenous
women.

In their recent submission to the Senate
Legal and Constitutional References Committee inquiry into legal aid and
access to justice, ATSIC note that 'Indigenous women have been identified
as the most legally disadvantaged group in Australia' .^[107] A matter of particular concern is the limited ability of ATSIC/ATSIS,
through its funding role of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Legal
Services (ATSILS) to provide access to justice for Indigenous women through
legal representation and family violence services.

ATSIS note that:

ATSILS are required to prioritise provision
of services in accordance with ATSIS' National Program Policy Framework
for ATSILS ("The ATSILS Policy Framework") affording priority assistance
to those clients who potentially face custodial sentences. Accordingly,
in face of sheer demand for assistance, ATSILS predominantly provide
legal aid services for criminal matters (89% of case and duty matters
in 2001-02; compared with only 2% family matters and 2% violence protection
matters). ^[108]

This trend has, ATSIS state, 'discouraged
Indigenous women from approaching ATSILS for assistance initially, particularly
given the likelihood of ATSILS defending the perpetrator'. They note:

The problem has often been attributed
to the "first-in, first-serve" nature of ATSILS work. The lack of alternative
service providers in many of the jurisdictions in which ATSILS operate
means that even if the victim sought ATSILS assistance first, if refused,
they at least have the option of seeking police assistance. However
were the ATSILS to turn away the perpetrator, he would have nowhere
else to seek representation. ATSIS acknowledges that wherever possible
LACs have attempted to represent indigenous women in cases of conflict
where the partner is represented by the ATSILS. However it remains that
in many instances the victim lacks any legal advice beyond that provided
by the police. ^[109]

Indigenous women are further disadvantaged
in the justice process by the Courts' (particularly the Bush Court)
inadequate approach to dealing with domestic violence and violence against
women. The need for expeditious process in domestic violence assault
charges and restraining order applications, particularly concerning
the victim's safety, is compromised due to the handling of such matters
by inexperienced community police officers. Frequently a case may reach
its fifth adjournment (five months after the original hearing date at
most Bush Courts) without a plea still having been entered. It is a
very challenging demand that inexperienced police officers are required
to provide what is in effect, legal aid assistance. ^[110]

The effect of delayed access to justice
for Indigenous women is even more severe given the cultural inhibitions
in their own communities such as beliefs in the sanctity of kinship
and fear of community retribution. If they overcome this threat and
seek representation, only to be met with refusal by the under-resourced
ATSILS the lesson can be devastating. These considerations have often
led to reluctance in seeking legal advice by many women. ^[111]

As noted above, ATSIC have introduced the
Family Violence Prevention Legal Service Program (FVPLS) as a response
to Indigenous women's lack of access to Legal Aid services. However with
only 13 services across Australia, they do not provide coverage to all
regions. ATSIS notes that 'This relatively small and under-resourced program
is unable to address the barriers Indigenous women face in accessing Indigenous
Legal Aid services, nor to provide the range of legal services available
through ATSILS'. ^[112] They express concern
that:

There is an urgently growing demand for
ATSILS to provide child protection, civil and family related, (including
family violence) services. However, providing these services as well
as continuing assistance in criminal matters will require additional
resources or, alternatively a change in the priorities set for provision
of legal aid services. If priorities are reset then this will simply
postpone unmet demand that will be unlikely to be satisfied through
referrals and alternative services. ^[113]

ATSIC/ATSIS note further that while they and the ATSILS
that it funds are committed to stamping out family violence, the prioritising
of scarce resources to criminal matters means that
'in practice, victims are not assisted while those responsible, are'.
Accordingly, constraints of existing resources for legal support limits
the capacity of ATSIC/ATSIS 'to give its own policies concrete substance.
This contradiction will be overcome only through additional resourcing
of ATSILS and Indigenous women specific legal service providers'. ^[114]

ATSIC's submission to the Department of
Finance and Administration Pricing Review in 2001 found a $12 million
annual funding shortfall of ATSILS compared to Legal Aid Commission benchmarks.
An Office of Evaluation and Audit (OEA) evaluation in 2003, reported the
following findings in relation to the performance of ATSILS:

