Communication challenges faced by lawyers

The indigenous people belong from the different culture. They have different personal backgrounds and histories. The indigenous people in the urban backgrounds cannot show conventional images of what persons appear like or live like. There is opportunity of superior diversity in the urban area. The diversity in the rural area is different from conventional images. The urban areas have solid recognition. The proper and effective communication is required between the people from indigenous background and lawyer for the better understanding. The consultants or lawyers are required to get alertness of the diversity of backgrounds, skills, and histories of diverse communities in respect of working effectively with the customers and the relatives.

In this essay, the issues faced by lawyers in the communication with indigenous people and aboriginal kinship structure is discussed, evaluated, and critically examined.

The Central Land Council (CLC) is a council, which gives support to the establishment of the strong consumer representative body over the problems related to the communication. As a representative aboriginal organisation, the Central Land Council establishes the privileges and rights of the indigenous people. The Central Land Council advocates the advanced telecommunication requirements in the indigenous community. The Central Land Council draws the attention towards the important communication problems faced by the consultant and the indigenous people. The major issues faced by the lawyer to communicate the indigenous people are listed below-

The Central Land Council has explored the telecommunication problems. Accordingly, there are not separate communication sectors. The critical shortages in the telecommunication services for the indigenous people in remote areas needs the acknowledgement. It also requires the commitments to address the communication issues in the systematic manner. It has been discovered by the Regional Telecommunications Review (RTR) 2009 that twenty two percent of remote indigenous communities do not have services of the voice telephone.

The main challenge is to resolve the problem by developing the policy initiatives. It makes sure that there are reasonable and affordable services for the indigenous people in the remote areas.

It is stated by the Australian Bureau of the Statistics 2007 that there are fifty-four communities of the common persons fifty or more than fifty, which are not able to access the public telephones. The main insufficiencies exist in the services exist despite supervisory methods such as Universal Service Obligation and Costumer Service Guarantees. It is believed by the Central Land Council that there is a requirement to propose the communities substitutes payphone preferences. It is required to consider the remoteness as the standard for the provision of the public phones.

The government and the service providers are required to make the focus on the giving the recommendations of the Australian Communication Authority 2004 Payphone Report. It will give the benefits to the aboriginal people in the remote area.

The prepaid telephone services are not provided by the service providers in the current time. The Central Land Council is in the favour of providing the prepaid services. The restricted extent of the ordinary telephone services accept by the indigenous people is documented in well manner. The best example of providing the prepaid connection of telephone in the remote area for indigenous people is iconnect. The inadequate test of the other prepaid services ‘Country Calling Line’ led by the Telstra and information technology and communication department was beneficial expansion. It is believed that deficiency of prepaid service is the preventing the development of standard phone services in the families in indigenous communities.

Telecommunication issues faced by Indigenous people

It is found as per the combined report of Central Land Council and Tangentyere research 2006 that Aboriginal people selects the option of the mobile phone over the fixed landline services. It is the important expense for the less income earners and the lack of coverage. The indigenous customers value the mobile phones because the choice for prepaid service is accessible. The phone maintain the high mobility related with the life of the indigenous people. It was toughly advocated by the Central Land Council that the increment of monitoring the telemarketing systems.

The services of internet are not proper in the remote area for indigenous people. The Australian Broadband Guarantee subsidy encourages the comparatively low speed. There is limit of monthly usage of internet is 1 GB. It properly marks the individual customers in place of communal access point. Most of the indigenous people of remote area are not in the scope of the National Broadband Network. The Central Land Council does not support the identification of ACCAN to shape the National Broadband Network. Because of the restricted transponder abilities, the provision of the high-speed broadband access such as more than two Mbps, for the indigenous people in the remote area is not so feasible.

The major significant issue for the remote communities is changing requirement of digital broadcasting because of the present satellite broadcasting transmission and the process of distribution in the communities. The present configuration permits the local indigenous media administration to broadcast the contents established locally. The Central Land Council stated that indigenous people are not aware about the shifts and costs involving in the broadcasting. The indigenous people should get aware about the effects connected with the change. This will help in making the proper connection by the lawyers with indigenous people in remote area.

