Discrimination In Australia: Legislation And Impact On Indigenous People

Legislation Addressing Discrimination in Australia

Discuss about the Discrimination and Legislations Laws.

The laws in relation to Discrimination is Australia have been derived from various sources such as the Rule of Law, International Conventions, Common Law and the principles of Equality[1]. The provisions of human rights also operate toward the elimination of discrimination from the society.  It has been stated by Rosie (2015) that discrimination is a social evil[2]. The commonwealth constitution of Australia makes any practice of discrimination as illegal where they are related to protected attributes such as Race, Sex, Intersex Status, Disability, Gender Identity, Sexual Orientation and Maternity in the public areas such as employment and education. The Age discrimination Act 2004[3], the Disability Discrimination Act 1992[4], The Sex Discrimination Act 1984[5] and The Racial Discrimination Act 1975[6] are a few primary legislations which deal with anti-discrimination laws in Australia. Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986[7] also deals with provisions in relation to ant discrimination in the country. Statutory responsibility has been provided to The Australian Human Rights Commission under the laws[8]. The commission conciliates and investigates complaints in relation to human rights and discrimination breaches which have been made under the above discussed legislations[9]. The AHRCA 1986 has brought into existence Australian Human Rights Commission which bases its functions on conventions like Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief and Convention Concerning Discrimination in Respect of Employment and Occupation[10]. Discrimination has been defined through the provisions of section 3(1) of the AHRCA 1986[11]. Additional grounds which constitute discrimination have also been provided through the legislation[12]. The legislation defines discrimination as exclusion, preference or distinction which has been made based on colour, race, sex, political opinion, social origin, national extractions and religion which have an effect of impairing or nullifying equality of treatment or opportunity in an occupation. Discrimination is also defined as any other exclusion, preference or distinctions which have an effect of impairing or nullifying equality of treatment or opportunity in an occupation in relation to the provisions of any regulation under the Act[13]. However discrimination does not constitute an exclusion, preference or distinction in relation to a job where particular requirements are required and in relation to a religious institution where people of the same religion may be required[14].  The primary purpose of the paper is to analyze Discrimination on Hollywood movies concentrating of the role on indigenous people and the legislation and exemption screening in Australian cinemas in relation to discrimination acts. The paper argues that even in the light of several legal provisions available to combat discrimination, Hollywood movie makers not only depict discrimination through movies but also discriminate against people of different races while allocating roles and providing jobs. The paper also argues that the censorship system under the operation of the Commonwealth Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995[15] is not operating effectively to identify movies which may depict racism in the society. 

In addition there are a few other legislations as well which address the issue in the paper. The Discrimination Act 1991[16] operates to categorize certain form of legislations to be unlawful in the country. The Racial Hatred Act 1995 (Cth)[17] has the purpose of striking a balance between two valued right of right to live free from criticism and the right to communicate freely. Statutory bodies like the Australian Classification Board (ACB) which used to be called Office of Film and Literature Classification bases its functions on the provisions of Commonwealth Classification Act 1995[18]. The body deals with the majority of the issues related to censorship in the country which includes classification guidelines and classification codes on films. The Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (Vic)[19] which is in compliance to the AHRCA 1986 operates to ensure that policy and law making along with their implementation is done with due consideration on Human Rights.  The Equal opportunity Act 2010 renders it illegal to discriminate against a person because of personal characteristics, it also recognizes that in some situation the act of discrimination can be justified.  The Anti Discrimination Act 1977 prohibits discrimination against race, sex and few other forms in specific situation and ensures the promotion of equal opportunity to every person[20].

Impact of Discrimination on Indigenous People

It has been argued by Marrie, Henrietta, and Adrian Marrie (2014) that the amount of discrimination which is carried out is Australia is very low if any[21]. On the other hand it has been stated by McCorquodale (2016) that the level of discrimination which the Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders are subjected to in the Australia community is increasing despite several measures taken by the  government to address the situation[22].  Discrimination is a hellhound that gnaws at Negroes in every waking moment of their lives to remind them that the lie of their inferiority is accepted as truth in the society dominating them.”[23]