• ATSILS are providing legal services at a cost that is
  significantly lower than that paid by mainstream LACs for legal work
  undertaken on a referral basis by private practitioners, and that it
  is achieved at a level of client satisfaction no different from that
  reported by LAC clients;
• The national shortfall in ATSIC funding to ATSILS, if
  their outputs are costed at the same level as LAC-paid legal work, is
  $25,605,598;
• There is low morale and high staff turnover among ATSILS
  practitioners; and
• Evidence suggests that ATSILS clients are more likely
  to plead guilty than mainstream offenders. ^[115]

In the context of the increased focus on
family violence in recent years coupled with the lack of progress in reducing
the over-representation of Indigenous people in custody in general, it
is a matter of great concern that there is not a greater emphasis on the
legal needs of Indigenous women.

There is an urgent need to ensure appropriate
funding levels for ATSILS in order to provide a greater focus on the legal
needs of Indigenous women as well as a greater focus on preventative action
and community education. At the very least, there is also an urgent need
for the federal government to allocate additional, quarantined, funding
to expand the Family Violence Prevention Legal Service Program. Such funding
needs to be new money as there is clearly no capacity for ATSIS/ATSIC,
through its support for ATSILS, to re-allocate existing resources.

Community justice responses to family violence

The criminal justice system is extremely
poor at dealing with the underlying causes of criminal behaviour and makes
a negligible contribution to addressing the consequences of crime in the
community. One of the consequences of this, and a vital factor that is
often overlooked, is that Indigenous victims of crime and communities
are poorly served by the current system.

Accordingly, the current system disadvantages
Indigenous people from both ends - it has a deleterious effect on Indigenous
communities through over-representation of Indigenous people in custody
combined with the lack of attention it gives to the high rate of Indigenous
victimisation, particularly through violence and abuse in communities.
Reform to criminal justice processes, including through community justice
initiatives, must be responsive to these factors.

The past decade has seen an increased emphasis
on restorative justice mechanisms for addressing criminal behaviour in
Indigenous communities to address the needs of victims (including of family
violence) as well as to make the system more meaningful to offenders.

The most accepted definition of restorative
justice is that of Tony Marshall which states that it is 'a process whereby
all the parties with a stake in a particular offence come together to
resolve collectively how to deal with the aftermath of the offence and
its implications for the future'.^[116] The
Law Commission of Canada provides a useful commentary on restorative justice
as:

fundamentally concerned with restoring
social relationships, with establishing or re-establishing social equality
in relationships. That is, relationships in which each person's rights
to equal dignity, concern and respect are satisfied ... As it is concerned
with social equality, restorative justice inherently demands that one
attend to the nature of relationships between individuals, groups and
communities. Thus, in order to achieve restoration of relationships,
restorative justice must be concerned with both the discrete wrong and
its relevant context and causes. ^[117]

This does not necessarily seek to return
a relationship to the position prior to the commission of some wrongdoing,
but instead to address the underlying issues. Restorative justice can
thus incorporate concepts of restitution and healing, while focusing on
the transformation of relationships.

There are numerous new initiatives in Australia
developing community based justice mechanisms for Indigenous people which
are based on restorative justice principles. Some of these processes,
such as Law and Justice Committees in the Northern Territory and Community
Justice Groups in Queensland incorporate an holistic response to family
violence into strategies for addressing offending in communities.

• Community Justice Groups in Queensland

The Community Justice Group project was
started in Kowanyama, Hopevale and Palm Island in 1993 as a pilot project
of the Queensland Corrective Services Commission. The Community Justice
Group model aims to provide Aboriginal people with a mechanism for dealing
with problems of justice and social control which is consistent with
Aboriginal Law and cultural practices as well as utilising aspects of
the Anglo-Australian legal system. The justice groups have no statutory
authority. The source of authority for the group is based on the collective
and personal authority of group members deriving from the place of individuals
within kinship systems and the personal respect they are accorded by
others. Ultimately the group's authority lies in Aboriginal Law and
cultural practices.

