ipl-logo

Meriam People Case

320 Words2 Pages

The decision affects the whole of Australia...
Although the formal declaration of the Court is limited to the land specified in the plaintiff 's claims, the comments of the judges regarding the recognition of native title are applicable to Australia as a whole. As Justice Toohey states: 'While this case concerns the Meriam people, the legal issues fall to be determined according to fundamental principles of the common law and colonial administrative law applicable throughout Australia ...no basic distinction need be made, for the purposes of determining what interests exist in ancestral lands of indigenous peoples of Australia, between the Meriam people and those who occupied and occupy the Australian mainland. The relevant principles are the same. '(1992) 175 CLR 1 at 179. …show more content…

Similarly, Justice Brennan comments that 'there may be other areas of Australia where native title has not been extinguished and where an Aboriginal people, maintaining their identity and their customs, are entitled to enjoy their native title. ' (1992)175 CLR 1 at 69.

The application of the decision to mainland Australia has been explicitly recognised in subsequent judgments. Note, for example, the following comments of Kirby P (as he then was) in the case of Mason v Tritton which came before the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal in 1994: 'If there existed any lingering doubt as to the applicability of the principles enunciated in Mabo to mainland Australia, that doubt is, as a matter of practicality, dispelled by the statement of Mason CJ in Coe v The Commonwealth (1993) 118 ALR 193. In the context of an application to strike out a statement of claim, his Honour said (at 200): 'Mabo [No.2] recognised that land in the Murray Islands was held by means of native title under the paramountcy of the Crown. The principles of law which led to that result apply to the Australian mainland as the judgments made clear. ' Mason v Tritton (1994) 34 NSWLR 572 at

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

Eddie Mabo was a Torres Strait Islander who believed Australian laws and land ownership were wrong and fought to change them. On 20 May 1982, Eddie Mabo, Sam Passi, David Passi, Celuia Mapo Salee and James Rice began their legal claim for ownership of their lands against the Queensland Government. In 1985, while the Mabo case was proceeding, the Queensland Government tried to avoid the issue of whether rights of Indigenous peoples survived colonisation. Due to this the leader of the Queensland Government Joh Bjelke-Petersen decided to introduce the Queensland Coast Islands Declaratory Act 1985. This Act had claimed to extinguish any rights and interests that the Meriam people may have had before its enactment.

Read More
902 Words | 4 Pages

The Mabo decision changed the legal, political and social relationships between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people. In recognising the traditional rights of Murray Islanders it changed Australia forever. The Mabo decision opened the doors for other indigenous people and groups to be able to claim ownership of land. They were required to prove that they had continuous connection to the land and maintained their traditional associating with it. The 'native title ' is the recognition by law that some aboriginal and torres strait islander people have rights to certain land due to their traditional laws and customs.

Read More
620 Words | 3 Pages

The Mabo decision of the high court in 1992 is vastly significant as it marks history as the victory of indigenous Australian land rights against the federal government, who had colonised their land and refused to acknowledge that Australia was originally owned by the ATSI people but became a terra nullius land due to the European colonists. The events that have occurred before 1992 such as the The Aboriginal Land Rights Act (NT) of 1976 and the bark petition is deemed less significant than the Mabo decision. I firmly believe that the Mabo case is an extraordinary achievement. it started in 1982 when Eddie Mabo brought up a case against the supreme court of Queensland that Indigenous Australians should have land rights. After almost a whole

Read More
962 Words | 4 Pages

After the Holt government announced on February 23 1967, a referendum to amend sections 51 and 127 of the constitution, the Federal Council for the Advancement of Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders used pamphlets and posters to campaign for a Yes vote. The ‘Right Wrongs, Write Yes’ poster in particular was a key factor in its appeal to a sense of justice in white Australians to vote yes, specifically in its use of appealing indigenous children (NMA,

Read More
370 Words | 2 Pages

The Mabo Decision was the turning point for the recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander rights. Firstly, the Mabo Decision was significant because the decision was the lead up to the recognition of Aboriginal Rights. The Mabo Decision was the movement that made everyone fully recognise the Aboriginal people as humans, and official citizens of the country. The Decision also raised awareness to the discrimination the Aboriginal people were facing before the referendum.