The above quoted lines of “Martin Luther King, Jr.” provides a pertinent account of the discrimination which many people face in the society on the score of various factors. The concept of discrimination can be defined as “treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person based on the group, class, or category to which the person is perceived to belong”[24]. It is significant to note that in the present times although the world has undergone much transformation yet there are various incidents where the process of discrimination resurfaces again and again[25]. A pertinent example of this is the portrayal of the indigenous people in the various movies of the present times[26]. It has been provided through the provisions of section 18 C of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 that it is illegal for a person to indulge in public actions where such actions may reasonably intimidate, humiliate, insult or offend a person belonging to a certain color, race, ethnic origin or national origin[27]. There are certain defenses also which have been provided through the provisions of section 18D of Act which include actions related to artistic works, scientific purpose, fair comment, fair reporting and a matter of public interest[28]. In the case of Bryant v Queensland Newspaper Pty Ltd [1997] HREOCA 23 a compliant had been dismissed by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission which had been bought by an English person against the use of the word Pom and Pommy in a newspaper[29].  The basis of the claim was that these names were insulting to English people[30]. The claim was rejected by the commission based on the reasoning that it will not be in the ends of justice to consider the use of words like pommy and pom aas so serious to have contravened the provisions of the Act[31]. Thus on the basis of these principles it can be stated that only when the portrayal of indigenous people would be so serious that it would fall within the meaning of the Act would it be considered as discrimination. However there are various other ways in which the sentiments of the indigenous communities hurt through the use of Hollywood movies[32].

Moreover, it is also seen that the various nations of the world as well as the individuals try to suppress the movies which focus on the theme of the discrimination faced by the indigenous people[33]. A pertinent example of this was the recent row which was caused with the news that a colored individual would now play the role of the superhero “Spiderman” in the “Spiderman” movie series. The provisions of the Equal opportunity Act 2010 renders it illegal to discriminate against a person because of personal characteristics, it also recognizes that in some situation the act of discrimination can be justified[34]. Part 5 of the EOA 2010 provides general exceptions along with exemptions from the prohibition of discrimination. However the legislation does not certify any action which has been taken in the above movie[35]. The exceptions would allow that where the role of the super hero is required to be a white person than it is legally valid to accept a white person only in that role, however where the role is general it there can be no such actions taken. In addition it is difficult to prove that whether the role actually required a white person or it was general as the producers can easily justify that they require a white person to do the role instead of an indigenous person.  However, on the contrary, there are movies which have a considerable impact in the recent times due to their captivating portrayal of the life as well as the living conditions of the lives of the indigenous people. A pertinent example of this is “Kunuk’s film, ‘Atanarjuat: The Fast Runner’, which became the first indigenous-language film to scoop the prestigious Camera d’Or prize for best feature film”[36].

