Contemporary Aboriginal Issues Assignment 3- Essay Topic 3: Discuss the political struggle for recognition of indigenous rights to land. In your answer, consider the benefits and limitations of the Native Title Act and recent United Nations criticisms of the current Act. For years we have witnessed the Indigenous population’s political struggle for recognition of rights to Australian land. At times the effort appears to be endless and achieving recognition almost seems impossible. Native Title and Land claims have become a step closer in achieving this recognition; however, for land rights to exist in an absolute form, they cannot exist as a mere Act of Parliament but must form a fundamental part of the Australian Constitution. This seemingly gigantic task is part of the incessant political struggle that the Indigenous population will continue to face. The United Nation’s is an integral part of the political struggle between the Australian government and the Indigenous people and have on many occasions fought to raise the issue of human rights violation within the Australian constitution. When Captain Cook arrived in 1788 and the colonisation of Australia began, the Indigenous people of Australia struggled and fought to protect their country from infringement, theft and violation. The Indigenous people were faced with a dominant military force and an extremely different view of the world. Over one hundred years ago, the colonists understood this land to be open for the taking and the rightful first owners were treated as intruders on their own land. In 1901 the commonwealth of Australia was proclaimed and a supposedly new era was to occur for this “lucky country” and its inhabitants. http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/2001/433/433pl6.htm However, for Indigenous Australians, this year marked a 113 years of resistance, removal, withdrawal and dispossession. Over one hundred years later, the Native Title act is passed and Indigenous Australian’s continue their political struggle for land rights Land rights are defined as the entitlement to inhabit and use the land. Indigenous Australian communities seek to gain land rights or “Native Title” over certain parts of Australian land. This allows the Indigenous Australians the right to hunt, fish and inhabit the land and also gives them the right to contribute to decisions over construction, fishing or mining of... ... middle of paper ... .../land_rights/australia/land_rights_in_australia.htm Accessed on 1st June, 3rd June 2005 • Native Title Corporations: A Legal and Anthropological Analysis http://www.federationpress.com.au/Books/MantziarisMartin.htm Accessed on 2nd June 2005 • Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and Social Justice Commissioner Native Title Report 2001, Summary of Native Title Report 2001 http://www.hreoc.gov.au/social_justice/ntreport_01/summary.html Accessed on 1st June 2005 • The Native Title Act case: Indigenous Australia vs. Commonwealth http://www.ags.gov.au/publications/agspubs/legalpubs/legalbriefings/br20.htm Accessed on 2nd June, 3rd June 2005 • Amnesty International: Australia- governments dismissal of UN criticism undermines hard earned credibility in human rights diplomacy. http://www.faira.org.au/pressreleases/1999/03/amnesty-international.html Accessed on 1st June 2005 • Australia silent on UN racism committee condemnation http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Australia_silent_on_UN-racism_committee_condemtation Accessed on 7th June 2005
Recently deceased former South African president, philanthropist, politician and human rights activist, Nelson Mandela states that “Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world.” A significant lack of education, awareness and understanding has resulted in continued naïve and ignorant attitudes, stereotypes, generalizations, and classifications towards Aboriginal people through forms of media, popular culture, family beliefs and educational teachings in schools.
Key events in Aboriginal Australian history stem from the time Australia was first discovered in 1788. For instance, when Federation came into existence in 1901, there was a prevailing belief held by non Aboriginal Australians that the Aborigines were a dying race (Nichol, 2005:259) which resulted in the Indigenous people being excluded from the constitution except for two mentions – Section 127 excluded Aborigines from the census and Section 51, part 26, which gave power over Aborigines to the States rather than to the Federal Government. Aboriginal people were officially excluded from the vote, public service, the Armed Forces and pensions. The White Australia mentality/policy Australia as “White” and unfortunately this policy was not abolished until 1972. REFERENCE
Australians by not clarifying it’s stance on it’s international obligations to Indigenous Australians or reflecting it’s international rhetoric and signature on UN conventions by implementing some in domestic law. This inadequacy in the development of Indigenous Peoples Land Rights in Australia has been declared by the Working Group on Indigenous Populations in July 1997, and highlights the Australian government policy regarding Indigenous Peoples Land Rights and may be argued as a denial of justice for Indigenous People by the Australian legal system. Australia can be said to be ineffective in achieving justice for Indigenous People due to it’s failure to recognise Indigenous Australians rights to land domestically by failing the Human Rights standards contained in international initiatives to which it is a signatory.
