Eddie Mabo
1 What does initiating a test case involve? (2 marks)
Initiating a test case involves establishing new legal rights or principles. After this, the decisions reason in the test case then sets precedent for future cases.
2 Describe one benefit to individuals and groups if a test case is brought to court. (2 marks)
If a person has been treated unfairly, the person can fight for the right to be treated fairly through the courts. A court may be able to make a decision that will undo the unfair treatment.
3 Who is Eddie Mabo? Where was he born? (2 marks)
Eddie Mabo is a native Australian who was born on Murray Island, who fought for indigenous land rights and fought against the injustices that were imposed on the Aboriginals and Torres
…show more content…
Under Australian law, Indigenous people have rights to land, that these rights had existed before colonisation and still exist. This right is called native title.
This improves the rights of indigenous people, as they are now recognised that they were land owners before white settlement. Therefore the land that is heritage for them, is set in their family name now, rather than being owned by the government.
10 How do you think this case changed the landscape of the Australian legal system? (2 marks)
The High Court’s rejection of terra nullius, and recognition of native title, has now developed the protection of property interests. It has generated intense political debate and vast amounts of academic writing. Media attention was enormous at the time and the case still creates lively interest.
The decision fundamentally altered the legal, political and social relations between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people. In recognising the traditional rights of Murray Islanders, the case has recognised the rights of all Indigenous people who have a continued connection to their land.
11 When did Mabo die? What is significant about the time he died? (2
…show more content…
In 2004, a study seeking public opinion towards Mabo found that not everyone was in favour of land rights for Indigenous people. The Australian Election Study was based on information obtained from surveys. Twenty-five per cent of the respondents in the 2004 survey felt that change in Aboriginal land rights had not gone far enough. Almost twice that many considered that change had gone too far. And about one-third of the respondents were of the view that change had been to the right extent. In other words, most of the respondents were either satisfied with the progress in land rights or were of the view that the progress had gone too far.
(3 marks)
13 What occurred as a result of the Mabo decision? (2 marks)
The Mabo decision created the Native Title act 1993, this act protects people’s homes and businesses by validating titles granted after 1975. The purposes of the Native Title Act was to establish ways in which future dealings affecting native title may proceed and be protected and to establish a mechanism for determining claims to native title. The Mabo decision now allowed indigenous Australians to own their native
Eddie Mabo was a recognised Indigenous Australian who fought for his land, Murray Island. Mabo spent a decade seeking official recognition of his people’s ownership of Murray Island (Kwirk, 2012). He became more of an activist, he campaigned for better access for indigenous peoples to legal and medical services, to house, to social services and to education. The Mabo case was a milestone court case which paved the way for fair land rights for indigenous people. The Merriam people wanted to ensure its protection. Eddie Mabo significantly contributed to the civil and land rights of Indigenous people in Australia due to his argument to protect his land rights. In a speech in 1976, at a conference on the redrawing of the Torres Strait border, Mabo articulated a vision for islander self-determination and for an independent Torres Strait Island (Stephson, 2009).
According to Lambert (2012. pg13) Torres Islanders and Aboriginals ownership of land were classified ‘‘outside the “advanced” nations of Europe” as Aboriginals and Torres Islanders used land for “sustainability, cultural and spiritual terms”. (Lambert 2012 pg.13) Lambert suggests “affinity to the land was not recognised by Europeans because it did not conform to the manner and procedure of land ownership recording in Europe”. Jeff Lambert debates that Aboriginals lived in Australia before the European settlers.
Mabo was born on July the 25th, 1936 in the village of Laos on Murray Island. However, soon after his birth, his mother passed away. Because of this, Eddie’s father gave him away, to his brother, and Eddie’s uncle, Benny Mabo. From birth Eddie was taught the traditions and customs of the indigenous people by the elders as well as his family, while at the same time he learned to read and write from a teacher at the island school, Robert Miles. However, due to the state of the country at the time, no islander was expected to pass beyond primary school. His life was very simple and rudimentary, spending most of his time learning how to fish, grow plants, and sing the songs of his culture.
Something like this may have happened to you, as it happened to many famous people in the past. For instance, Feng Ru, Melba Pattillo Beals and Jackie Robinson -- they all have experienced unjust treatment. The only difference is, they actually stood up to change that. Here’s how, and here’s why.