Portrayal of Indigenous People in Movies

The portrayal of the indigenous people in the various movies of not only the nation of Australia but also of the world in general has come under much critical debate in the recent times. In the opinion of many people the indigenous people do not find adequate or sufficient representation in the various movies[37]. This is explicitly against the objectives of anti discrimination laws in the country[38].  It is significant to note that in the most of the movies of the later part of the 20^th century and also in the early part of the 21^st the indigenous people are relegated to all kinds of background roles or non-essential roles and it would hardly have mattered had they been not there[39]. For example, the various black or the colored individuals are often relegated to the roles of the household servants or the maids and are rarely casted in the lead roles of the movies[40]. This situation is totally contrary to the objective of the provisions of the Racial Hatred Act 1995[41]. The purpose of the legislation is to strike a balance between two valued right of right to live free from criticism and the right to communicate freely. Section 3 of the RHA 1995 incorporates the right of individuals to liable without criticism[42]. However in the given situation these movies indirectly depict that people belonging to the indigenous communities are subjected to lower roles in the society only[43].  Few examples of this particular aspect are the movies “The Help”, “Gone with the Wind”, “The Shawshank Redemption (1994)” and others. The opinion of “Edith J. R. Isaachs” articulated in his famous work “TheaterArts, August, 1942” becomes very significant to note in this particular context when she says “Even today the motion picture has not quite outgrown its immaturity. It still uses talented indigenous players to fit into the stereotypes of the loving Mammy and comic servants”[44]. This also depicts that indigenous people are being subjected to derogatory treatment in the society. In the case of Rugema v Gadsten Pty [1997] HREOCA 34 the court had upheld an appeal made in relation to racial discrimination. In this case the community had been addressed by derogatory words and the court held that such situation accounts to racial discrimination. thus in the same way these actions which are subjecting the indigenous or other races to shame are also liable to be considered as discrimination[45]. Moreover movies like “Chinatown Nights” where white individuals were used for the purpose of playing non white characters is another example of the discrimination which is being meted out to the indigenous people in the contemporary movies and cinemas. The actions which the producers indulged into with respect to this movie were a clear breach of anti discrimination laws. In the case of Horman v Distribution Group [2001] FMCA 52 the court held that where the line in relation to what a reasonable person would feel as discrimination has been crossed a claim for discrimination is going to be successful.   Furthermore, in the movies like “Robert Montgomery Bird’s Nick of the Woods (1837)”, “Samson & Delilah”, “Rabbit Proof Fence”, “Goldstone”, “Warwick Thornton’s We Don’t Need A Map” and others where the colored as well as the indigenous people have found a central stage yet they have been portrayed in a much sarcastic manner[46].  In the case of Jones v Scully [2002] FCA 1080 it had been stated by the court that the distribution of offensive anti-Semitic literature in letterboxes was an act of discrimination[47]. Thus where such actions are considered as discrimination than what happed in the above discussed movies is also to be regarded as discrimination against specific races[48]. In the opinion of Smith (2001), “Representation is important as a concept because it gives the impression of ‘the truth”[49]. Therefore, it is generally considered that giving representation to these people is not only going to empower them but also is likely to change the status quo of the present society. It is a reflection of this that most of the colored or the indigenous people are portrayed as type characters in the movies of Hollywood like characters of maids, servants, the savage warrior, the Noble Savage, the Indian Princess and various others[50]. It is significant to note that the indigenous people have long ago left their savage habits as well as the lifestyle but the media still keeps on portraying them in that particular light itself. In this situation also the right to live without criticism as provided by Section 3 of the RHA had been violated[51].  