The Community Justice Groups use traditional
structures and cultural principles to develop and apply their own system
of justice and social control. They seek to restore social order by
curbing anti-social behaviour and by creating a more positive and supportive
environment. Group actions that they handle within the existing legal
framework include family-related dispute settlement, crime prevention
and community development projects, co-ordination with government and
community agencies and providing information and advice to the judiciary,
Community Corrections Boards and other government decision making bodies.

Perceived positive outcomes for the model
to date include: decline in crime rate and in the level of violence;
an effective community corrections program at Palm Island that has kept
people from appearing before court and from possible incarceration;
dramatic decrease in juvenile crime at Kowanyama; changes in social
patterns; more effective government service delivery, leading to savings
in time and money for government and community agencies, courts, law
enforcement agencies and correctional centres.

Perceived negative outcomes for the model
include: harsh punishments; potential drain on the community's resources;
acting without statutory authority; and a lack of indemnity for justice
group members.

The Community Justice Panel (CJP) now
works with clan groups on Cape York. The CJP model is an evolutionary
process, with options at each stage to be trialled before the justice
groups go on to the next stage.

The CJP model is supplemented by monthly
programs run by the Department of Corrections and the Department of
Family and Community Services in substance abuse and anger management.
There are also women's shelters in all communities. Greater support
is needed however for people on the alcohol management program in terms
of counseling and support. Without better infrastructure, such programs
will fail over the long-term.

• The Kurduju Committee Law and Justice Strategy

The Aboriginal Law and Justice Strategy
of the Northern Territory seeks to provide a whole-of-community and
whole-of-government approach to addressing community justice issues
within a law and justice planning process. It was originally implemented
at Ali-Curung in 1996 and in Lajamanu in 1999. Both these communities
now have their own law and justice plans and are engaged in peer modeling
with Yuendumu community.

In each community a law and justice committee
has been established. These committees have a wide range of responsibilities
and comprise key community representatives from the Tribal Council,
Community Elders, Safe House Committee, women's group, traditional owners,
outstation representatives and other community organisations. Representatives
from the Ali-Curung, Lajamanu and Yuendumu communities also sit on the
Kurduju Committee, which provides an opportunity for information-sharing
and peer modeling, and also to address a perceived deficit in policy
and program knowledge, and expertise in regard to remote communities.

The aim of the law and justice plans was
'to facilitate the empowerment of the local community to assume a greater
role in law and justice, and to address law and justice concerns through
local dispute resolution where practical.' There was a perceived need
for low-level intervention by Aboriginal communities in early crime
prevention and more productive participation in the justice system.

At Ali-Curung, Lajamanu and Yuendumu,
individuals and community organisations had largely lost their capacity
to resolve their own law and justice issues through the introduction
and consequential reliance on external dispute resolution. Subsequently,
the Law and Justice Strategy sought to incorporate Aboriginal dispute
resolution principles into community law and justice processes. This
was not a straightforward revival of customary law but an innovative
adaptation of traditional decision making in a contemporary situation
through the merging of mainstream community based dispute resolution
with mainstream law and justice. The process is negotiated and agreed
to between community organisations and government agencies.

The Ali-Curung and Lajamanu law and justice
committees are involved in diversionary programs, pre-court conferencing,
victim offender conferencing, community service orders, and the operation
of night patrols and safe houses. Ali-Curung, Lajamanu and Yuendumu
have adopted an approach to family violence that involves local dispute
resolution and healing methodology.

As in the case of the community justice
panels in Queensland, the experience of the Law and Justice Strategy
to date indicates that any initiatives seeking to formalise an interface
between aspects of customary law and the western legal system should
be organic, evolutionary and holistic. In order to be effective, any
community justice initiatives will also involve a considerable investment
in community consultation, participation and education: the emphasis
should be on devolving power to the communities. A one-size-fits-all
approach or the top-down application of a preconceived model is unlikely
to yield long-term results and could even be counterproductive in resolving
law and justice issues.

The last two years has also seen the development
of community justice mechanisms for involvement of Indigenous peoples
in sentencing. Examples include the Ngunga Court and Ngunga Youth Court
in South Australia; the Murri Court in Queensland; the Koori Court in
Victoria and circle sentencing in New South Wales.^[118] Generally, these processes seek to incorporate an Aboriginal traditional
customary law approach to the sentencing of Aboriginal offenders within
the framework of existing legislation. While there are variations between
the various models, they all involve Aboriginal Elders sitting alongside
the magistrate to advise on sentencing options, with members of the offender's
family, the victim, the victim's family and other interested community
members participating in the sentencing process.