This essay is about the land rights of of Australia and how Eddie Marbo was not happy about his land been taken away from him. In May 1982 Eddie Marbo and four other people of the Murray Islands began to take action in the high court of Australia and confirming their land rights. Eddie Marbo was a torres islander who thought that the Australian laws were wrong and who went to fight and try and change them. He was born in 1936 on Mer which is known as Murray Island. The British Crown in the form of the colony of Queensland became of the sovereign of the islands when they were annexed in1978. They claimed continued enjoyment of there land rights and that had not been validly extinguished by the sovereign. (Australian Bureau of Statistics 2012)
On 23 August 1966, Gurindji tribal elder Vincent Lingiari led 200 Aboriginal workers off their jobs at the Wave Hill cattle station, belonging to the British pastoral company Vestey. They established a settlement in Wattie Creek, where they sought the return of Gurindji
Their main vision is to empower the idea of a shared country and encourage opportunities for growth. With the perplexed requirements set out by the Native Title Act, this tribunal has helped claimants by providing legal aid to increase the chances of regaining lost land. For example, the Wik Peoples v Queensland (1996) 187 CLR 1 case was successful in recognising the lost land of the Wik people of Cape York. “They claimed native title over land that had previously been leased by the State Government to farmers for pastoral use” (Woodgate, Black, Biggs & Owens, 2011, p.354). The court then decided by a 4:3 majority that pastoral leases did not necessarily extinguish native title. This means that, in some cases, native title rights will co-exist with the rights of the pastoralists. Therefore, through progression and more native title cases heard, the laws surrounding the Native Title Act will adapt to further assist the Indigenous Australians in reclaiming their land. For instance, the processes surrounding Native Title issues are constantly being refined. As more and more people and political parties become aware of this process, the easier court litigation will become (Dow, 2002)
An issue facing society is whether the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth), is sufficient in balancing the rights of Indigenous Australians and the rights of current land owners. To determine whether legislation is sufficient and fair, an investigation into the current societal view points needs to be considered by legislators, with an evaluation into the ways in which other societies cater to the needs of Indigenous land owners should be made. This information then allows recommendations and changes to be debated, to therefore to ensure more equitable legislation on land rights within Australia.
Access to land and resources is important for many aboriginal communities as a basis for the maintenance of aboriginal cultural values, financial security, and economic development. The self-government has also helped provide access to treaty rights and land claims settlements for the Aboriginal population.
The Effectiveness of Native Title 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.
The journey for the Aboriginals to receive the right to keep and negotiate land claims with the Canadian government was long but prosperous. Before the 1970's the federal government chose not to preform their responsibilities involving Aboriginal issues, this created an extremely inefficient way for the Aboriginals to deal with their land right problems. The land claims created by the Canadian government benefited the aboriginals as shown through the Calder Case, the creation of the Office of Native Claims and the policy of Outstanding Business.
Indigenous Australian land rights have sparked controversy between Non Indigenous and Indigenous Australians throughout history. The struggle to determine who the rightful owners of the land are is still largely controversial throughout Australia today. Indigenous Australian land rights however, go deeper than simply owning the land as Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders have established an innate spiritual connection making them one with the land. The emphasis of this essay is to determine how Indigenous Australian land rights have impacted Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, highlighting land rights regarding the Mabo v. the State of Queensland case and the importance behind today’s teachers understanding and including Indigenous
Since the time of federation the Aboriginal people have been fighting for their rights through protests, strikes and the notorious ‘day of mourning’. However, over the last century the Australian federal government has generated policies which manage and restrained that of the Aboriginal people’s rights, citizenships and general protection. The Australian government policy that has had the most significant impact on indigenous Australians is the assimilation policy. The reasons behind this include the influences that the stolen generation has had on the indigenous Australians, their relegated rights and their entitlement to vote and the impact that the policy has had on the indigenous people of Australia.
...r case. You should include a table of contents, a table of authorities, a jurisdiction statement, questions or issues, a statement of the case, a summary of the argument, the argument, and a conclusion.
Indigenous people are those that are native to an area. Throughout the world, there are many groups or tribes of people that have been taken over by the Europeans in their early conquests throughout the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, by immigrating groups of individuals, and by greedy corporate businesses trying to take their land. The people indigenous to Australia, Brazil and South America, and Hawaii are currently fighting for their rights as people: the rights to own land, to be free from prejudice, and to have their lands protected from society.