ipl-logo

Impact Of The Mabo Decision

949 Words4 Pages

One of the most significant events in Aboriginal peoples struggle for rights in Australia was the Mabo decision in 1992. This event took away the myth of terra nullius from Australian law and would recognise rights that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples have to the land and waters according to tradition. Thus, creating way for the legal recognition of native land titles (Loos & Mabo, 2013). This essay will explain the impact of the Mabo decision, what events led to this event and what impact this has on Australian people today.

The Mabo decision was a lengthy legal battle beginning back in 1982. One of the key elements of this was that Terra Nullius land did not belong to anyone during the time of the European Settlement …show more content…

Because of this, Aboriginal people found it difficult to claim ownership of land, as it did not adhere to British regulations. Eddie Mabo and two other members of the Merian people, commenced proceedings in the High Courts in refusing to be denied of their rights for native title and ownership (Crommelin,1993). They wanted declarations of the Murray Islands as, owners, possessors and as occupiers entitled to use and spend time on the islands (Commelin, 1993). Before mabo, earlier leaders of Milirrupum and Yolngu members unsuccessfully petitioned the parliament in Canberra to recognise their land ownership with a lease and project approval in 1965. This case however was rejected against on an eighteenth and nineteenth century treaty of supremacy who had obtained colonies around the globe (Commelin, 1993). It was then that Mabo successfully challenged the idea that Aboriginal properties were incapable of being recognised because of belonging to an inferior …show more content…

The Wik case, which first started in 1992, when the Wik peoples lodged a claim into the judicial system for certain areas of land in Northern Queensland. These claims were related to two pastural lease agreements (Mark & Clifford, 1997). Firstly, over 40% of sacred land was under lease from the government for agricultural development. Secondly, that the land was not being used for pastural purposes (Mark & Clifford, 1997). In June of 1996, there was an appeal to the High Court that was rejected. The High Court said that if native title could survive a grant of pastoral leasing, it would “fracture the skeleton” that gives Australia its land law shape ( Stevenson 1996). Furthermore, ruling that co-existent leasing would be recognised although pastoral lease would prevail (Stevenson, 2014). Additionally, this would also mean that aboriginals who were removed from these areas in the 60’s and 70’s could attempt to claim back their traditional land and that aboriginals who occupied the 42% of land mass would now be recognised as native title (Mark & Clifford, 1997). Although today the Wik decision does provide a challenge for government policy makers, this has provided a catalyst for agriculturalists to pursue the next step in improving tenure from having a leasehold to freehold. This became possible because of the success from the Mabo

Show More
Related
767 Words | 4 Pages

After 10 long years Torres Strait Islander Eddie ‘Koiki’ Mabo has lead indigenous Australians to a victory over the Queensland government. This win this case is a historical moment, as of yesterday, the indigenous Australians have been recognised as the owners of Murray Island. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders are known to have resided in Australia, 40,000 to 60,000 years before the British arrived in 1788. When the British took over they decided to take all the land for themselves even though the indigenous Australians were here first. This court case recognises indigenous Australians unique connection to the land and acknowledges that they have the rights to the land.

Read More
695 Words | 3 Pages

When the Europeans first arrived in Australia, Indigenous Australians lost all their land rights. This was mainly due to the Europeans claiming that Australia was Terra nullius. Terra Nullius was a international law stating that if territory was not owned, it was to be given to the first nation to discover it and entitled to take over. The Europeans did not recognise the Aboriginals and Torres Strait islander people as the traditional owners of Australia and therefore took all there land rights. The indigenous people were then constricted by the terra nullius rule from 1788 to 1991.

Read More
1004 Words | 5 Pages

The deed in and of itself was a big decision made by the company to relinquish such a large portion of its land. But with the progression of what society had deemed as “fashion”, had diverted from fur top hats and such things and the HBC no longer needed such a vast amount of land that they exclusively owned for trapping and hunting. As compensation, “The Hudson’s Bay Company may for 50 years after the surrender, claim any township or district within the Fertile Belt in which land is set out for settlement”. This meant that the company could continue to make a profit and would not lose all the power they had previously had. With the land under the new ownership of the Crown, new immigrants arrived and began to inhabit the land and the HBC recognized these people as the new customers that they would have to appeal to with their products.

Read More
420 Words | 2 Pages

The Mabo Decision was a turning point for the recognition of the rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders. From recognising ownership of traditional lands to raising awareness of racial discrimination, it affected the Indigenous Australian society in various ways. Firstly, the Mabo Decision was significant because it acknowledged the ownership of traditional lands by abolishing “terra nullius”, meaning that the land is empty and owned by no one. Previously, the British denied the Indigenous Australians' connection and ownership of the land by declaring that Australia was "terra nullius". However, on the 3rd of June, 1992, the High Court decided that the Merriam people were "entitled as against the whole word to possession, occupation

Read More
820 Words | 4 Pages

“This is our land! It isn’t a piece of pemmican to be cut off and given in little pieces to us. It is ours and we will take what we want.” (voices and visions chapter 8 pg.181, poundmaker in the english tongue) The Cree and many Métis believed that the land was theirs and they were entitled to it.