Exceptions to Anti-Discrimination Laws in Film

The term “Indigenous Cultural and Intellectual Property (ICIP)” has gained much popularity in the recent times[52]. It is significant to note that in the present times the term “Cultural Heritage” is used to mean the same thing[53]. One of the land mark cases in relation to the issue was the case of Payunka, Marika & Others v Indofurn Pty Ltd 30 IPR 20. In this case copyrights in relation to reproducing carpets which were the original work of the indigenous artists have been found to have been violated by the court[54].  Another case in relation to the case is the case of  Bulun Bulun, John & Anor v R & T Textiles Pty Ltd – [1998] FCA 1082 where the concept had been discussed in details[55]. The court ruled in this case that the concept of ICIP refers to “all the rights that Indigenous people have, and want to have, to protect their traditional arts and culture”[56]. In the recent times because of the kinds of subversion the indigenous people have received this particular concept has gained prominence[57]. The concept of ICIP covers the basic precepts of “Right to protect traditional knowledge and sacred cultural material, Right to ensure that traditional laws and customary obligations are respected, particularly when money is made from ICIP, Right to be paid for use of ICIP, particularly if it has been used in a way which is inconsistent with traditional laws or without the community’s permission” and others[58]. It is significant to note that the concept of ICIP is related not only to the writing of the books, poems but other forms of artistic creation like the production of movies, paintings and others. Therefore, to protect the rights as well as the artistic creations of the indigenous people and other kinds of colored people the nation of Australia have came up with various laws like the “Copyright Act 1968 (Cth)”[59], which seeks to protect the artistic works composed by the indigenous people, the “Moral rights of individual artists”, “Individual performer’s rights”, “Designs Act 2003 (Cth)”, which aims to protect the various designs created by the indigenous people, “Patents Act 1990 (Cth)”, which aims to provide patent rights to the indigenous people and others[60]. Furthermore, the recent High Court cases in the country of Australia like “Western Australia v Ward[61]; AttorneyGeneral (NT) v Ward[62]; Ward v Crosswalk Pty Ltd[63], Cox on behalf of the Yungngora People v Western Australia”[64] and others have contributed much towards the creation of the various legislations like “Native Title Act 1993 (Cth)” which aim “to something approaching an incorporeal right akin to a new species of intellectual property” and others[65]. The opinion of “Erica-Irene Daes” articulated in her “Special Rapporteur of the UN SubCommission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities and Chairperson of the Working Group on Indigenous Populations” is very significant to note in this particular context “For indigenous peoples the world over the protection of cultural and intellectual property has taken on growing importance and urgency[66]. The very concept of indigenous embraces the notion of a distinct and separate culture and way of life…..without the ability to conserve, revive, develop and teach the wisdom they have inherited from their ancestors”[67]. Therefore, it can be said that these interventions as well as the legislations of the Australian government have tried much to safeguard the interests as well as the creations of the indigenous people[68]. Some of the most important legislations passed by the various states of Australia in regards to this particular aspects are “Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001 (Vic)”, “The Equal Opportunity Act 1984 (WA)” and others. In addition to these, “The Equal Opportunity Act 2010 (Vic)” has helped not only to reduce the discrimination faced by the various indigenous people of the nation but also provides them with equal opportunity.   The significance of these acts as well as legislations come into prominence when the transition undergone by the various movies related to the indigenous people of the 20^th century and the present times is taken into consideration. The movies like “Uncivilized” (1936), “Dust in the Sun” (1958), “A Changing Race” (1964), “Journey out of Darkness” (1967), “The Unlucky Australians” (1974) and others tried to show the native indigenous people as the savage people who were very far removed from even the basic precepts of civilizations.  However, the passing of the above mentioned laws and with the gradually changing views of the people the various movies related to the indigenous people or made by them like “Diedra and Laney Rob a Train” (2017), “Sami Blood” (2017), “My Father’s Tools” (2017), “Nutag – Homeland” (2017) and others have gained much popularity in the recent times[69]. It is a reflection of the active intervention of the government and their policies related to the ICIP that the various indigenous film festivals like “Sundance” where films made by the native indigenous women are screened, have gained prominence in the recent times. It is significant to note that following the model of Australia the other nations of the world like the United States of America and Canada have also taken active initiatives to support as well as the protect the culture as well as the artworks of their indigenous people[70]. The most common examples of these interventions of the government are the “National Native American Heritage Month”, where the movies related to the indigenous people or made by them are not only screened but also given rewards as per their merits[71]. The primary aim of these kinds of platforms and their significance in the modern day framework was articulated by the “Sundance” official website itself “The Institute is bringing forward a fourth generation of Native filmmakers and solidifying a pipeline of artists whose voices will have an important impact on American and global cinema and culture”[72]. It would b apt to say that these changes in the attitudes of the people and the various platforms which are now being made available to the indigenous people are a reflection of the various above mentioned legislations and acts.

Movies with Positive Representation of Indigenous People

In the opinion of George Lipsitz articulated in his famous book “Time Passages: Collective Memory and American Popular Culture”, “Instead of relating to the past through a shared sense of place or ancestry, consumers of electronic mass media can experience a common heritage with people they have never seen”[73]. Therefore, it can be said that the major interest of the people as well as the directors is on the portrayal of a perceived idea about the ancestry of the indigenous people and their way of life rather than the actual facts of their lives[74]. Therefore, Lipsitz in his aforementioned book says “[consumers] can acquire memories of a past to which they have no geographic or biological connection” through the various movies related to these particular themes[75]. However, it is often seen that in most of the nations of the world these movies are denied the right of screening. A few examples of these kind of movies are “Moana (2016), Pocahontas (1995), Peter pan (1953), Pan (2015), The Ridiculous 6 (2015), The Lone ranger (2013), Dance with wolves (1990)” and others which faced discrimination in the various nations of the world including Australia[76]. In this particular context the opinion of “Paul Martin, Former Canadian Prime Minister” is very significant to note when he says “We have never admitted to ourselves that we were, and still are, a colonial power”[77]. Therefore, the suppression of the various movies as well as TV series related to the portrayal of the indigenous people is often seen as the exercise of this particular colonial power by the diverse nations and the individuals of the world[78].

