the bumpy, years-long journey to Australia’s first human rights laws
- Written by Azadeh Dastyari, Director, Research and Policy, Whitlam Institute, Western Sydney University
On June 11, Australia marks 50 years since the Racial Discrimination Act[1] became law. This important legislation helps make sure people are treated equally no matter their race, skin colour, background, or where they come from.
But the act didn’t happen overnight. It took nearly ten years for Australia to follow through on the promises it made to the world to fight racism when it signed the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination[2] in 1966.
When Australia first signed that agreement, it still had laws and attitudes shaped by the White Australia Policy[3].
Even after Australia started moving away from the White Australia Policy, federal leaders held off on making anti-racism laws. They weren’t sure[4] it was allowed under the Constitution, worried about the cost, and didn’t want to upset the states. Many also feared that Australians wouldn’t support it.
It took the courage of Gough Whitlam, Australia’s 21st prime minister, to pass Australia’s first anti-discrimination law. Between 1973 and 1975, Whitlam and his government made four attempts to pass laws against racial discrimination. The act was the result of their fourth try – this time, it worked.
An uphill battle
The first time the Racial Discrimination Bill was introduced was in 1973[5], it was alongside a Human Rights Bill[6]. Together, they were part of a bigger plan to give people in Australia more rights and fair treatment.
People had mixed feelings about the idea of a law to protect individual rights. Most of the concern was about the Human Rights Bill, but some also doubted whether a Racial Discrimination Act was needed[7].
There was debate about whether it would really work or just be a symbolic step[8], and whether or not it would take away from people’s freedoms[9].
In the end, the 1973 bill lapsed and did not become law.
The Whitlam government reintroduced the bill twice more in 1974, once in April[10] and then again in October[11].
The April version added protections for immigrants and focused more on conciliation and education, but it wasn’t debated before an election.
The bill returned in October with minor updates, mainly to strengthen education efforts and clarify that it used civil, not criminal, enforcement.
Still, it was withdrawn in early 1975 because of ongoing political instability.
The 1975 Racial Discrimination Bill was the Whitlam government’s final, and successful, push to make laws tackling racism.
Familiar debates
Labor MPs backed the 1975 version of the bill, highlighting its importance for Indigenous people and other marginalised groups.
But the Liberal–Country Party Coalition, then in opposition, pushed back hard.
While the opposition claimed to support equality, they questioned the legal basis of the bill, feared it gave too much power to the race relations commissioner and warned it might threaten free speech.
Some opposition voices, especially in the Senate, went further, downplaying racism altogether. Senator Ian Wood claimed Australia was “singularly free of racial discrimination”[13].
Senator Glen Sheil argued[14] immigration was the issue:
Australia over recent years has adopted an immigration policy that has allowed the immigration into this country of blacks, whites, reds, yellows and browns […] because of these problems, once again created by governments, we are now faced with this Racial Discrimination Bill. In my opinion if this bill is implemented it will create more discrimination, not less.
The opposition successfully weakened the bill by removing several key parts, including:
criminal penalties for inciting racial discrimination
the ability of the commissioner to start legal proceedings in court or ask a court to make someone give evidence
and criminal penalties for publishing, distributing or expressing racial hostility.
Despite these setbacks, the Racial Discrimination Act passed.
Change takes time
Even with all the compromises, the passing of the act was a major moment in Australian history.
As Whitlam acknowledged[15]:
it is of course extraordinarily difficult to define racial discrimination and outlaw it by legislative means. Social attitudes and mental habits do not readily lend themselves to codification and statutory prohibition.
The act has not erased racial discrimination[16], nor is it perfect.
It continues to spark debates[17] and needs to be further strengthened[18] to meet the changing needs of our society.
However, the laws have been used in real cases to protect people’s rights, shown the federal government does have the power[19] under the Constitution to make laws about human rights, and has sent a strong message that everyone deserves to be safe and free from discrimination, regardless of their race, colour or national or ethnic origin.
The story of the Racial Discrimination Act is a reminder that real change takes time, resolve and tenacity.
While the laws finally passed, the Human Rights Bill introduced alongside it in 1973 did not.
More than 50 years later, Australia still does not have[20] a national Human Rights Act. As more people call for stronger human rights protections[21] in our laws, the Racial Discrimination Act stands as both a reminder of what progress can look like and a challenge to imagine what bold leadership could achieve today.
A Human Rights Act is now needed more than ever to protect those most at risk. It will take the same political will, moral clarity, and bravery that brought the Racial Discrimination Act to life.
References
- ^ Racial Discrimination Act (www.legislation.gov.au)
- ^ International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (www.ohchr.org)
- ^ White Australia Policy (theconversation.com)
- ^ weren’t sure (classic.austlii.edu.au)
- ^ Racial Discrimination Bill was introduced was in 1973 (parlinfo.aph.gov.au)
- ^ Human Rights Bill (parlinfo.aph.gov.au)
- ^ was needed (trove.nla.gov.au)
- ^ symbolic step (trove.nla.gov.au)
- ^ people’s freedoms (trove.nla.gov.au)
- ^ April (parlinfo.aph.gov.au)
- ^ October (parlinfo.aph.gov.au)
- ^ The National Archives of Australia (recordsearch.naa.gov.au)
- ^ singularly free of racial discrimination” (parlinfo.aph.gov.au)
- ^ argued (parlinfo.aph.gov.au)
- ^ acknowledged (parlinfo.aph.gov.au)
- ^ erased racial discrimination (www.austlii.edu.au)
- ^ spark debates (theconversation.com)
- ^ strengthened (humanrights.gov.au)
- ^ does have the power (classic.austlii.edu.au)
- ^ does not have (theconversation.com)
- ^ people call for stronger human rights protections (humanrights.gov.au)
Authors: Azadeh Dastyari, Director, Research and Policy, Whitlam Institute, Western Sydney University