Read More
954 Words | 4 Pages

The Gurindji Strike or Wave Hill 'Walk off' was a fundamental event in the Australian Aboriginal struggle for rights. The Gurindji's were faced with low wages and poor conditions on the cattle station which sparked the start of the protest but soon after the focus shifted to the land rights of the Gurindji people (ABC net, 2014). On the 23rd of August 1966, 200 Gurindji stockmen, house servants and their families went on strike on the Wave Hill cattle station in Kalkarindji in the Northern Territory. This essay will discuss what led up to this event and its goals, why was this seen as a 'landmark' event and what the ongoing impacts are from the event. The Gurindji strike showcases the true struggle for the proper rights that the Australian

Read More
702 Words | 3 Pages

The High Court ruled that Indigenous Australians had a right to claim native title to traditional lands that were not legally owned by the

Read More
370 Words | 2 Pages

They were counted in the census and the right to vote was given to the Indigenous was given to them by the Commonwealth in 1962 and by all States in 1965. Queensland was the last state to grant Abroginial people these rights. Secondly, the Mabo Decision was important

Read More
938 Words | 4 Pages

The government eventually passed the native title in which stated that the laws and regulation for the courts follows in future claims. This had all happened in 1993. Many non- indigenous people did not understand why Mabo had put so much effort into all this when it was just land. They did not realize the issue that Mabo was stating, butF why would the non-indigenous people see a problem.

Read More
1740 Words | 7 Pages

The situation no longer directly affected the Non-Indigenous Australians, as Non-Indigenous Australians had thought that the process of reconciliation was complete, with the matters of the Indigenous Australians now handed over to the Australian Government. Over the course of the next 10 years, the nation became apathetic towards indigenous affairs, however public interest was revived in 1982 when Eddie Mabo, an Indigenous land rights activist and several others challenged action against the State of Queensland and the Commonwealth of Australia in the High Court over Indigenous land rights in the Murray Islands. This gained massive media coverage, as it was the first time that the issue of Indigenous land rights had been raised at a federal level. At this time, it was unexpected, as many, again, believed that the altering of the constitution had closed the seal on reconciliation. It was not a high priority for the Government who, at the time, was trying to meet the political demands driven by the public to fix the Australian economy, which whilst booming, was leaving thousands unemployed, with high-interest rates, a catalyst for impending disaster.

Read More
936 Words | 4 Pages

Eddie had a strong passion for his hometown that drove the proud Torres Strait Islander to then undertake a 10-year legal battle, which rewrote Australians history for the better. During 1982 Eddie Mabo led the Indigenous people of Mer Island. As a troop, their main argument was to clarify that many generation of the Meriam people had lived on the island, when then was even prior to the arrival of all Europeans. They all believed that they were the first and traditional owners of the land. Terra Nullius was another one of there arguments even though the Europeans had taken charge and claimed it in 1770.

Read More
733 Words | 3 Pages

The Supreme Court had decided that the Indians could live on the land; however, they could not hold a title to the land. This was because their “right to own their land” was inferior to the settler’s “right to discovery.” The Indian’s wanted to own their own land because it was theirs to begin with; therefore, they thought this decision was

Read More
441 Words | 2 Pages

Mabo: The Mabo case was a judgment in the High Court of Australia in 1992 affirming that Aboriginal people could still have rights to land taken by settlers. Wik: The Wik decision was a legal judgment made in Australia in 1996 that protects the right of Aboriginal people to own land. However, it stated that Native Title could co-exist with other rights on land under pastoral lease but, if there is a conflict between Native Title and lease, the rights of the leaseholder will

Read More
1190 Words | 5 Pages

Abstract Being an aborigine in a white dominated society is a complicated identity. Australia, one of the white governed nations, also owns many aboriginal tribes. They lived harmonious lives in the early period. But European colonization has made a profound effect on the lives of Aboriginals in Australia, which led to the total demolition of their native culture, identity and history. As a result the new generation Aboriginals have lost their Aboriginal heritage and have been accepted neither by Aboriginals nor by whites.

Read More
696 Words | 3 Pages

The fighting which took place between 1788 and 1934 was to claim aboriginal land in the name of the King of England to set up a new colony. This has created ongoing problems between the modern day aboriginals and the government. In the mid twentieth century aboriginals had to work very hard to be accepted as people living in this country and be included in the constitution. Even today there are people who work to get aboriginals fully recognised as the first people of

Read More

More about Impact Of The Mabo Decision

Related Topics

Open Document