In the opinion of Baum, Bently and Anderson (2007), “policy debates in the Australian media have presented Aboriginal issues as if they are unsolvable and intransigent and caused by ‘deviant’ characteristics inherent in Aboriginal communities”[79]. It is a reflection of this that most of the movies related to the theme of indigenous have tried to show the problem as an unsolvable one[80]. In the opinion of most of the psychologists the people generally tend to censor the movies related to the theme of indigenous people because these movies tend to show the side of their existence which they have long ago passed over and no longer wish to revisit[81]. This situation is totally contrary to the provisions of the Commonwealth Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995[82].   The same concept becomes apparent when the concept is analyzed in terms of “Foucault’s social theory of discourse” which states that “Power is exercised socially through discourse, and Foucault explains that discourse transmits and produces power at the same time as it undermines and exposes it, renders it fragile and makes it possible to thwart it”[83]. Thus, it can be said that most of the people view these movies as the forms of discourse of the indigenous people which tries to alter the status quo related to power in the society. Therefore, it can be said that these movies tend to capture the spirit of mankind in their most primeval state. Thus, most of the people belonging to the first world nations of the world tend to repudiate these movies. It is a reflection of this that movies like “The Dead Lands (2014)”, “Embrace Of The Serpent (2015)”, “Once Were Warriors (1994)”, “Rhymes for Young Ghouls (2013)” and others have been much criticized by the people[84]. 

In the recent times various campaigns have been organized not only by the indigenous people but also by the other people to subvert this particular status quo of the power status which exists in most of the countries of the world like Australia, Canada, the United States of America and others[85]. According to a “2013 report published by La Trobe University” there are various misconceptions associated with the indigenous people “which lists various erroneous but widely-held ideas of Australian aboriginals — that Australian indigenous people were simple and uncivilized that they somehow cannot look after themselves and that all stories about indigenous people are about their failures”[86].  It is to counteract these negative misconceptions that the campaigns like “Anti-whitewashing” have been organized in the present times[87]. One of the chief proponents of this particular movement was Johnny Depp who was much criticized for his role in the movie “The Lone Ranger”[88].

In most of the movies in which the colored and the other indigenous people find representation it is commonly seen that there are certain ways in which the reality of the lives of these people is subtly subverted[89].  The most commonly used techniques are whitewashing, race-blending and others[90]. The most common example of the incident of whitewashing is the “2015, Joe Wright’s Pan” where “Rooney Mara as the movie’s Indian princess Tiger Lily”. Another significant fact to note that in the movies where the colored or the indigenous people find representation it is generally seen that in the course of the movie there are some white saviors who emerge at various critical points to relive the indigenous or the colored people of their distress[91].  It has been provided through the provisions of Section 8 of the ANTI-DISCRIMINATION ACT 1977 that no person should indulge in discrimination against a person based on race where such person is an applicant or an employee[92]. Providing the rule to people of other races depicts the level of discrimination which takes place in the Hollywood industry. Another common feature all these movies is the fact of blending of the races or the emergence of a new kind of race which is a fusion between the pure white and the colored or the indigenous people and is considered to be superior than the pure colored or the indigenous and inferior to the pure white people[93]. It is a reflection of this the American movie “The Lone Ranger” (2013) in which Johnny Depp played the lead role of an indigenous person was much criticized for it.

The concept of “Intellectual Property” can be defined as the “a category of property that includes intangible creations of the human intellect, and primarily encompasses copyrights, patents, and trademarks. It also includes other types of rights, such as trade secrets, publicity rights, moral rights, and rights against unfair competition”[94]. In the recent times his particular concept has gained special prominence particularly in the context of the indigenous people[95]. In the opinion of many people, “Indigenous intellectual property is an umbrella legal term used in national and international forums to identify indigenous peoples claims of intellectual property rights to protect specific cultural knowledge of their groups”[96]. It is significant to note that since the traditional times the various indigenous people and the other colored people have traditional been considered to possesses a very lower level of intellectual property and thus they have been subjected to various kinds of discriminations in almost every walk of their lives[97]. It is a reflection of this particular feature that the indigenous people in the recent times do not get adequate representations in the various movies as well as the TV serials and even if they do get representations their roles are non-essential or they are just relegated to the backgrounds[98]. The example of the movie “Peter Pan” is pertinent to note in this particular context where the native indigenous people of the land are just relegated to the background and most of the characters belonging to the indigenous category did not even get adequate representation and the entire movie just focus on the central character of Peter Pan[99]. Another pertinent example of this is the movie “Australia”, where although there are some indigenous characters in the movie yet they have been relegated to the background and have been shown as savage people with whom the white man needs to share his or her “white man’s burden”[100]. The ending of the movie where the indigenous boy is being adopted by the Australian family is a reflection of this particular fact. In addition to these, there is the movie named “Beloved” which although centers around the lives of the black people yet the lives of the black people has been shown in a much satirical manner[101]. The entire movie instead of focusing on the concept of slavery and the torture endured by the black people focuses only on the inhumanity of the specific act in which the woman kills her infant daughter in a bid to save her from the cruel machinery of slavery[102]. Therefore, it would be apt to say that the indigenous people have been subjected to various kinds of discrimination not only in terms of their intelligence but also in terms of the way they have been portrayed in the various movies in the recent times.

