A/55/304 5. Mission by the Special Rapporteur to Australia 20. In his preceding report to the General Assembly (A/54/347, para. 17), the Special Rapporteur indicated that he had drawn the attention of the Australian authorities to the concerns raised by the Native Title Amendment Act 1998 and reiterated his desire to visit that country to assess in situ the effects of that law, which the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination considered discriminatory. The Special Rapporteur had also drawn attention to the process of reconciliation between the Aborigines and the rest of the population and to the claims of aboriginal children who had been taken from their parents and forced to assimilate (the “Lost Generation”). 21. A provisional date has been set with the Government of Australia to carry out the mission in October 2000. In the meantime, the Special Rapporteur has been informed that difficulties have arisen in the process of intra-Australian reconciliation, as the Government and the Council for Aboriginal Reconciliation were unable to reach agreement, on 27 May 2000, on a single text that could be accepted as an Australian declaration towards reconciliation. The positions of the Government and the Council differed with respect to the apology which the Aborigines wished to receive from “one part of the nation”. The Council’s text on this subject reads: “As we walk the journey of healing, one part of the nation apologizes and expresses its sorrow and sincere regret for the injustices of the past, so the other part accepts the apologies and forgives”, whereas the text as revised by the Government reads: “As we walk the journey of healing, Australians express their sorrow and profoundly regret the injustices of the past and recognize the continuing trauma and hurt still suffered by many Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders”. 22. The Special Rapporteur hopes that the dialogue will continue and that the best formula for promoting peace of mind and peaceful coexistence among all Australians will be found. 6. Other activities (a) Allegations of racial discrimination in Zimbabwe 23. Following the occupation by Zimbabwean war veterans, between February and May 2000, of land belonging to white farmers and the murder of four 6 people, the Special Rapporteur drew the attention of the Zimbabwean Government to allegations of racist propaganda and violence against whites. 24. The Government of Zimbabwe replied as follows: “What you refer to as ‘farm occupations’ are in fact demonstrations on farms by the war veterans, and did not target white-owned properties only, as has erroneously been reported in the media. Demonstrations have been held on farms belonging to black farmers also. As you may be aware, about 4,000 commercial farmers in Zimbabwe own more than 70 per cent of the land, a fact that has meant that more white-owned farms have been affected by the demonstrations. There has been no deliberate policy by the Government of Zimbabwe encouraging the demonstrations on the farms, whether white- or black-owned. The demonstrations on the farms were directed and carried out by the war veterans, through their organizational structures, to show their impatience and dissatisfaction with the slow pace of resettlement and the pattern of unfair land distribution in Zimbabwe. “The President of Zimbabwe called on both the war veterans and the farmers to desist from violence and from provoking each other in the course of the demonstrations. Regrettably, some lives were lost by both black and white persons. Contrary to reports, all incidents were investigated by police. One police officer was indeed shot dead during the course of investigating reported incidents of violence on one farm. Realizing that it was ill-equipped to give effect to the High Court ruling ordering the war veterans off the farms, the Zimbabwe Republic Police appealed against the ruling, which appeal has been referred to the Supreme Court for a final determination. “It should be noted that the demonstrations are widespread and involve large numbers of people who are presently on 1,200 farms, spread all over Zimbabwe. The Zimbabwe Republic Police cannot possibly be at all these farms to ‘intervene to prevent abuses or apprehend culprits at scene or investigate cases’ as suggested in your letter. Investigations have, however, been carried out, with others still in progress. Fifteen people have been arrested so far. These investigations are