3.2 Common Law – Land Rights.
In 1971 the Gove Land Rights case dispelled many of the historical myths through formal recognition of Indigenous culture, law, social structure, connectivity with the land and the strength of oral history as evidence. It was a turning point in Australian history and ultimately led to the findings of the Mabo case.
The 1992 Mabo case destroyed the long standing myths of terra nullius and the acquisition of land ownership through sovereign possession. It provided formal recognition that NT continued to exist unless extinguished by conscious acts of parliament, and could only be extinguished in the future if it did not breach provisions
of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth).
The Wik case further refined the findings in Mabo, revisiting the issue of sovereign land ownership and NT. It found that pastoral leases did not provide exclusive possession rights and that co-existence of NT with leasehold title was possible.
The 1996-1998 Yorta Yorta case re-seated the court in the euro-centric view of history, discounting oral versions of history from Indigenous witnesses in favour of written records and interpretations. In rejecting the NT claim, Olney J, determined the Indigenous claimants ‘[n]o longer exercise “traditional” rights and duties and have adopted European ways’, promoting the myth that Indigenous customs, laws and beliefs ‘evaporated’ the moment they deviated from pre-colonial tradition.
3.3 Common Law - Human Rights
The Cubillo and Gunner cases, whilst conceding the possibility of the Stolen Generations, rejected the assertion that wide spread forced removals occurred for any reasons other than ‘[i]n the best interests of the children’. This determination was based on written documentary evidence; almost exclusively recorded by white anglo-Australian males, which in this authors view only reinforces the euro-centric version of
history. These cases also provided legitimacy to the then federal Minister for Aboriginal Affairs public perpetuation of the ‘rescued’ children myth and denial of the Stolen Generation.
The Kruger case dispelled the constitutional myth that human rights were guaranteed in Australia, particularly for Indigenous Australians. It was declared the Constitution does not provide implied rights, or restrain the acts of government which could conceivably include acts of genocide. It also rejected the concept of constitutional redress for wrongs, stating such remedy was provided at common law. The effect of this enables the government to enact laws that infringe on indigenous rights and exclude the possibility of any common law remedy. This appears to render the principle quoted in Kruger that, ‘[l]egislation is presumed not to violate the rules of international law’, virtually meaningless in protecting human rights.
4. INTERNATIONAL LAW
International law was used to justify the ‘colonisation’ of Australia, and in recent times has influenced the enactment of domestic laws to give effect to ratified international treaties. The ratification of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) in 1991 has provided Indigenous peoples of Australia with an international
forum to lodge complaints of rights abuses through the Human Rights Committee of the United Nations (HRCUN). Adverse findings of infringements on cultural and indigenous rights can place considerable pressure on governments to ensure compliance with the provisions of the ICCPR, but does not extend to the right for self determination. However, acts of ‘cultural genocide’, as could be applied to the Stolen Generation, are excluded in the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. Therefore Indigenous rights under international law are largely non-existent and have little real effect unless enacted domestically.
5. RECOGNITON, RECONCILIATION AND TIME FOR A TREATY.
5.1 What Is Needed?
The future is uncertain, but requires action in a number of areas long identified by Indigenous leaders and consistently iterated since the invasion of 1788.
They include the right to:
- Self Determination,
- Recognition for the harms inflicted, cultural heritage, customary law and Indigenous sovereignty,
- A Treaty,
-
Constitutional recognition and rights.
The path to these goals now lies with a new political leadership, and their directions have already been indicated.
5.2 The Prime Minister (PM) – Mr Kevin RUDD.
The PM’s speech provided a landmark change in direction for acknowledgement of the truth, but was also restrained in a number of key areas of reconciliation.
Clear recognition and apology was given for the grievous harm inflicted on Australia’s Indigenous peoples, made possible through the laws passed by parliament. Reflection and focus on the consequences of that harm through the personal accounts of members of the Stolen Generations, and reference the Bringing them home report rejected the ‘mythical’ view of history. The ‘history wars’ were firmly attacked at the political and academic level with the unambiguous rejection of the euro-centric view perspective, in favour of the ‘[c]old, confronting, uncomfortable truth’.
Key areas of reconciliation were excluded, including the invasion and a treaty, indigenous land rights and self determination. This may be in reflection of previous difficulties experienced by former labour governments with partisan politics, and confronting such issues may turn an unstable bipartisan alliance into political stalemate.