The indigenous people since the traditional times have been subjected to much exploitation not only in the general sense of the term but also in terms of the exploitation of the artworks composed by them. Therefore, it can be said that the level of competition and the consumer exploitation for the indigenous people is higher in comparison to the other people of the world. It is often seen that the credit for the artworks composed by them are often taken by the other people[103]. Thus, to safeguard the interest and the creative activities of these people the government of Australia have passed several legislations like the “Competition and Consumer Amendment (Exploitation of Indigenous Culture) Bill 2017”[104] which aimed to “amend the law in order to prevent non?First Australians and foreigners from arrogating for their personal benefit First Australian culture, and to stop the sale of art, souvenir items and any other cultural affirmations that exploit and thereby deprive First Australians of the rightful benefits from their culture, and for related purposes” and “Competition and Consumer Act 2010”[105] which aimed to “prohibit the supply in trade or commerce of anything that includes an indigenous cultural expression, unless it is done in accordance with an arrangement with the relevant indigenous community and artist and the thing is made in Australia; and create an offence for the supply of anything that includes an indigenous cultural expression without an arrangement with the relevant indigenous community and artist”[106]. Therefore, it can be said that in the present times the government of the nation of Australia is taking an active interest not only in the diverse aspects of the lives of the indigenous people but also for safeguarding their interests.

The concept of censorship in the recent times had gained much prominence in the recent times[107]. The concept of censorship has been a part of the nation of Australia for a very long time and the earliest instances where the movies have been censored dates back to the later part of the 20^th century when movies like “Hannibal, Lolita and Romance” were censored and prohibited from being screened[108]. It is a reflection of this that the “Film Censorship Board” of the nation came into existence in the 1980s[109]. It is significant to note that in the later part of the 20^th century the various movies related to the indigenous people were banned by this particular board[110]. The “Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995” which aimed to “provide for the classification of publications, films and computer games for the Australian Capital Territory” did very little to curb this particular menace[111]. Therefore, in a recent article “Federal Attorney-General Robert McClelland and Justice Minister Brendan O’Connor have announced a shake-up of censorship law in Australia through a review of the 1995 Classification Act”[112]. Thus, it can be said that even in the present times there is a need for change in the system so that the indigenous people can find adequate amount of representation and their rights are safeguarded.

The various movies related to the indigenous people have been subjected to censorship since the 20^th century and the trend still continues in the 21^st century. It is the objective of the Commonwealth Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 to ensure the maintenance of peace in the society along with the rights of different sectors. however these laws are being used in Australia in a way with is contrary to its purpose.

From the above discussion it can be evidently stated that that even in the light of several legal provisions available to combat discrimination, Hollywood movie makers not only depict discrimination through movies but also discriminate against people of different races while allocating roles and providing jobs. The paper also argues that the censorship system under the operation of the Commonwealth Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 is not operating effectively to identify movies which may depict racism in the society.  The rights to indigenous community are also being violated in relation to intellectual property rights. Discrimination has been a part of the society of the various nations of the world since the ancient times. However, in the recent times the concept has gained more prominence and has become a topic of much discussion due to the various instances of discrimination which the indigenous people and the movies related to them have to face. The discrimination of the indigenous people in the various movies of not only Australia but also of the other nations of the world is a case in instance. It is significant to note that legislations and regulations pertaining to anti discrimination and censorship laws not only have attempted to improve the lot of the indigenous people but also to mitigate the level of discrimination faced by these people. Although such attempts have been successful in relation other industries not much effect has been seen in relation to the movies industry. The primary reason for this is that the laws pertaining to anti discrimination have certain defenses added to ensure business efficacy which are much more favorable to employers rather than the people belonging to indigenous races.

