The decision of the Mabo case in 1992 resulted in the adoption of the Australian Native Title, which recognises the traditional connection aboriginals have with the land and gives them the right to a say in the development and use of certain sites. There was a great lead up to the establishment of the native title, which began when the Europeans invaded Australia, claiming the land their own through the European law claiming vacant land. Although aboriginals occupied Australia the Europeans claimed the land terra nulius because the people who were there, were considered unhuman and therefore were not actually occupying or living on the land. The indigenous people attempted to resolve the disaster the European invasion caused by asking for a treaty, however their wishes were not recognised. The aboriginals were not recognised as land owners until the High Court decision of the Mabo case in 1992, which was closely followed by the adoption of the Native Title Act 1993. The decision of the Mabo case effectively benefits the many aboriginals whose ancestors where unfortunate having had their land and homes invaded by Europeans in 1788.
There are many stakeholders involved in the dispute revolving around native title however, both the statue and common law is effective in producing the fairest possible outcomes for all parties involved. The process of claiming land in more complex then simply applying for the claim, for native title to exist there must be an ongoing link between the current inhabitant and the ancestors form pre-colonial times. Native title can be extinguished is the holders lose their connection with the land. The Government believes it has provided a fair and balanced framework for the future by adopting the Native Title Act in 1993.
The interpretation of native title is often misunderstood, which results in the establishment many negative opinions regarding native claims. The claim of native title does not mean indigenous people own the land they claim, it simply gives them the right to a say in the production, development and use of the land. In some cases aboriginals receive small amounts of compensation, which occurs when the land they claim is being used for profiting purposes. Native title benefits aboriginals as it allows them to continue their traditional and spiritual connection with the land. The native title also effectively benefits individual landowners, who first feared the Mabo decision, as they believed that land claims could be made on their backyards. Native title claims cannot be made on freehold land, which benefits these stakeholders such as farmers and landlords.
The common and statute laws regarding native title are significant aspects of the Australian legal system. Although the title provides the fairest possible outcomes for most stakeholders, there are certain aspects of the law they could be reconsidered and amended. These features include the Wik case, which sets the principle that the granting of pastoral lease does not necessarily extinguish native title rights, the situation regarding miners and the complexity of the legislation, which causes understanding problems for the indigenous people. Despite these small problems, the native title is an effective aspect of our common and statute law, which strives to achieve fair results for all citizens.
Today we understand that the aboriginal’s form of ownership of the land extends back more the 40,000 years, which is recognised in the Australian Native Title. This important aspect of Australia’s common and statue law should be further taught in schools, universities and to the community because of its ongoing political, social, cultural and legal significance. Native title was adopted not only to benefit indigenous citizens but also the Australian society as a whole.
