Land Rights Impact On Land And Land

In 1992, the doctrine of terra nullius was overruled by the High Court in the case Mabo v Queensland (No.2) [1992] HCA 23. After recognising that the Meriam people of Murray Island in the Torres Straits were native title landholders of their traditional land, the court also held that native title existed for all

The lengthy period, undertaken by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, shows the resource inefficiency in relation to the Native title law reform. The Mabo V Queensland began in 1985 and concluded in 1992 where the High Court ruled the Australia was not terra nullius, reinstating the original Indigenous Australians with native title over the land. This case lead to the Mabo V Queensland (no 2) which resulted in the legislation Native Title Act 1993. This case took place in the High court of Australia proving very inefficient in the way of time and money, due to the high costs and long trial period. This legislation met

The National Apology of 2008 is the latest addition to the key aspects of Australia’s reconciliation towards the Indigenous owners of our land. A part of this movement towards reconciliation is the recognition of Indigenous Australians and Torres Strait Islanders rights to their land. Upon arrival in Australia, Australia was deemed by the British as terra nullius, land belonging to no one. This subsequently meant that Indigenous Australians and Torres Strait Islanders were never recognised as the traditional owners. Eddie Mabo has made a highly significant contribution to the rights and freedoms of Indigenous Australians as he was the forefather of a long-lasting court case in 1982 fighting for the land rights of the

Aboriginal people, since British settlement, have faced great inequalities and much racial discrimination on their own soil. Aboriginal Australians through great struggle and conflict have made significant progress in the right to their own land. To better understand the position of the Aboriginal Australians, this essay will go into more depth about the rights that Aboriginal people had to their own land prior to federation. It will also include significant events and key people who activated the reshaping of land rights for Indigenous Australians and how that has affected the rights Aboriginal people now have in the 21st Century, in regards to their land.

When European colonists settled in Australia they treated the Aboriginal people extremely different to that of their fellow white men. The Aboriginals were not seen as first class citizens through the European eye and as a result were victims of extreme oppressions and had nearly no rights or freedoms. Since then Aboriginal people have fought to be treated equally to the white men through various different ways. I will discuss the previous struggles faced by the Aboriginals, the Australian strife for equality and finally the level of success and degree of rights and freedoms given to Aboriginals in modern Australia.

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.

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 native title act inspired by the mambo case enabled and encouraged the aboriginal people in the past, present and future to stand up for their culture, community and land. The mambo case allows me to understand the fight the aboriginal people fought for. In recognising that Indigenous peoples in Australia had prior rights to land, the Court held that these rights, where they exist today, will have the protection of the Australian law until those rights are legally extinguished (HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL OF AUSTRALIA,2017).

Eddie Mabo was a revolutionary figure in the rights of Australia’s Indigenous people. With the introduction of white people to Australia in 1788, they followed the idea of terra nullius which was a Latin term meaning ‘land belonging to no one’. The white settlers ripped the Indigenous people’s land from under their feet therein making the original Australians a displaced group of people. Mabo’s court case enabled the Aboriginal people to have ownership of their own land. By taking the request for land rights to the High Court of Australia, Eddie Mabo brought the plight of the landless Indigenous people into the public spotlight.

In the 1980’s the state and government drew back from pursuing more legislations or granting land rights from the indigenous land rights because of the shortage of popular support in different places of the country. The indigenous fear of losing from votes and it began to take over from the state and progress of the indigenous rights, but all of this changed in 1992 from a case called the Mabo case that took place with a High Court. This case was named after Eddie Mabo, who was an indigenous from the Murray Island in the Torres Strait. He was the head of a group of his fellow indigenous Torres Strait people called the Meriam people and lead them into the Supreme Court to challenge the Queensland government for their land rights and ownership,

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.

A treaty should not be seen as an alternative to constitutional recognition. Though, a reform of the constitution itself will only yield a partial resolution for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders – due to its symbolic nature. A critical analysis of Zia Akhtar’s article, ‘Aboriginal Determination: Native Title Claims and Barriers to Recognition’, will emphasise the importance of recognition and self-determination to the Indigenous. This essay will explore the notions that reconciliation is more achievable through constitutional recognition and treaty together, that changes must be made to the Australian Constitution, particularly sections 25 and 51 (xxvi), and how the Native Title (Amendment) Act has hindered recognition and determination in a variety of ways.

Edward ‘Koiki’ Mabo (1936-1992) contributed to the fight for Indigenous rights in the 1960s. He was the first Indigenous Australian to receive the recognition of their land rights in Australia. He worked as a gardener in James Cook University in Queensland. He sat in lectures, where he learned that his island, Mer (Murray Island) was Crown land and the Indigenous Australians were not the traditional owners. Mabo stated that “I’d like to see anyone take my land off me.” This influenced his decision to lead a campaign against the High Court to fight for his land.

Edward Koiki Mabo (Eddie Mabo) is the Australian Man born in 1936 from Torres Strait Islander campaigning for Indigenous land rights. His decision for land rights was the legal decision. In 1981, Mabo gave first speech at the land rights conference at the James Cook University explaining the traditional land ownership and inheritance system that his community followed on Mer Island. The lawyer in the conference noted the significance of Mabo’s speech and gave a suggestion there should be a test case to claim land rights through the court system. The case was heard for ten years, progressing from the Queensland Supreme Court to the high court of Australia. The choice of high court judgment in the Mabo case came about a clearing the myth of tera nullins and setting up a legitimate structure for native title by indigenous Australian. People recognize that Indigenous Australian have a prior claim to land taken by the British Crown since 1770. They were only land such as vacant crown land, national parks and possibly some leased land, where the lease is subjected to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. It is important because it was the turning point for the recognition of Aboriginal and People right which acknowledge their unique connection with land. The judgments of the High Court inserted

Before the case of Eddie Mabo, Indigenous Australian’s ancestral lands that they were raised on were claimed for British purposes and benefits. After crossing paths with land-rights advocates and legal minds, Eddie Mabo became of crucial importance to Indigenous Australian land law. Mabo was looking to seek a retreat from injustice concerning Indigenous Australians right to the land. After a ten year legal battle, often referred to as the ‘Mabo’ Case, six out seven High Court Judges ruled that: ‘The Meriam people are entitled as against the whole world, to possession, occupation, use and enjoyment of the lands of the Murray Islands’. By showing that the Indigenous owned land as individuals and as families, and had clearly demarcated property boundaries, Mabo’s battle for land rights proved successful. This succession paved the way for fair land rights for Australia’s Indigenous people.