Aph.gov.au. 2018. Censorship and Classification in Australia – Parliament of Australia. [online] Available at: https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/Publications_Archive/archive/censorshipebrief [Accessed 21 Apr. 2018].

Aph.gov.au. 2018. Competition and Consumer Amendment (Exploitation of Indigenous Culture) Bill 2017 – Parliament of Australia. [online] Available at: https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r5810 [Accessed 21 Apr. 2018].

Artslaw.com.au. 2018. [online] Available at: https://www.artslaw.com.au/images/uploads/aitb/AITB_information_sheet_-_Indigenous_cultural_and_intellectual_property_ICIP_2.pdf [Accessed 21 Apr. 2018].

Bently, L. and Sherman, B., 2014. Intellectual property law. Oxford University Press, USA.

Canberra.edu.au. 2018. [online] Available at: https://www.canberra.edu.au/media-centre/attachments/pdf_folder/MIP-Report_Combined_Final.pdf [Accessed 19 Apr. 2018].

CBC. 2018. Top 10 indigenous films of all time | CBC News. [online] Available at: https://www.cbc.ca/news/indigenous/top-10-indigenous-films-of-all-time-1.2807553 [Accessed 19 Apr. 2018].

Christie, M. and Verran, H., 2013. Digital lives in postcolonial Aboriginal Australia. Journal of Material Culture, 18(3), pp.299-317.

Craven, I., 2012. Australian Cinema in the 1990s. Routledge.

Culturalsurvival.org. 2018. Protecting Indigenous Intellectual Property Rights: Tools That Work. [online] Available at: https://www.culturalsurvival.org/publications/cultural-survival-quarterly/protecting-indigenous-intellectual-property-rights-tools [Accessed 21 Apr. 2018].

Demme, J., Morrison, T., Busia, A., Winfrey, O., Glover, D. and Beener, Y. 2018. Beloved (1998). [online] IMDb. Available at: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120603/ [Accessed 21 Apr. 2018].

Drahos, P. and Frankel, S., 2013. Indigenous Peoples’ Innovation: Intellectual Property Pathways to Development. ANU Press.

Drahos, P., 2016. A philosophy of intellectual property. Routledge.

Geismar, H., 2013. Treasured possessions: Indigenous interventions into cultural and intellectual property. Duke University Press.

Griffin, L., Griffin, S. and Trudgett, M., 2017. At the Movies: Contemporary Australian Indigenous Cultural Expressions–Transforming the Australian Story. The Australian Journal of Indigenous Education, pp.1-8.

Haaretz.com. 2018. Report: China bans Avatar from 1,600 cinemas due to fear of popular revolt. [online] Available at: https://www.haaretz.com/1.5049164 [Accessed 19 Apr. 2018].

History of censorship and classification  2018. History of censorship and classification. [online] Available at: https://www.alrc.gov.au/publications/2-current-classification-scheme/history-censorship-and-classification [Accessed 21 Apr. 2018].

Humanrights.gov.au. 2018. Legislation | Australian Human Rights Commission. [online] Available at: https://www.humanrights.gov.au/our-work/legal/legislation [Accessed 21 Apr. 2018].

Kral, I. and Schwab, R.G., 2013. Learning spaces: Youth, literacy and new media in remote Indigenous Australia. ANU Press.

Law.uwa.edu.au. 2018. [online] Available at: https://www.law.uwa.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/2795575/Protecting-the-Knowledge-and-Cultural-Expressions-of-Aboriginal-Peoples.pdf [Accessed 21 Apr. 2018].

Legislation.gov.au. 2018. Competition and Consumer Amendment (Exploitation of Indigenous Culture) Bill 2017. [online] Available at: https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2017B00019 [Accessed 21 Apr. 2018].

Legislation.gov.au. 2018. Racial Discrimination Act 1975. [online] Available at: https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2014C00014 [Accessed 21 Apr. 2018].

