Authors Avatar


The debate about native title issues has tended to see issues from idealistic perspectives ignoring the practical realities that native title poses to governments, industry and indigenous people. The implementation of the Native Title is an appropriate and significant aspect of Australia’s common and statute law, which effectively strives to develop a fair outcome for all Australian citizens. The Native Title Act 1993, like the court Mabo decision in 1992, transforms the ways in, which indigenous ownership of land may be formally recognised and incorporated within Australian legal and property regimes. The process of implementation, however, raises a number of crucial issues of concern to native title claimants and to other interested parties. These issues will need to be settled in court however, despite the many disputes between opposing stakeholders, the Australian Native Title effectively reaches the best and fairest possible outcomes for all Australian citizens.

Join now!

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 ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

Here's what a teacher thought of this essay


A good essay about the foundations of native title but where is the analysis of effectiveness? Issues to be explored include: native title within the 'hierarchy' of Australian property rights; the difficulty of proving the ongoing connection to the land native title is claimed over (issues of evidence, the break in connection caused by WW2 etc.); issues related to numerous native title groups (overlapping claims and disagreements etc.); insufficiency of compensation; financial issues (eg. up to 80% of funds lost to experts); biased arbitration process; no veto rights and compulsory acquisition. 3 Stars.