Such stalemate would prevent further reform and ‘constitutional recognition of the first Australians’. Reference to the ‘[l]ong standing platform commitments’ of the labour party, indicates an agenda to provide long demanded constitutional rights to provide trans-government guarantees of protection.
The declaration of government commissions and continuation of intervention policies, led by anglo-Australian politicians, is inconsistent with the demands for self determination. In accepting that ‘[a] business as usual approach towards Indigenous Australians is not working’, these proposals should be rejected.
However, the PM’s speech, despite its exclusions and contradictions has provided the strongest recognition to the truthful past and has not only recognised the harm but has also partially relieved the conscience of a troubled nation; it is a positive step forward.
5.3 The Leader of the Opposition – Dr Brendan NELSON
Dr Nelson maintained the discredited, euro-centric myths and interpretation of history which undermined his token support of apology in his speech. Justification of assimilation and the removal of children based on the ‘Christian doctrine’ rejected acknowledgement of the wrongs of the past, and provided no reference to the
bloodshed or violence inflicted, instead describing them as ‘involuntary sacrifices’. The use of stereotypes also reinforced the myths, with reference to positive anglo-Australian ANZAC and ‘gritty settler’ icons in negative contrast to the alcohol abuse, corruption, nepotism, neglect and abuse of children in Aboriginal communities most eloquently expressed:
[c]ome to any of these communities and tell me you wish you had been born there.
To then refer to monetary compensation attempted to undermine the entire principle of the apology, as this has not been a general demand in the reconciliation process.
The euro-centric view of Indigenous history was further reinforced with reference to stories of the Stolen Generation ‘success stories’, and the condescending, racist attitude that Neville Bonner reached an approval standard expected of the ‘[L]iberal Party members who selected him’.
The closing use of the racist terms ‘boongs’ and ‘blacks’ so close to ‘We are sorry’ causes the reader to question , ‘what are you actually sorry for?’
6. CONCLUSION
The path to ‘the right way of living’ and the future lies within the past, something that many Australians have yet to understand. All are necessary to effect healing, all must be guaranteed and not subject to change at the whims of those in authority on the day. In the void once held by terra nullius, the government must give constitutional effect to a treaty with the Indigenous peoples of Australia, to provide guaranteed rights. Only then can past wounds heal and the conscience of a nation be laid to rest. Ultimately, history will be a judge of our actions and hopefully it will be as ‘honourable ancestors’.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
- ARTICLES/BOOKS/JOURNALS
Atkinson, Wayne, ‘Mediating the Mindset of Opposition: The Yorta Yorta Case’ (2002) 5(15) Indigenous Law Bulletin 8.
Bachelard, M, The Great Land Grab: What Every Australian Should Know About WIK, MABO and the TEN-POINT Plan (1997) Hyland House, South Melbourne.
Bird, Greta, The Process of Law in Australia: Intercultural Perspectives (2nd ed 1993) Butterworths, Sydney.
Bird, Greta, Ricketts, Aidan, Rogers, Nicole, Legal Process Study Guide (2008) Southern Cross University, Lismore, NSW.
Bennett, David ‘The Cubillo and Gunner Cases’ (2000) November Quadrant 37.
Behrendt, Larissa, ‘Righting Australia: At a time of Increased Inequity, Is a Bill of Rights the Answer?’ (2000) 45 Arena Magazine 24.
Buti, Tony, ‘Kruger and Bray and the Common Law’ (1998) 21(1) UNSW Law Journal 232.
Cockayne, James, ‘Members of the Yorta Yorta Aboriginal Community v Victoria: Indigenous and Colonial Traditions in Native Title” (2001) 25 Melbourne University Law Review 786.
Heywood, Andrew, Political Ideologies: an introduction (3rd ed, 2003) Palgrave Macmillan.
Santayana, George, The Life of Reason: Or, The Phases of Human Progress (1933) C. Scribner, USA.
Thornton, Margaret, The Liberal Promise: Anti-Discrimination Legislation in Australia (1990) Oxford University Press, Melbourne.
Heydon, Dyson , ‘Judicial Activism and the Death of the Rule of Law’ (2003) January/February Quadrant 9.
Horn, Nicholas, ‘T(r)op(ic)ology: Law, Interpretation, Power’ (1996) 5 Griffith Law Review 124.