Legislation.gov.au. 2018. Racial Hatred Act 1995. [online] Available at: https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2004A04951 [Accessed 21 Apr. 2018].

Legislation.nsw.gov.au. 2018. NSW Legislation. [online] Available at: https://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/#/view/act/1977/48 [Accessed 21 Apr. 2018].

Legislation.vic.gov.au. 2018. [online] Available at: https://www.legislation.vic.gov.au/Domino/Web_Notes/LDMS/PubStatbook.nsf/f932b66241ecf1b7ca256e92000e23be/7CAFB78A7EE91429CA25771200123812/$FILE/10-016a.pdf [Accessed 21 Apr. 2018].

Lse.ac.uk. 2018. [online] Available at: https://www.lse.ac.uk/media-and-communications/assets/documents/research/msc-dissertations/2013/109-Ledwell.pdf [Accessed 19 Apr. 2018].

Luhrmann, B., Beattie, S., Luhrmann, B., Kidman, N., Jackman, H. and Adams, S. 2018. Australia (2008). [online] IMDb. Available at: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0455824/ [Accessed 21 Apr. 2018].

Manderson, D., 2012. The Law of the Image and the Image of the Law: Colonial Representations of the Rule of Law. NYL Sch. L. Rev., 57, p.153.

May, C., 2015. The global political economy of intellectual property rights: The new enclosures. Routledge.

Michael Ramaraj Dunstan 2018. Michael Ramaraj Dunstan. [online] Available at: https://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/FedLRev/2009/5.pdf [Accessed 21 Apr. 2018].

Neville, H.A., Oyama, K.E., Odunewu, L.O. and Huggins, J.G., 2014. Dimensions of belonging as an aspect of racial-ethnic-cultural identity: An exploration of indigenous Australians. Journal of counseling psychology, 61(3), p.414.

NITV. 2018. 5 Indigenous films that changed the national conversation. [online] Available at: https://www.sbs.com.au/nitv/article/2017/07/18/5-indigenous-films-changed-national-conversation [Accessed 21 Apr. 2018].

NITV. 2018. Fake Aboriginal art Bill boomerangs back into Parliament. [online] Available at: https://www.sbs.com.au/nitv/nitv-news/article/2017/09/11/fake-aboriginal-art-bill-boomerangs-back-parliament [Accessed 21 Apr. 2018].

Ottosson, Å., 2012. The intercultural crafting of real Aboriginal country and manhood in Central Australia. The Australian Journal of Anthropology, 23(2), pp.179-196.

Paradies, Y., 2016. Beyond black and white: Essentialism, hybridity and indigeneity. In Handbook of Indigenous Peoples’ Rights (pp. 44-54). Routledge.

Pearson, M. and Fernandez, J.M., 2015. Censorship in Australia: Intrusions into media freedom flying beneath the international free expression radar. Pacific Journalism Review, 21(1), p.40.

Philpot, C., Balvin, N., Mellor, D. and Bretherton, D., 2013. Making meaning from collective apologies: Australia’s apology to its indigenous peoples. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 19(1), p.34.

Ro.ecu.edu.au. 2018. [online] Available at: https://ro.ecu.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2265&context=theses_hons [Accessed 21 Apr. 2018].

Simpson, G.E. and Yinger, J.M., 2013. Racial and cultural minorities: An analysis of prejudice and discrimination. Springer Science & Business Media.

Stoddard, J., Marcus, A. and Hicks, D., 2014. The burden of historical representation: The case of/for Indigenous film. The History Teacher, 48(1), pp.9-36.

Sundance.org. 2018. 9 Indigenous-Made Films to Premiere at the Sundance Film Festival. [online] Available at: https://www.sundance.org/blogs/program-spotlight/9-indigenous-made-films-to-premiere-at-the-sundance-film-festival#/ [Accessed 22 Apr. 2018].

Tascon, S., 2012. Considering human rights films, representation, and ethics: whose face?. Human Rights Quarterly, 34(3), pp.864-883.

Wilsonquarterly.com. 2018. [online] Available at: https://wilsonquarterly.com/stories/no-reservations-the-rise-of-indigenous-cinema/ [Accessed 19 Apr. 2018].