These processes have been extremely successful
in their initial years. Currently, however, they are limited to dealing
with particular non-violent offences. Accordingly, offences relating to
violence and sexual offences cannot be addressed within these sentencing
processes.

In a discussion paper titled Holistic
community justice, the NSW Aboriginal Justice Advisory Council proposes
that restorative justice approaches such as these sentencing options should be available for dealing with family violence.

Specifically, they have proposed the establishment
of localised community controlled justice and healing centres combined
with alternative sentencing processes for offenders which seek to establish
formal links with local Aboriginal communities.^[119] In this approach, community justice and healing centres would be
established as a single point of contact for victims of family violence.
They would assess their needs (such as emergency accommodation, financial
assistance, health care, counselling or healing) and negotiate with appropriate
service delivery agencies on their behalf. Should the victim wish to pursue
their matter through the criminal justice system, the centre would also
provide assistance with this. The centre would also be community controlled,
and actively engage the local Aboriginal community with the consequence
that it could assist the victim and provide 'a direct community sanction
on the offender's behaviour and demonstrate the community's intolerance
of family violence'.^[120] Alternative
sentencing processes, such as circle sentencing, would also be available
'to ensure that the causes and consequences of the offence are dealt with
holistically'.^[121]

AJAC argues that this approach:

Provides an alternative model to address
the serious matter of family violence in Aboriginal communities. The
urgency of actually making an on the ground impact where communities
can actually be involved directly in programs ensures a level of community
re-empowerment. This approach also exposes family violence as an unacceptable
crime in Aboriginal communities, but to actively ensure a service for
victims whilst offenders take responsibility and deal with the underlying
causes of their offending behaviours.

It is argued that long term effects will
be an overall reduction of family violence, and that communities can
be positioned to actively heal the wounds of family violence according
to their unique and local needs. ^[122]

There are similarities in this proposal
with the Northern Territory Law and Justice Committee and Queensland Community
Justice Group approaches, as well as similarities with the roles of services
established under ATSIC's Family Violence Prevention Legal Service Program.
It also provides what the Memmott report, as discussed earlier, identified
as an holistic composite set of programs for addressing family violence.

It also has similarities to Canadian models
for addressing sex offending by Indigenous people. The Canadian approach
emphasises the need for restorative justice, community-based initiatives
beyond the justice system such as victim-offender mediation, family group
conferencing, sentencing circles and formal cautioning. It also highlights
the gaps that exist in addressing Aboriginal sex offender needs and the
need for Aboriginal control of appropriately cultural services. The report Aboriginal Sexual Offending in Canada identifies four areas where
action is necessary to address Aboriginal sexual offending: community
development; program development; research and human resources.^[123] The effectiveness of this model and whether aspects could be transferred
to the Australian context, particularly in regard to community capacity-building
and service coordination, is an avenue for further investigation.

These models and proposals suggest that
the full potential of community justice mechanisms for addressing family
violence has not been explored sufficiently, and may provide an appropriate
way forward for addressing some aspects of need.

Conclusion

This chapter has identified a range of commitments
and recent initiatives by all governments to address its impact. These
commitments are welcome and long overdue. As yet, they are not sufficiently
wide-ranging in their scope or effectively funded. There are also significant
gaps in service provision, including through a general paucity of programs
and lack of legal assistance to Indigenous women in many areas. As a consequence,
there remains a need for ongoing, continuous support for innovative, community
led solutions to address family violence and the adoption of an holistic,
coordinated approach by governments. ATSIC's Family Violence Plan provides
a platform for improving this situation, with the development of regionally
targeted programs and action plans. The escalating and debilitating affects
of family violence on Indigenous people and communities requires urgent
attention.