Kerruish, Valerie and Perrin, Colin, ‘Awash in Colonialism’ (1999) 24(1) Alternative Law Journal, 7.
‘Law and Cultural Diversity: Constitutional Law’, Electronic Reading Room.
‘Law and Cultural Diversity: Access and Equity’, Electronic Reading Room.
McDonell, Mark, ‘Racism’ in Greta Bird, Law and Cultural Diversity: Electronic Reading Room.
O’Connor, Pam, ‘History on Trial: Cubillo and Gunner v The Commonwealth of Australia’ (2001) 26(1) Alternative Law Journal 27.
Patrick, Peggy ‘Statement of Peggy Patrick’ in Robert Manne (ed), White Wash: on Keith Windshuttle’s Fabrication of Aboriginal History (2003) Black Inc. Agenda.
Patton, Paul, ‘Reconciliation, Aboriginal Rights and Constitutional Paradox in Australia’ (2001) 15 Australian Feminist Law Journal 25.
Pearce, DC and Geddes, RS, Statutory Interpretation in Australia (4th ed, 1996) Butterworths, Sydney.
Reilly, Alexander, ‘Land Rights: From Past to Present to Absent’ (2001) 26(3) Alternative Law Journal 143.
Reynolds, Henry, This Whispering in Our Hearts (1998) Allen & Unwin, St Leonards.
Storey, Matthew, ‘Kruger v The Commonwealth: Does Genocide Require Malice?’ (1998) 21(1) UNSW Law Journal 224.
Watson, Irene, ‘There is No Possibility of Rights without Law: So Until Then, Don’t Thumb Print or Sign Anything!’ (2000) 5(1) Indigenous Law Bulletin 4.
- CASE LAW
Cubillo v Commonwealth (2000) 174 ALR 97.
Jumbunna Coal Mine NL v Victorian Coal Miner’s Assoc (1908) 6 CLR 309.
Kruger v Commonwealth [1997] HCA 27.
Mabo v Queensland (No 2) [1992] HCA 23.
Milirrpum v Nabalco Pty Ltd and The Commonwealth of Australia (1971) 17 FLR 141.
Members of the Yorta Yorta Aboriginal Community v Victoria [2002] HCA 58.
Wik Peoples v Queensland (1996) 187 CLR 1.
- LEGISLATION
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act 1984 (Cth).
Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976 (Cth).
Native Title Act 1993 (Cth).
Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth).
- TREATIES
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, opened for signature on 16 December 1966, 999 UNTS 171 (entered into force 23 March 1976).
- OTHER SOURCES
ABC Awaye, Linda Burney, ‘Vincent Lingiari Memorial Lecture’, September 1, 2006.
ABC TV, ‘Authors in History Debate’, ABC Lateline, 3 September 2003.
ABC TV, ‘The Cape Crusade’, Australian Story, 11 November 2002, 3.
Department of Aboriginal Affairs, Lousy Little Sixpence: Discussion Guide, Department of Aboriginal Affairs, Canberra.
‘Half-Caste Girls Paid 1/6 Wages’ Daily News (Sydney) 12 March 1940.
Henderson, Gerard, ‘Campaigner stumbles on whitewash of racist past’, Sydney Morning Herald (Sydney), 7 December 2004.
Jopson, Debra, ‘A century on, stolen spirits are laid to rest’, Sydney Morning Herald (Sydney).
Kingston, Margo, ‘Stolen Justice’, Sydney Morning Herald (Sydney), 6 March 1999.
Kingston, Margo, ‘Libs Enlist Nazi Race Laws for Court Fight’, Sydney Morning Herald (Sydney), 10 February 1998.
Letters to the Editor, ‘A black day for Yorta Yorta people’, Weekend Australian, 14/15 December 2002.
Nelson, Brendan, ‘Apology to Australia’s Indigenous Peoples (speech delivered at the Commonwealth Parliament, Canberra, 13 February 2008).
Rudd, Kevin, ‘Apology to Australia’s Indigenous Peoples (speech delivered at the Commonwealth Parliament, Canberra, 13 February 2008).
Stephens, Tony, ‘A sad and happy day as tribal bones return home’, Sydney Morning Herald (Sydney) 22 June 2001.
George Santayana, The Life of Reason: Or, The Phases of Human Progress (1933) 284.