Struggles by Aboriginal and Torres Strait islander people for recognition of their rights and interests have been long and arduous (Choo & Hollobach: 2003:5). The ‘watershed’ decision made by the High Court of Australia in 1992 (Mabo v Queensland) paved the way for Indigenous Australians to obtain what was ‘stolen’ from them in 1788 when the British ‘invaded’ (ATSIC:1988). The focus o...
During the late sixteen century, when the first fleet arrived to Australia and discovered the free settlers or known as Australian Indigenous inheritors (The Aborigines), the community of aboriginal inhabitants since then have experienced vast levels of discrimination and racism against their gender, race, colour and ethnicity. The term over representations refers to the presents of minority or disproportionate ethnic aboriginal groups represented in the criminal justice system (CJS). This essay will further explain the relationship between aboriginal communities and policing discussed in Blagg (2008) and Cunneen (2007, the three major sources of concern in association to aboriginal over representation in CJS which include; systematic bias,
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 ... ... middle of paper ... ... toral 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.
Year Book Australia). The Native title Act was significant as it provided a legal doctrine for Indigenous Australians to claim ownership of land that had a significance to their tribe and culture. Currently 15 percent of Australia is under ownership of Indigenous Australians which is Native Title land (Reconciliation Australia (2014). The Mabo Decision). It was a significant impact as now Indigenous Australians had the legal rights for the first time to claim back land by taking issues to court. In 1994 the National Native Title Tribunal was established and it dealt with legal matters concerning native title. The tribunal’s procedures took in account the cultural and customary concerns of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders and had the power to determine uncontested native title and compensation claims which had never been seen in Australia
Throughout this course, I have experienced many different forms of personal growth, but I would say the two major areas were open-mindedness and research skills. Before this course, I alway thought my lifestyle was the correct way to live because it seemed to work very well for me. However, after learning more about the Aboriginal way of life, I have become much more open-minded to other lifestyles and cultures. I no longer think of my lifestyle as being correct, but I recognize this lifestyle is fulfilling and best for me, while another culture or way of life can make someone else just as happy and be just as fulfilling for them. Therefore, I’ve grown to be more open minded and
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.
Shah, Anup. "Rights of Indigenous People." Global Issues. N.p., 16 Oct. 2010. Web. 3 May 2014. .
This paper supports Thomas Flanagan's argument against Native sovereignty in Canada; through an evaluation of the meanings of sovereignty it is clear that Native sovereignty can not coexist with Canadian sovereignty. Flanagan outlines two main interpretations of sovereignty. Through an analysis of these ideas it is clear that Native Sovereignty in Canada can not coexist with Canadian sovereignty.
It is the sole ‘western democracy’ which has no constitutionally entrenched bill of rights as a component of its legislation. Its treatment and approach towards Asylum seekers is ultimately a reflection of its human rights agenda. Australia is dependant under the United Nations Convention Relating to the status of refugees (the refugee convention), to assist refugees under international law. The country’s policies and procedures to an imprudent degree has ultimately led to ‘international concern about Australia’s asylum seeker policies’. Professor Gillian Trigg’s, president of the Australian Human Rights Commission acknowledges the raising concern labelling Australia’s policies a direct result of the country ‘straying from its international obligations’. The country however operates on the basis of a dualist system, thereby bypassing any international law until its formal acknowledgement as a domestic law. This simultaneously allows Australia signing the UN Refugee convention, whilst also maintaining a domestic legal system that perpetrates injustice and inhumanity towards Asylum Seekers. However it is necessary to question, whether Australia is applicable to bypass an international law, it is signatory to, aimed at achieving justice in its approach to prevent refugees and asylum
Thesis: Given the struggles aboriginals have had to face in Canada, the Canadian government should take action to
The conditions which led to the reform to the ‘Terra Nullius’ claim were by the aboriginal activists challenging the Australian Sovereignty on the grounds that terra Nullius was applied improperly. When undertaking the Inquiry, the Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) sought evidence as to whether the current native title system is meeting its objectives, whether specified options for reform would improve the operation of the system, and the alternative reform options should be
To a sovereign nation, the current treatment of asylum seekers may seem lawful as they are exercising their rights. Internationally, however, the procedures and execution of how Australia handle their asylum seeker ‘problem’ conflicts greatly with International law and treaties, to which they were ratified. As a result, Australia is left in a political and lawful bind between the complexities and intricate nature of the United Nations and Australian Government laws and legislation. Whilst the United Nations claim Australia is violating a multitude of their International Conventions, such as the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and the 1951 United Nations Refugee Convention.