Denied Water, Denied Dignity: How Australia’s Youth Justice System is Breaching International Law

In a deeply disturbing revelation aired by Living Black, a 17-year-old Aboriginal boy—known as Cyrus—recounted being told by youth justice officers to drink water from his cell toilet. His story is not an anomaly, but rather a harrowing reflection of systemic inhumanity within the Northern Territory’s youth justice system. The gravity of these allegations not only offends common decency; it constitutes a flagrant breach of international law and Australia’s own legal obligations concerning the humane treatment of persons in detention.

This blog examines how these incidents violate the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (the Mandela Rules) and Australia’s domestic legal obligations under both Commonwealth and Northern Territory law. We also explore the potential consequences of these breaches, including international accountability and the erosion of Australia's credibility as a human rights-respecting nation.

The Mandela Rules: International Minimum Standards

The Mandela Rules, adopted unanimously by the United Nations General Assembly in December 2015, are regarded as the universal blueprint for the humane treatment of incarcerated individuals. These rules are not optional—they embody customary international human rights law, and member states, including Australia, are expected to implement them.

Key provisions relevant to Cyrus’ experience include:

• Rule 13: “All accommodation provided for the use of prisoners… shall meet all requirements of health, with due regard being paid to climatic conditions and particularly to cubic content of air, minimum floor space, lighting, heating and ventilation.”

• Rule 15: “Prisoners shall be provided with adequate bathing and shower installations.”

• Rule 18: “Prisoners shall be provided with drinking water whenever they need it.”

• Rule 1: “All prisoners shall be treated with the respect due to their inherent dignity and value as human beings.”

• Rule 43: “In no circumstances may restrictions or disciplinary sanctions amount to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.”

The practice of telling a child to drink toilet water, particularly in a cell where the toilet and sink are not separated, is manifestly inconsistent with these provisions. It amounts to degrading treatment, particularly when the child in question is from a racial group that is historically marginalised, over-incarcerated, and institutionally discriminated against.

Australia’s Legal Obligations: Breaching Domestic Law

Beyond international standards, the treatment described by Cyrus contravenes numerous legal obligations under Australian law.

1. Commonwealth Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth)

Section 9(1) prohibits acts involving a distinction based on race which have the purpose or effect of impairing the enjoyment of human rights on an equal basis. Telling Aboriginal children to drink from toilets, while white children (hypothetically) would not be treated in such a manner, could amount to indirect or direct racial discrimination.

2. Northern Territory Youth Justice Act 2005 (NT)

Section 211(1) states that a detainee must be treated in a humane and dignified manner. This includes the provision of adequate food and water. Telling a child to consume water from a contaminated source, or denying access to clean drinking water entirely, is a clear breach.

3. Criminal Code Act 1983 (NT) – Section 208 (Ill-treatment of Child)

A person who has custody or control of a child and ill-treats that child commits an offence. The refusal of clean drinking water and psychological torment can potentially constitute a criminal act.

The Human Rights Cost: Systemic Failure

What makes Cyrus’ story even more tragic is the context in which it occurs. Aboriginal children account for 94 to 100 per cent of children in detention in the Northern Territory. The youth justice system has been widely criticised for its punitive turn, particularly since the Don Dale Royal Commission in 2016 recommended a therapeutic, rehabilitative model for youth detention.

Yet, nine years on, advocates such as NT Children’s Commissioner Shahleena Musk confirm that abuses akin to those uncovered in Don Dale continue. The NT Government’s policies—lowering the age of criminal responsibility to 10, reintroducing spithoods and restraints, and cutting diversionary programs—have exacerbated the crisis.

In April 2025, a racial discrimination complaint was submitted to the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD), alleging systemic violations of the Convention on the Rights of the Child and other core treaties.

Denied Water, Denied Dignity: How Australia’s Youth Justice System is Breaching International Law

What Are the Consequences?

While the Mandela Rules are not binding in the same way as domestic law, Australia is accountable under international treaties including:

• The Convention Against Torture (CAT)

• The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)

• The Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC)

The United Nations can and has in the past issued urgent communications and inquiries into Australia's treatment of Indigenous peoples. If the CERD complaint progresses, Australia may face international condemnation, reputational damage, and the risk of special procedure mechanisms, including site visits by UN Special Rapporteurs.

Domestically, such abuses can be grounds for class actions, tort claims, or human rights complaints in jurisdictions with enshrined charters or acts, such as Victoria and the ACT. Although the Northern Territory does not yet have a Human Rights Act, these actions may still find footing in negligence law or through institutional accountability mechanisms such as ombudsmen or the Anti-Discrimination Commission.

A Call to Action

Cyrus' story is not just an anecdote—it is evidence of a continuing national disgrace. It is time for governments at all levels to stop playing political football with Indigenous children’s lives. The federal government must prioritise a national plan for youth justice in partnership with Aboriginal community-controlled organisations. This plan must include:

• Raising the minimum age of criminal responsibility to at least 14;

• Banning the use of spithoods and other cruel restraints;

• Ensuring access to basic human necessities like water, bedding, and medical care; and

• Proper funding for culturally appropriate, trauma-informed diversion programs.

Failure to act not only risks international legal action—it reinforces Australia’s legacy of systemic racism and institutional violence against the First Peoples of this country.

Further Reading:

• Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (Mandela Rules) – UN Office on Drugs and Crime

• Royal Commission into the Protection and Detention of Children in the Northern Territory – Final Report – Australian Government

• Australian Human Rights Commission – Children’s Rights – AHRC