Greta Bird, Aidan Ricketts, Nicole Rogers, Legal Process Study Guide (2008) 2.3-2.5,
Andrew Heywood, ‘Chapter 2: Liberalism’ in Andrew Heywood, Political Ideologies: an introduction (3rd ed, 2003) 26, 39-41, 57-65,
Margaret Thornton, The Liberal Promise: Anti-Discrimination Legislation in Australia (1990) 9, 14-15,
Dyson Heydon, ‘Judicial Activism and the Death of the Rule of Law’ (2003) January/February Quadrant 9-10,
Nicholas Horn, ‘T(r)op(ic)ology: Law, Interpretation, Power’ (1996) 5 Griffith Law Review 143
Mark McDonell, ‘Racism’ in Greta Bird, Law and Cultural Diversity: Electronic Reading Room, 32-34.
Henry Reynolds, This Whispering in Our Hearts (1998) 248,
ABC TV, ‘Authors in History Debate’, ABC Lateline, 3 September 2003,
Bird, above n 2, 3.8-3.10.
Thornton, above n 2, 11,
Greta Bird, The Process of Law in Australia: Intercultural Perspectives (2nd ed 1993) 1, 2,
Reynolds, above n 4, 246-249,
Pam O’Connor, History on Trial: Cubillo and Gunner v The Commonwealth of Australia (2001) 26(1) Alternative Law Journal, 30-31,
Irene Watson, ‘There is No Possibility of Rights without Law: So Until Then, Don’t Thumb Print or Sign Anything!’ (2000) 5(1) Indigenous Law Bulletin, 5-6.
Alexander Reilly, ‘Land Rights: From Past to Present to Absent’ (2001) 26(3) Alternative Law Journal, 144.
Paul Patton, ‘Reconciliation, Aboriginal Rights and Constitutional Paradox in Australia’ (2001) 15 Australian Feminist Law Journal, 30-34.
ABC Awaye, Linda Burney, ‘Vincent Lingiari Memorial Lecture’, September 1, 2006,
Bird, above n 2, 3.1-3.2,
Bird, above n 6, 1-2, 56-67,
‘Law and Cultural Diversity: Constitutional Law’, Electronic Reading Room, 104-105.
‘Law and Cultural Diversity: Access and Equity’, Electronic Reading Room, 299-300,
Patton, above n 9, 34.
ABC TV, above n 4,
Bird, above n 6, 1-2, 13-19, 307.
‘Law and Cultural Diversity: Constitutional Law’, Electronic Reading Room, 104,
Patton, above n 9, 30.
‘Law and Cultural Diversity: Access and Equity’, Electronic Reading Room, 299,
McDonell, above n 3, 33,
Bird, above n 6, 2, 13-16.
McDonell, above n 3, 33,
Patton, above n 9, 30,
Bird, above n 6, 2, 13-16.
Kevin Rudd, ‘Apology to Australia’s Indigenous Peoples (speech delivered at the Commonwealth Parliament, Canberra, 13 February 2008).
Reynolds, above n 4, 245-251,
Rudd, above n 17,
Bird, above n 6, 24-38.
Bird, above n 6, 31-37,
Rudd, above n 17.
‘Half-Caste Girls Paid 1/6 Wages’ Daily News (Sydney) 12 March 1940.
Rudd, above n 17,
Margo Kingston, ‘Stolen Justice’, Sydney Morning Herald (Sydney), 6 March 1999,
Department of Aboriginal Affairs, Lousy Little Sixpence: Discussion Guide, Department of Aboriginal Affairs, Canberra, 2-4.
Bird, above n 6, 56-90,
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act 1984 (Cth).
Tony Stephens, ‘A sad and happy day as tribal bones return home’, Sydney Morning Herald (Sydney) 22 June 2001, 8,
Debra Jopson, ‘A century on, stolen spirits are laid to rest’, Sydney Morning Herald (Sydney).
Watson, above n 7, 5-6,
Larissa Behrendt, ‘Righting Australia: At a time of Increased Inequity, Is a Bill of Rights the Answer?’ (2000) 45 Arena Magazine 25-26.
ABC TV, ‘The Cape Crusade’, Australian Story, 11 November 2002, 3.
Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth),
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act 1984 (Cth).
Bird, above n 6, 327-331.
Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976 (Cth).
Margo Kingston, ‘Libs Enlist Nazi Race Laws for Court Fight’, Sydney Morning Herald (Sydney), 10 February 1998, 5,
McDonell, above n 3, 41-43.