1. Atkinson, C, Atkinson, J, and
Students of Gnibi - the College of Indigenous Australian Peoples, Southern
Cross University, Review of Programs and Policies Addressing Family
Violence in Indigenous Communities - Final Report, Unpublished paper
prepared for the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, 2003.
(Herein referred to as Atkinson, C, and Atkinson, J, Review of Programs
and Policies Addressing Family Violence in Indigenous Communities).

2. I also, of course, accept full responsibility
for the contents of this chapter and its accuracy.

3. Atkinson, J, Foreword in
Atkinson, C, and Atkinson, J, Review of Programs and Policies Addressing
Family Violence in Indigenous Communities, p5.

4. Dodson, M, Violence Dysfunction
Aboriginality, Speech, National Press Club, 11 June 2003, p2.

5. Bennett, B, 'Domestic Violence',
(1997) 21(4) Aboriginal and Islander Health Worker Journal 11,
p11.

6. Mow, K E, Tjunparni: Family Violence
In Indigenous Australia, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission,
1992, p10.

7. Atkinson, J, Beyond Violence:
Finding the Dream, National Domestic Violence Education Program, Office
for the Status of Women, Canberra, 1990, p7.

8. Simpson, M A, 'Bitter Waters: Effects
on ºÚÁÏÇ鱨վ of the Stresses of Unrest and Oppression', International
Handbook of Traumatic Stress Syndromes, Eds Wilson J P, & Raphael,
B, Plenum Press, New York, 1993, p603.

9. Atkinson, C, and Atkinson, J, Review
of Programs and Policies Addressing Family Violence in Indigenous Communities,
p10.

10. Blagg, H, Crisis Intervention
in Aboriginal Family Violence: Summary Report, Partnerships Against
Domestic Violence, Canberra, 2000, pp2-3.

11. Judy Atkinson quoted in Atkinson,
C, and Atkinson, J, Review of Programs and Policies Addressing Family
Violence in Indigenous Communities, p11.

12. ibid, p12.

13. Bennett, B, 'Domestic Violence', Aboriginal and Islander Health Worker Journal, 1997, p14.

14. Blagg, H, Crisis intervention
in Aboriginal family violence - Summary report, Office for the Status
of Women, Canberra 2000, quoted in Northern Territory Law Reform Committee, Aboriginal communities and Aboriginal law in the Northern Territory Background Paper 1 - Inquiry into Aboriginal Customary Law, NTLRC Darwin
2003, p18.

15. Blagg, H, Intervening with
adolescents to prevent domestic violence: phase 2 the Indigenous rural
model, National Crime Prevention, Canberra 1998.

16. Atkinson, C, and Atkinson, J, Review of Programs and Policies Addressing Family Violence in Indigenous
Communities, p14.

17. ibid.

18. ibid, p17.

19. For further discussion see Royal
Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody, National Report ,
AGPS, 1991; Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, Report of
the National Inquiry into Racist Violence in Australia, AGPS, 1991;
also Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commissioner, Indigenous
Deaths in Custody 1989 to 1996, A report prepared for Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander Commission, October 1996.

20. For further details see NSW Department
for Women, Heroines of Fortitude - Experiences of women in court as
victims of sexual assault, 1996.

21. Memmott, P, Stacy, R, Chambers,
C & Keys, C, Violence in Indigenous Communitie -, Full Report,
Commonwealth Attorney General's Department, Canberra, 2001.

22. For an overview of statistics
in the late 1980's and early 1990s see: Atkinson, C, and Atkinson, J,
Review of Programs and Policies Addressing Family Violence in Indigenous
Communities, pp27-31. See, for example: National Committee on Violence,
Violence: Directions for Australia, Australian Institute of Criminology
Canberra 1990, Family Violence Professional Education Taskforce, Family
violence: Everybody's business somebody's life, Federation Press Sydney
1991; and Queensland Domestic Violence Task Force, Beyond these walls,
Department of Family Services and Welfare Housing, Brisbane 1988.

23. Steering Committee for the Review
of Government Service Provision, Overcoming Indigenous disadvantage -
Key indicators 2003, Productivity Commission, Melbourne 2003, pp 3.44-3.57.