Read More
996 Words | 4 Pages

In the 1980’s, national campaigns for land rights laws began and Eddie spoke at a 1981 land rights conference on land rights in the Torres Straits. On hearing his speech, Lawyer, H. C. ‘Nugget’ Coombs, encouraged Eddie and other Meriam people to establish ownership of their lands through the High Court of Australia, and on 20 May 1982, Koiki and four other Meriam Men began their fight for ownership of their lands on Murray and Dauar Islands through the Australian High Court. Koiki was named the first plaintiff, so the case became known as the Mabo Case. Research grants from AIATSIS helped out with the case, but the Queensland Government introduced a sneaky new law in 1985 to crush their chances for native title. Koiki and his colleagues challenged this new law and won, as the High Court found in 1988, this new Queensland law breached Australian racial discrimination laws—Mabo v. Queensland [No. 1].

Read More
1740 Words | 7 Pages

The Commonwealth was completely unprepared, and as the Mabo story gained traction, apathy started to fade away, knocking down any political policy the government had set out to conquer at the beginning of its term. On 3 June, 1992, the High Court of Australia rejected the doctrine of terra nullius and recognised Indigenous land rights for the first time. In doing so, the Commonwealth had admitted that the Indigenous peoples had lived in Australia for thousands of years, that their land had slowly dissolved into the colonies as they grew, underwriting the Australian identity. This lack

Read More
1583 Words | 7 Pages

Here, the Aboriginal Protection Act 1869 (VIC) was made to establish an inclusive scheme of control over the lives of First Australians (Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies, 2014). New South Wales’ equivalent to this was the Aborigines Protection Act 1909 (NSW) which was to provide protection and care of Aboriginal People but rather legislated for the control of their lives. The policies of assimilation directly related to and relied on segregation and protectionism policies. This policy reflected the views of all governmental bodies of Australia, in that they thought it necessary that Aboriginal people were to eventually exercise the equivalent method of living as non-Indigenous Australians and to live as members of a sole community appreciating the same rights and freedoms, accept the same responsibilities, observing similar duties and be predisposed to the same loyalties, hopes and

Read More
1001 Words | 5 Pages

It was ultimately the success of Mabo’s case, which pushed through the change needed in Australia. The Motivations that pushed Mabo to fight for land rights Eddie Mabo thought that the best years of his life, came from growing up on Mer island, the island to him, was his safe place, away from the troubles of poverty and the xenophobic nature of the Caucasian culture of Australia, a place that was filled with a recognizable culture and language, a place where the community were caring and selflessly helped one another. On the island, life truly was a paradise, people didn’t need to worry about feeding each other, as the island provided that comfort, people didn’t need to worry about housing, as the land belonged to the people, or so they thought.

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
419 Words | 2 Pages

In 1957, I and fellow activist Jessie Street launched a petition in support of the referendum culminating in the 1967 victory. In 1974, I decided to direct my energies to the plight of my own people, the 16,000 descendants of South Sea Islanders. I founded the National Commission for Australian South Sea Islanders and, in 1975, made my first emotional journey to my father’s birthplace on

Read More
491 Words | 2 Pages

In this article by Smith, there is an image that represents Australia things like generation y, tracks, flag icon of Australia, union jack, outback Australia, white young Australians, holding the Australian flag (settling) and smiling. Smith further argues that indigenous people survived and managed the land well; consequently modern Australia should try and get indigenous people to get them to feel like they belong in our country Australia. The sense of nurture is included in this article by smith when he uses the words fragile, nurtured and carefully managing. The effect of the article by Smith when the reader reads the article it makes them feel that the land belongs to no one when smith argued the words “terra Nullius.”

Read More
1495 Words | 6 Pages

Indigenous Law and Justice: an Integrated Approach Over the past few years, integrating Indigenous law into mainstream courts has been a topic of discussion in Australia. This essay discusses the importance of incorporating Aboriginal law into mainstream courts and its significance to Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people. Incorporating Indigenous law into mainstream courts will help build stronger relationships between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people by showing mutual respect for laws and values.

Read More
1488 Words | 6 Pages

Following the controversial definition of sovereignty, a popular argument emerged claiming ‘a nation cannot make a treaty with itself’ from former prime minister John Howard. With Howard’s highly influential status, this was quickly adopted by many Australians who insisted that Indigenous people are also Australians and therefore a treaty would divide the nation. However, Howard’s definition is based on an extremely narrow understanding of the terms ‘treaty’ and sovereignty. This misconception negatively affects the process of treaty-making as it creates unprecedented fear when in reality Indigenous people do not seek recognition of statehood. Therefore, as the controversial debate over the implications of sovereignty continues, the underlying issue must first be addressed: an embedded and outdated definition weaponised by the HCA to prevent progression in treaty-making.

Read More

More about Meriam People Case

Related Topics

Open Document