Milirrpum v Nabalco Pty Ltd and The Commonwealth of Australia (1971) 17 FLR 141.
Bird, above n 6, 266, 275-288.
Mabo v Queensland (No 2) [1992] HCA 23,
Bird, above n 6, 266, 275-288,
Bird, above n 2, 5.4-5.5.
Mabo v Queensland (No 2) [1992] HCA 23,
M Bachelard, The Great Land Grab: What Every Australian Should Know About WIK, MABO and the TEN-POINT Plan (1997) 52-54,
Bird, above n 2, 5.4,
Bird, above n 6, 304-325.
Wik Peoples v Queensland (1996) 187 CLR 1,
Bachelard, above n 30, 58-65,
Wik Peoples v Queensland (1996) 187 CLR 1.
Members of the Yorta Yorta Aboriginal Community v Victoria [2002] HCA 58,
Valerie Kerruish and Colin Perrin, ‘Awash in Colonialism’ (1999) 24(1) Alternative Law Journal, 7,
James Cockayne, ‘Members of the Yorta Yorta Aboriginal Community v Victoria: Indigenous and Colonial Traditions in Native Title” (2001) 25 Melbourne University Law Review 786-809,
Urse Richter, Peter McGinniss, Victor Hart, ‘A black day for Yorta Yorta people’, Weekend Australian, 14/15 December 2002, Letters to the Editor.
Cubillo v Commonwealth (2000) 174 ALR 97,
David Bennett, ‘The Cubillo and Gunner Cases’ (2000) November Quadrant, 37, O’Loughlin J,
Kruger v Commonwealth [1997] HCA 27,
Matthew Storey, ‘Kruger v The Commonwealth: Does Genocide Require Malice?’ (1998) 21(1) UNSW Law Journal, 224-231,
Watson, above n 7, 5-6,
Tony Buti, ‘Kruger and Bray and the Common Law’ (1998) 21(1) UNSW Law Journal, 233-239.
Kruger v Commonwealth [1997] HCA 27,
DC Pearce and RS Geddes, Statutory Interpretation in Australia (4th ed, 1996) 136-137,
Jumbunna Coal Mine NL v Victorian Coal Miner’s Assoc (1908) 6 CLR 309.
Bird, above n 6, 47,
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, opened for signature on 16 December 1966, 999 UNTS 171 (entered into force 23 March 1976).
Bird, above n 6, 112-115.
Bird, above n 6, 47-48, 112-115.
Watson, above n 7, 6,
‘Law and Cultural Diversity: Constitutional Law’, Electronic Reading Room, 115-117.
Watson, above n 7, 4-6,
Patton, above n 9, 30-34,
Bird, above n 6, 41.
Bird, above n 6, 43, 114, 458,
Watson, above n 7, 4-6,
Patton, above n 9, 25-30.
Watson, above n 7, 4,
Bird, above n 6, 458.
Rudd, above n 17,
Peggy Patrick, ‘Statement of Peggy Patrick’ in Robert Manne (ed), White Wash: on Keith Windshuttle’s Fabrication of Aboriginal History (2003) 215-217,
Gerard Henderson, ‘Campaigner stumbles on whitewash of racist past’, Sydney Morning Herald (Sydney), 7 December 2004.
Bird, above n 6, 43, 114, 458,
Watson, above n 7, 4-6,
Patton, above n 9, 25-30.
Behrendt, above n 23, 24,
Bird, above n 6, 43-44,
Patton, above n 9, 25-30.
Behrendt, above n 23, 25-26.
Patton, above n 9, 27-30.
Henderson, above n 48, 1-2,
McDonell, above n 3, 33-36.
Patrick, above n 48, 215-217,
Brendan Nelson, ‘Apology to Australia’s Indigenous Peoples (speech delivered at the Commonwealth Parliament, Canberra, 13 February 2008).
McDonell, above n 3, 35-36,
Wayne Atkinson, ‘Mediating the Mindset of Opposition: The Yorta Yorta Case’ (2002) 5(15) Indigenous Law Bulletin, 9.
Bird, above n 6, 43, 114, 458,
Watson, above n 7, 4-6,
Patton, above n 9, 25-30.
Reynolds, above n 4, 251,
Patrick, above n 48, 216
Patrick, above n 48, 216- 217.
ABC Awaye, above n 9, 15.