24. Steering Committee for the Review
of Government Service Provision, Overcoming indigenous disadvantage -
Key indicators 2003, Productivity Commission, Melbourne 2003, pp3.51-3.53

25. Mouzos, J, 'Indigenous and non-Indigenous
homicides in Australia: A comparative analysis', Trends and Issues in
Crime and Criminal Justice, no2, Australian Institute of Criminology,
Canberra, 2001, pp1-6

26. Atkinson, J, 'Making Sense of
the Senseless Feeling Bad, Being Mad, Getting Charged Up!, Having it Both
Ways: Dual Diagnosis, Alcohol, Drugs and Mental Illness ,Conference Proceedings,
Melbourne University, 1998, p5.

27. Queensland Domestic Violence Task
Force, ibid, pp198-256 as cited in Robertson, B, Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander Women's Task Force on Violence Report, Queensland Department
of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policy, Brisbane 1999, p97.

28. Barber, J, Punt, J and Albers,
J, 'Alcohol and Power on Palm Island', (1988) 23(2) Australian Journal
of Social Issues 87 as cited in Robertson, B. ibid, p97.

29. Miller, B, 'Crime Prevention
and Socio-legal Reform on Aboriginal Communities in Queensland', in McKillop,
S and Vernon, J, (eds.), The Police and the Community: Conference Proceedings,
Monograph 5, Australian Institute of Criminology, Canberra 1989, as cited
in Robertson, B, ibid, pp97-98.

30. National Injury Surveillance Unit,
Study of Inquiry in Five Cape York Communities, Australian Institute of
Health and Welfare and Queensland Health, Brisbane 1997, pp43-45, as cited
in Robertson, B, ibid, p98.

31. Department of Public Prosecutions
Queensland (DPP), Indigenous Women and the Criminal Justice System Report,
DPP, Brisbane 1997, as cited in Robertson, B, ibid, p99.

32. Robertson, B, ibid, Executive
Summary, pp x -xi.

33. Justice Fitzgerald, Cape York
Justice Study, Queensland Government, Brisbane 2001, p93-94.

34. Gordon, S, Putting the Picture
Together: Inquiry into Response by Government Agencies to Complaints of
Family Violence and Child Abuse in Aboriginal Communities, State Law Publisher,
Perth, 2002, p424.

35. Ferrante, A, Morgan, F, Indermaur,
D, and Harding, R, Measuring the Extent of Domestic Violence, University
of Western Australia, Perth, 1996. See: .

36. ibid

37. ibid

38.
NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, Aboriginal Victimisation
and Offending: The Picture from Police Records, Crime and Justice Statistics,
December, 2001.

39. Aboriginal Justice Advisory Council,
Holistic Community Justice - a proposed response to Aboriginal Family
Violence, AJAC, NSW Attorney-Generals Department, Sydney 2001, p6.

40. ibid

41. ibid, p7.

42. ibid.

43. AJAC (NSW), Speak out
speak strong: Researching the needs of Aboriginal Women in Custody, AJAC,
NSW Attorney-General's Department, 2003, p6, p54.

44. Bagshaw, D, et al, Reshaping Responses
to Domestic Violence - Final Report, University of South Australia, April,
2000, p123.

45. Northern Territory Law Reform
Committee, Aboriginal communities and Aboriginal law in the Northern Territory,
Background Paper 1 - Inquiry into Aboriginal Customary Law, NTLRC Darwin
2003, p18

46. ibid.

47. Pugh, R, ya pulingina kani - Good
to See You Talk, Government of Tasmania, Hobart 2002.

48. ibid, pp87-89.

49. Newman, J, Minister for Family
and Community Services, Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the
Status of Women, 'Launch of New Partnerships against Domestic Violence
Initiatives', Media Release, October 1999.

50. Commonwealth of Australia, Working
Together Against Violence: The first three years of partnerships against
domestic violence, Office of the Status of Women, Canberra, August 2001.

51. Herron, J (Minister for Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander Affairs) and Newman, J (Minister Assisting
the Prime Minister for the Status of Women), '$2.2 million for Indigenous
communities to design solutions to family violence', Joint News Release,
14 August 2000.

52. Lawrence, C, House of
Representatives, Hansard, 17 June 2002.

53. ATSIC, 'Working for Families -
1000 extra CDEP places', at www.atsic.gov.au.

54. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Commission (ATSIC), 'PM meets Indigenous leaders to discuss violence',
ATSIC News, Winter 2003, p9.

