First Nations Consultations For the Australian Human Rights Commission pathways for education and employment. This includes implementing policies that promote diversity and inclusion, providing targeted support and mentorship programs, and ensuring that First Nations voices are represented in decision-making processes. 4.1.1 Legislative Framework Participants articulated that the core of the issue lies with the continuation of Australia as a constitutional Monarchy. They expressed that systems designed by and for the dominant culture will continue to marginalise and oppress First Nations people. There was a strong opinion amongst participants that to effectively implement genuine and successful ant-racism initiatives, it was necessary to dismantle and decolonise the existing foundations of our current systems. Recommendations that this process needs to start with the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act (Constitution) were prominent. Throughout consultations, reference was often made to section 51(xxvi) of the Constitution, and its continued use to make laws specifically for First Nations people. Professor Gabrielle Appleby, of the Law Faculty at University of New South Wales (UNSW) states that “The Commonwealth Parliament has, and continues, to rely on the races power to make laws for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, including, for instance, the Native Title Act and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act.” It was suggested that the enactment of the Native Title Act does not live up to the intention of the Mabo movement, which sought to recognise the sovereign land rights of First Nations people. Participants stated that the current use of the Native Title Act attempts to align First Nations concepts of belonging and connection into a Western framework of ownership. Participants identified this as one example of how the race powers have been used in a way that was thought to be beneficial to First Nations people but instead causes division and harm. It was widely accepted amongst participants that the first step in dismantling systemic racism was to enact an amendment to the Constitution that recognised the unique status and history of Australia’s First Peoples but removed the power of the Commonwealth Parliament to make laws based on race. Similarly, participants discussed the use of the Heritage Protection Act which is purported to ‘protect culturally significant areas or objects under threat’. Participants stated that interpretation of what areas or objects are significant should not be at the determination of a Western system, and that too many times the act has been used against community trying to use the legislation to protect country. Participants throughout the consultations spoke freely about the impact of the Voice Campaign and the fall out post referendum. Whether or not participants were in favour or opposed to the Voice, there was consensus that the decision should have sat solely with First Nations people. The campaign and referendum were said to be the ‘most violent form of political racism experienced by our generation’. Participants urged government to cease the politicisation of First Nations human rights to progress individual agendas. Another recent example of how race powers are used to enact racism against First Nations people in the name of ‘law’ was the introduction of the Northern Territory National Emergency Response Act 2007 (Cth) (NTER Act). Introduction of the NTER Act suspended operation of the Racial Discrimination Act (1975) and denied communities affected by the Northen Territory Intervention protection under the RDA. This is a blatant example of the many ways in which the current legislative framework can be manipulated to inflict harm and remove the human rights of Firsts Nations people. An Anti-Racism Framework: Voices of First Nations Peoples Page 44