August 2.

Artwork by Glenn Loughrey

The stolen children

The Report must be read with an open heart and mind

The Report of the National Inquiry into the separation from their families and communities of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children by compulsion, duress or undue influence is not an ordinary Report.

Most official inquiries are directed to the ascertainment of facts and the drawing of conclusions. Their reports record those facts and conclusions and stand as an objective record, to be absorbed by the mind.

In the case of the stolen children, the report was different. Much of it is expressed in the words actually spoken to us by those who suffered personally from the processes of separation. They are words which were spoken from the heart to the heart. The Report must be read with an open heart and mind, and with a willingness to listen, and to listen intently.

To read the Report in this way has been difficult for some people. Some of them have attacked the Report as lacking in credibility, because in reporting on the effects of laws, practices and policies that resulted in the forcible removals the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission did not require those who told their stories to 'prove' that they were true, as they would be required to do in a court of law. These critics must have expected the Commission to embark on a process of investigation so as to discover the evidence of wrongdoing that would stand up in court.

To these criticisms I offer the response that the report is not that kind of report. We were asked to consult widely throughout the nation and to listen to Indigenous peoples, Indigenous organisations, governments, churches and community organisations. Having consulted widely, we were to trace the relevant laws, practices and policies and then to describe the impact of those laws, practices and policies on the lives of people.

The terms of reference do not ask the commission to identify offenders for prosecution or as possible respondents to civil litigation. The objective clearly is not retribution, but understanding and healing.

In any event, there is no reason to doubt the general authenticity of the stories we were told. Altogether the Commission listened to 535 personal stories of forcible removal and had access to another thousand or so in written form. In general terms, each of those stories were corroborative of the substance of all the others.

...Notwithstanding their general similarity, every [story] was special because it recorded the experience of a particular unique individual. I was filled with a sense of privilege and awe that I should be admitted to share in these dreadful secrets of the past. I could not doubt their authenticity as the storytellers reached into their memories and their pain, sometimes for the first time ever, sometimes for the first time in many years. At times, it was as if they were reliving the experiences of which they spoke.

...The Commission became convinced that the process of storytelling was itself the beginning of a healing process. We have therefore recommended that those remaining stories we were unable to hear because of lack of time and resources should continue to be told to an appropriate authority.

…The national Inquiry disclosed that many of our fellow Australians are still suffering from the wounds inflicted by past laws, practices and policies which, notwithstanding that they may have been devised with the best will in the world, were ill-conceived and led to gross violations of human rights.

Preface dated August 1997 by Sir Ronald Wilson who chaired the inquiry.

Acknowledgment: Carmel Bird, the stolen children – their stories, pp. Xiii-x