55. ibid, p9.

56. Howard, J (Prime Minister), Media
Release, 'Government Tackles Violence in Indigenous Communities', 28 August
2003.

57. Howard, J (Prime Minister), Media
Release, 'Government Tackles Violence in Indigenous Communities', 28 August
2003.

58. Schubert, M, 'Vanstone plans year
of black reform', The Australian, 23 December 2003.

59. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Commission (ATSIC), Annual Report 2001 - 2002, Commonwealth of Australia,
Canberra, 2002, pp. 154 - 155.

60. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Commission (ATSIC), Annual Report 2002-03, Commonwealth of Australia,
Canberra, 2003, p189.

61. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Commission (ATSIC), 'Overcoming family violence: We must all do better',
ATSIC News, Winter 2003, p7.

62.Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Commission (ATSIC), 'Indigenous Women's Roundtable meets to tackle family
violence', Media Release, ATSIC, 11 September 2001; Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander Commission (ATSIC), 'Overcoming family violence: We must
all do better', op.cit, p7.

63. Clark, G (Chairperson), 'National
Indigenous Group on Domestic Violence', Media Release, ATSIC, Canberra,
22 August 2001.

64. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Commission (ATSIC), 'Overcoming family violence: We must all do better',
op.cit, p7.

65. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Commission (ATSIC), Our Family, August 2003 at www.atsic.gov.au/issues/Our_Family/Family_Violence_Information_Kit/Family_

Violence_Action_Plan/Default.asp.

66. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Commission (ATSIC), 'ATSIC takes strong stand against family violence
in CQ', Media Release, Central Queensland Regional Council, 25 November
2003; Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission (ATSIC), 'Family
Violence Plan for Many Rivers', Media Release, Joint statement by ATSIC
NSW East Zone Commissioner Rick Griffiths and Many Rivers Regional Council
Chairperson Stephen Blunden, 26 November 2003; Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander Commission (ATSIC), 'Family violence - Kamilaroi Regional Council
Priority', Media release, Statement by ATSIC Kamilaroi Regional Council
Chairperson Lyall Munro, 31 October 2003; Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander Commission (ATSIC), 'ATSIC Yilli Rreung Regional Council takes
a tough stand against Family Violence', Media Release, Statement by Yilli
Rreung Regional Council, 4 December 2003. All media releases can be found
at: www.atsic.gov.au/News_Room/media_releases

67. Council of Australian Governments,
Communique, Canberra, 3 November 2000

68. Reconciliation Australia, Words,
Symbols, Actions: Reconciliation Report Card 2002, Commonwealth of Australia,
Canberra, 2002, pp. 19 - 20.

69. Council of Australian Governments,
Media Release, Canberra, 5 April 2002.

70. Ruddock, P, Minister for Immigration
and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs, 'Agreement on Indigenous Family
Violence Welcomed', Media Release, 28 July 2001.

71. Debus, B (NSW Attorney General)
and Aboriginal Justice Advisory Council, Aboriginal Justice Agreement,
New South Wales Government, 13 June 2002.

72. Department of Health (New South
Wales), NSW Aboriginal Family Health Strategy, Preface, at

73. Robertson, B (Chair), The Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander Women's Task Force on Violence Report, Department
of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policy and Development, op.cit.

74. Meeting Challenges, Making Choices:
The Queensland Government's response to the Cape York Justice Study, Queensland
Government, Brisbane, April 2002.

75. Department of Justice (Victoria),
Victorian Indigenous Family Violence Strategy, Government of Victoria,
Melbourne, 1999.

76. Online at: ,
accessed: 10 November 2003.

77. Gordon, S, Hallahan, K, Henry,
D, Putting the picture together, Inquiry into Response by Government Agencies
to Complaints of Family Violence and Child Abuse in Aboriginal Communities,
op.cit, 2002.

78. Western Australian Government,
First Progress Update on the Implementation of 'Putting People First'
- Addressing Family Violence and Child Abuse in Aboriginal Communities,
Perth, June 2003, pp8-10.