Functioning through the issues requires the engagement of the aboriginal sector-

It is noticed by the Central Land Council that there is lack of alertness of the ACCAN among the local aboriginal media organisations. It is believed by the Central Land Council that ACCAN should develop the solid connections with the aboriginal sector.

The indigenous people in Australia are treated as per the very strict laws of relationship and the obligations. The aboriginal kinship supports the laws, rules, regulations, and norms. It administers the all facets of the social behaviour of individual. The aboriginal kinship was undisputable part of the old-style indigenous society. The aboriginal kinship is also introduced in the traditional indigenous community strongly. Some aboriginal kinship obligations are considered very seriously irrespective of the urban area or remote area.

The objective of aboriginal kinship is to develop the knowledge and the cultural practice among the indigenous people in the remote area. It helps in developing the knowledge of the professional standards and professional ethics among the aboriginal people in the remote areas. It recognises the various stages of the relationship, reciprocal bonds of the connection work. The aboriginal kinship model helps in develop the understanding of the participant in respect of the how the aboriginal social structure is differ from the western societies. The aboriginal kinship develops the understanding among the indigenous people regarding how the ethical valuation supports in considering these influences. It also makes able the indigenous people to understand that how the difference between the indigenous people affects the aboriginal people in the common systems, which function in the Australia such as by the training, education, criminal justice scheme, health, and legal system more largely. The aboriginal kinship model aims over establishing and maintaining the proper effective communication between the indigenous people of remote area and the consultants such as lawyers or practitioners.  

The indigenous community is framed around the society. There is existence of very strong kinship ties within the communities and within each of categories.  This aboriginal kinship model ties overlay the numerous categories thus making very solid and positive relationship among the diverse aboriginal people of remote areas.

Not all people are same. People came from different background and different culture. It makes the better awareness of the potential conflict in the functioning with persons came from the different background, different status and different culture. The people from different nations have changing histories in respect of assault and have variety models of aboriginal kinship model. This model develop knowledge of ethical awareness and professional standards for the lawyers, which help to communicate with diverse people.

Conclusion

As per the above analyses, it can be said that poor access to the integrity and justice has a great effect on the confinement rates of the aboriginal people. The logic of inequality or partiality is unavoidable from the misunderstanding of the proceedings of the court is to provoke doubt for the laws in place of providing the space for rehabilitation. It is analysed that the amenities available to the aboriginal people have upgraded from the last years. However, the services provided to the indigenous people are not proper to provide the full access to the justice. It is required the proper communication between consultant or lawyer and indigenous people. There are many issues arise for the lawyers to make communication which can be resolved by giving the more legal service in the remote areas and by giving the translator services in the all court. The aboriginal people should be allowed to lodge the documents of the court. There should be more aboriginal community improvement officers.

David Truog, issues for indigenous community (LexisNexis Butterworths, 2017)

James Bradley, Singing saltwater country, (Allen & Unwin, 2010)

James Mooney and David Howard-Wagner, Teaching aboriginal culture online (Law building Foyer, 2012)

James Mooney and Lee Riley, indigenous online cultural teaching and sharing (University of Sydney, 2012)

Jennies Paris, Approach of aboriginal kinship model (Pearson Education Limited, 2018)

John Savulescu, diversity in indigenous community (Oxford University Press, 2018)

Methew Genner, Embedding indigenous content (University of Sydney, 2012)

Methew Giovanelli, relationship between reflective frameworks for indigenous cultural competence in Australian universities (university of Australia, 2003)

Neil William, national best practice framework for indigenous cultural competence in Australian universities (universities Australia, 2011)

Australian government department of education, the aboriginal and torres strait islade higher education advisory council (9 July 2014) < https://www.education.gov.au/aboriginal-and-torres-strait-islander-highereducation-advisory-council>

Australian government, national aboriginal and Torres Strait islander education policy (5 March 2010) <https://deewr.gov.au/Indigenous/Schooling/PolicyGuidelines/Pages/aep.aspx#04>