Declaratory Act Essay

Law reform in relation to Native Title has developed and become testament to the growing justice for the ATSI community, however effective mean and complete justice is yet to be achieved. From the changing values and attitudes of society, alongside conditions of social change and new concepts of justice- ATSI justice is being implemented, with law reform. With seminal cases alike Mabo and Wik, legislation has been delegated and changed accordingly; with the recognition of Native title - finally succeeding in overturning the “terra nullius” doctrine, which for centuries has damaged and hurt the ATSI peoples. Despite this, with the Wik decision and largely the 10 point plan, it sought to pour "bucket-loads of extinguishment" upon Native Title

The court case consisted of the Queensland government passing an act and trying to pass a law which prevented Aboriginal people, from claiming native title. Native title in Australia being the government recognising the traditional connection that the Indigenous people have with the land and waters. Mabo eventually won this case, the result not being that they could claim native title but that the possibility was

The law reform process has been effective to a certain extent in achieving just outcomes in regards to native title. This can be seen through both the Eddie Mabo case [1992] and the Yorta Yorta case [2002] as although the cases had been concluded with final decisions, there were still measures that could have been taken, and areas where it could have been improved to achieve a just outcome.

They claimed that their rights to the land had not been extinguished by the Crown when their islands were taken over or annexed by Queensland. They still had a legal right to the land based on the legal concept of ‘native title’ – right of ownership based on traditional ownership of the land. The Queensland Government’s response was to pass the Coast Islands Declaratory Act, 1985.

In 1982, Eddie Mabo and four other Torres Strait Islander people went to the High Court of Australia claiming that their island, Mer (Murray Island), had always been under their name and right, therefore making them the “true owners” (Australianmuseum, 2015) of the land. They acknowledged that the British Crown had exercised authority when it invaded the islands, but claimed that their land rights had not been validly extinguished. On June 3 1992, the High Court decided in favour of Eddie Mabo and other petitioners. But Eddie Mabo was never able to hear the ruling, as he unfortunately died of cancer in January of that year.

In this article, McIvor discusses the history of Aboriginal Land Claims in Canada, and how they have been handle in the past. The article also suggests that the Canadian government’s plan to extinguish Indigenous people’s interest in their lands is wrong, and they should instead, recognize Aboriginal Title. This suggests that the Canadian government should adopt a new policy that is coherent with the principles underlying the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People. Dr. Bruce McIvor is the principle of First Peoples Laws, that is an organization that is dedicated to defending Aboriginal Rights. He has practiced law for many years, and therefore is qualified to write his opinion of the subject. My study focuses on issues

• establish ways in which future dealings affecting native title may proceed, and to set standards for those dealings, including providing certain procedural rights for registered native title claimants and native title holders in relation to acts which affect native title

In 1976 the Fraser government passed the Aboriginal Land Rights Act. Several state governments passed their own Land Rights Acts, which recognised aboriginal and Torres Strait islander claims to land and guaranteed them royalty payments from mining companies working there. Some laws enforced by the government became challenging for most indigenous people to abide by. Through the analysis of this information we understand the impacts the government and its laws had towards the indigenous society of

The term ‘Native Title’ refers to the right of Indigenous people to their traditional land. In Australia it has a legal significance of the right to an area of land, claimed by people whose ancestors were the original inhabitants of the land before European settlement. Also who can prove that they have had a continuous connection with the land. Native Title is the term given by the High Court to Indigenous land rights by the Court in Mabo and others v State of Queensland (No.2) [1992] HCA 23. The case required

the land they claim, it simply gives them the right to a say in the

In this article, Heuser discusses one of the main issues with Aboriginal Land Claims today, and how the government handles them. One of the main issues mentioned was the time it takes to fulfill Aboriginal Land Claims. For example, the Algonquins of Ontario launched a land claim against the provincial and federal government in the 1980s, and it is still being discussed today. Heuser is a journalist for several newspapers including the National Post. Heuser has graduated from the University of Toronto with a J.D. in the faculty of law, as well as receiving her B.A., making her qualified to form valid opinions on government issues. The arguments presented in this article are well stated, and proved with recent government land-claims to back them

Terra Nullius was once apparent in Australian society, but has now been nullified with the turn of the century. With the political changes in our society, and the apology to Indigenous Australians, society is now witnessing an increase in aboriginals gaining a voice in today’s society. Described by Pat Dodson (2006) as a seminal moment in Australia’s history, Rudd’s apology was expressed in the true spirit of reconciliation opening a new chapter in the history of Australia. Considerable debate has arisen within society as to whether aboriginals have a right to land that is of cultural significance and whether current land owners will be able to keep their land.

Act (1993), which saw the official recognition of native title. Native Title is defined in Section 61

Consequently, the indigenous Australians were considered a primitive race, with no obvious system of local law, and Australia was deemed uninhabited land under the doctrine of Terra Nullius - thereby, allowing Britain to claim sovereignty over it

The 2007 The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) states that ‘Indigenous peoples have the right to self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development’. The right to self-determination is born from the legal and cultural acknowledgement of Indigenous peoples as Australia’s first settlers, and is important in the context of the Australian Legal System. Self-determination may be used by the courts to interpret domestic legislation, as well as