The stigmatisation, control, criminalisation and incarceration of people with disability have a long history. While in recent decades there has been increasing commitment to the rights of people with disabilities by governments in western nations, the over-representation of people with mental and cognitive disability in criminal justice systems has continued. Although there are similarities amongst Western jurisdictions in regard to the treatment of people with disability in justice systems, there are particularities in Australia that will be drawn out in this article. We argue that disadvantaged people with mental and cognitive disability are being managed by and entrenched in criminal justice systems across Australia’s six states and two territories, including so-called diversionary and therapeutic measures that appear to accommodate their disability. In the absence of early and appropriate diagnosis, intervention and support in the community, some disadvantaged and poor persons with mental and cognitive disability, in particular Indigenous Australians, are being systematically criminalised. Criminal justice agencies and especially youth and adult prisons have become normalised as places of disability management and control. Drawing on research that focuses in detail on the jurisdictions of the Northern Territory and New South Wales, we argue for a reconstruction of the understanding of and response to people with these disabilities in the criminal justice system.

Crime rates are generally decreasing and governments in Australia (as elsewhere) have committed to reducing recidivism. However, incarceration rates of certain groups continue to rise, including Indigenous and racialised peoples, those experiencing poverty, mental health issues, addiction, homelessness and people with cognitive disability. A large proportion are in custody for minor offences and/or not yet sentenced; however, political leaders have continued to defend their detention on the grounds of risk to community safety. The sudden drop in people incarcerated during the COVID-19 pandemic, without a commensurate rise in crime rates, highlighted the degree to which incarceration rates are a matter of policy decisions. For a time, public health priorities dominated criminal legal policies. Evidence on the social determinants of health that people experiencing social, economic, political and environmental disadvantage are more likely to experience poorer health outcomes has led to acceptance globally that public health policies must address systemic factors and not just focus on individual behaviour. In this article, we propose that a conceptual framework of the social determinants of justice could valuably inform efforts to reduce the criminalisation and incarceration of targeted and disadvantaged groups.

Crime data collated by the New South Wales (NSW) Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research (BOCSAR) indicates that there is considerable variation in rates of Indigenous1 offending from one area to another in NSW, including in areas that are comparable in terms of Indigenous population. However, despite research findings that raise the importance of community context in relation to the offending of Indigenous individuals, there has been little investigation of the relationship between the dynamics of Indigenous communities and crime rates. In particular, there is a dearth of research that seeks to better understand the factors that may render Indigenous communities less prone to crime. This article outlines the findings of a pilot study undertaken by a research team from Jumbunna Indigenous House of Learning at the University of Technology Sydney, with support from BOCSAR. The pilot study sought to better understand the factors that contribute to variations in rates of Indigenous offending by conducting qualitative research in two communities with significant Aboriginal populations — Wilcannia and Menindee — that are demographically and geographically comparable but with contrasting crime rates.

The Australian Government has recently increased resourcing for evaluation of Indigenous programmes following critical reports by the Australian National Audit Office and Productivity Commission around their failure to significantly reduce Indigenous disadvantage. Evaluation in Indigenous affairs has a long history, although not a consistent or coordinated one. While there is significant knowledge held by those with experience in commissioning and conducting evaluations for Indigenous programmes over a number of decades that could usefully inform current efforts, there has been little research focused on this area. This article outlines the findings of qualitative research about evaluation in Indigenous policy conducted with policymakers, senior public servants, programme managers, researchers and independent evaluation consultants that sought to privilege the voices and perspectives of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. It outlines key themes derived from those interviews relating to the methods, parameters, politics and accountability around government-commissioned evaluation in Indigenous policy and programmes and concludes by canvassing ways that evaluation could better serve the interests of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

This article outlines the development of “Yuwaya Ngarra-li” (YN), a holistic, community-led partnership with a university that aims to realize Aboriginal Elders’ vision for wellbeing in their community. The Dharriwaa Elders Group (DEG), a community-controlled organization in Walgett, a remote town in New South Wales (NSW), Australia, invited the University of New South Wales (UNSW) to partner with them to progress their long-held vision for systemic change. This partnership aims to improve the environment, life pathways, and wellbeing of Aboriginal people living in Walgett through collaboration on evidence-based initiatives, research and building local community capabilities and control. YN builds on decades of strong advocacy, community development, and participatory research that has focused on addressing structural injustices and inequity through centering Indigenous knowledges, worldviews, and rights. This innovative partnership is contributing to the evidence base for community-led solutions, with implications for research, policy and practice.

Aboriginal Elders in Australia are recognised as having an important role as community leaders and cultural knowledge holders. However, the effects of colonisation and institutional racism mean Elders also experience significant social and economic disadvantage and poor health outcomes. There has been a systemic lack of attention to the worldviews and priorities of Aboriginal people as they age. In this article, we detail the findings of a qualitative study using a localised Aboriginal Elder-informed methodology that involved interviews and focus groups with 22 Aboriginal Elders in the remote town of Walgett on what ageing well means to them. This study was undertaken as part of a long-term partnership between a unique community-controlled Elders organisation and a university. The findings illuminate the barriers and enablers to ageing well for Aboriginal people in Walgett and elsewhere, and demonstrate the value to research, policy and service delivery of listening to and learning from Elders, centring Indigenous knowledges and worldviews, and bringing a more holistic conceptualisation of wellbeing to the understanding of what it means to age well.