79. ibid., and Department of Indigenous
Affairs, Media Release, 'PM failing to solve domestic violence and abuse
in Indigenous communities', Perth, 24 July 2003.

80. McHale, S (Minister for Community
Development, Women's Interests, Seniors and Youth, Disability Services,
Culture and Arts), Media Release, 'Recruitment of child protection workers
involves Aboriginal communities', 23 October 2003.

81. McHale, S (Minister for Community
Development, Women's Interests, Seniors and Youth, Disability Services,
Culture and Arts), Media Release, 'Aboriginal artwork raises family violence
awareness', 25 September 2003.

82. McHale, S (Minister for Community
Development, Women's Interests, Seniors and Youth, Disability Services,
Culture and Arts), Media Release, 'New video alerts Aboriginal parents
to the dangers of shaking babies', 9 September 2003.

83. Australian Capital Territory Government,
The Extent of Family Violence in the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Communities in the ACT - ACT Governments response, Act Government, Canberra
2003.

84. Memmott, P, Stacy, R, Chambers,
C, & Keys, C, Violence In Indigenous Communities, op.cit, p59.

85. ibid, pp64-65.

86. ibid, pp65-66.

87. ibid, pp66-67.

88. Young, K, Research/Evaluation
of Family Mediation Practice and the Issue of Violence: Final report,
Legal Aid and Family Services, Canberra, 1996.

89. Ozols, E, Rekindling the spirit:
An appeal from the heart, Paper presented at the Best Practice Interventions
in Corrections for Indigenous People conference convened by the Australian
Institute of Criminology held in Sydney, 8-9 October 2001, pp 10-14, Australian
Institute of Criminology website, (Accessed 14th January 2003).

90. Memmott, P, Stacy, R, Chambers,
C, & Keys, C, Violence In Indigenous Communities, op.cit, pp67-68.

91. Australian Institute of Criminology,
'Tangentyere Night Patrol', in the Australian Violence Prevention Awards
1993, Canberra, 1998, pp.34-42.

92. Memmott, P, Stacy, R, Chambers,
C, & Keys, C, Violence In Indigenous Communities, op.cit, pp69-70.

93. ibid, pp70-71.

94. Potas, I, Smart, J, Brignell,
G, Thomas, B & Lawrie, R, Circle Sentencing in New South Wales a Review
and Evaluation, New South Wales Aboriginal Justice Advisory Council and
the New South Wales Judicial Commission, Sydney, 2003.

95. Memmott, P, Stacy, R, Chambers,
C, & Keys, C, Violence In Indigenous Communities, op.cit, pp71-72.

96. ibid, pp72-73.

97. See: .

98. See:

99. See Southern Cross University
website: ,
(Accessed 16th January 2003).

100. Memmott, P, Stacy, R, Chambers,
C, & Keys, C, Violence In Indigenous Communities, op.cit, pp73-74.

101. Ibid, pp3-4.

102. ibid, p4.

103. ibid.

104. ibid, p76.

105. ibid, p4.

106. ibid.

107. Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander Commission and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Services,
Submission to the Senate Legal and Constitutional References Committee
inquiry into legal aid and access to justice, ATSIC/ATSIS, Canberra 2003,
p6.

108. ibid, p7.

109. ibid, p14.

110. ibid, p15.

111. ibid, p16.

112. ibid, p14.

113. ibid, p14

114. ibid., p16.

115. ibid, p10.

116. Marshall, T., 'Criminal mediation
in Great Britain' (1996), 4(4), European Journal on Criminal Policy and
Research , p37.

117. Llewellyn, J and Howse, R, Restorative
justice - a conceptual framework, Law Commission of Canada, Ottawa 1999,
p2. See:

118. For an overview of these processes
see: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner,
Submission to the Northern Territory Law Reform Committee's inquiry into
recognition of Aboriginal customary law, HREOC Sydney 2003.

119. Aboriginal Justice Advisory
Council, Holistic community justice, op.cit, pp10-11.

120. ibid, p10.

121. ibid.

122. Ibid, p11.

123. Hylton, J H, Aboriginal
Sexual Offending in Canada, The Aboriginal Healing Foundation, 2002,
p157