The wik decision. How did the Wik 10 2019-02-16

The wik decision Rating: 5,1/10 1899 reviews

A stepping stone in native title: the Wik case, 19 years on

the wik decision

It is now known as Mamumgari Conservation Park. In this, as in any other litigation, the claimants will be best served if their claims are put before the court dispassionately, lucidly and in proper form'. The claim extends from the Mitchell River to the Edward River in the north and west to the Gulf of Carpentaria. The British settlers had a policy known as Terra Nullius or Nobody 's Land 1788-1992 , which recognised any land without any government or current ruling. On 22 March 1996 Justice Spender granted the appellants leave to appeal to the Full Court of the Federal Court against the judgment. It was eventually passed two years later on 8 July 1998 by the Senate after the longest debate in the history of the Senate. Such agreements or clauses may reduce the need for litigation on these issues.

Next

Wik Peoples v Queensland

the wik decision

A test case is a case that establishes new legal rights or principles. After years of struggle and lobbying, Lingiari was famously given back his land back by Prime Minister of Australia, Gough Whitlam in 1972. This lease was surrendered in 1973. It was passed by the House of Representatives, however, the Senate made 217 amendments to the bill and returned it to the lower house for reconsideration. The minority judges wrote a single joint judgment. Archived from on 22 July 2008.

Next

Outline the Importance of the Land Rights Movement, Specifically Referring to the Wik Decision, Mabo Judgement and the Native Title. Essay

the wik decision

Mick Dodson at the time, ''By purporting to 'confirm' extinguishment by inconsistent grants, the Commonwealth is purposely pre-empting the development of the common law - not allowing sufficient time to integrate the belated recognition of native title into Australia's land management system. Australia's Indigenous people began to try and fight for their land rights during in the mind 1900s. In that respect, it seeks to provide a brief summary of the decision, placing it within the broader legal framework established by the decision of the Court in Mabo. The reason for the outcry from the political heavyweights was not the decision itself, but what it represented — sectional interests prevailing over mainstream interests despite the cost being essentially nil. These claims were brought before the commencement of the Native Title Act 1993 Cth came into operation. At the 2004 ceremony Premier Rann said the return of the land fulfilled a promise he made to Archie Barton in 1991 when he was Aboriginal Affairs Minister after he passed legislation to return lands including the sacred Ooldea area which also included the site of Daisy Bates' mission camp to the Maralinga Tjarutja people.

Next

What is the Wik Decision and Why Is It So Important? Part 2

the wik decision

He states that the High Court recognised that native title was in no way destructive of the title of pastoralists. It streamlined the claims system and provided security of tenure to non-Aboriginal holders of and other land title, where that land might potentially be claimed under the Native Title Act 1993. The argument provided was that the yolngu people had a complex social and legal system, a Government of laws, not of men. Those rights depended on the local laws and customs. The Indigenous groups did not want to lose any of the ground they had gained through Mabo, but the government did not want to lose the support of the white community.

Next

The Wik Decision

the wik decision

The court decided 4 judges to 3 that indigenous people who can prove a connection to the land may have rights to hold ceremonies and perform other traditional activities - as long as they don't interfere with the pastoralists' legitimate activities. It is hosted by the Universities of the Witwatersrand and Western Cape, the African Population and Health Research Centre and the Nigerian Academy of Science. Many feel like this event was no great victory for the Aboriginal people, it was no civil rights victory, but merely a decision that the grant of a pastoral lease did not necessarily extinguish Native Title and in fact, would extinguish Native Title to the extent of any inconsistency. The Yolngu people claimed that Nabalco Mining were illegally mining on. The mining leases There were also what were called the Comalco and Aurukun matters.

Next

The Native Title Act and Wik, Land Rights and Native Title, Changing rights and freedoms: Aboriginal people, History Year 9, NSW

the wik decision

It gives reference to Australian material including journal articles, book chapters, books, conference papers, reports and press clippings. By this point, many academics and judges in Australia were. The old scare stories of suburban backyards being claimed as sacred sites re-emerged. The Kansas-Nebraska Act and the Dred Scott Decision caused tension between the northern and southern parts of the country that led to the Civil War in 1861. They both relied on huge tracts of land to run their businesses and many of them felt that their rights to that land would disappear under Native Title legislation. The ruling that leaseholder and Aboriginal rights could co-exist related only to the land in question on Cape York.

Next

Twenty years after the High Court's Wik decision, how does the 'judicial activism' charge stand up?

the wik decision

It concerns only their right of access to the land held under pastoral leases ie used - but not owned - by for grazing. No matter how big or small the issue is managers should use the decision-making process to insure they are making the right decision. Although colonisation wrought social changes upon the Aborigines, customary Aboriginal law continues to regulate the lives of many Aboriginal Australians. Over the years the White Man has come onto Native lands and gradually pushed them out, using the land for whatever they have need to. The High Court held in that native title is a , which may be extinguished one by one, for example, by a mining lease.

Next

Native title in Australia

the wik decision

The lease was surrendered in 1921. The Commonwealth of Australia was the second respondent. The Aurukun claim also included an attack on an agreement called the Aurukun Associates Agreement entered into under the Aurukun Associates Agreement Act 1975 Qld. A challenge in the High Court ensued and the action was won by the corporation. Ibid at 173-4, per Toohey J; at 204, per Gaudron J; at 226, per Gummow J; and at 265-6, per Kirby J. The truth was native title'.

Next

What is the Wik Decision and Why Is It So Important? Part 2

the wik decision

Subsequent to that grant leave, the High Court made orders that the appeal be removed into the High Court for determination by that court. Their traditional lands centre around the and the. The decision itself was not momentous - merely stating that the existence of a lease itself did not extinguish Native Title. Adventures in Law and Justice. The Court held, rather, that native title existed without originating from the Crown. He found that the granting of the leases over the two land claims extinguished any native title rights to those lands. Since the Wik case and the establishment of the in 1993 there have been 274 successful claims listed on the Native Title Register, with a further 374 applications pending decisions.

Next

Case summary: Wik Peoples v Queensland

the wik decision

It is in the District of Cook which was opened up for occupation in 1866. Of his notable legislative contributions, The Native Title Act 1993 which nationally recognised and protected native title, a result of the Mabo v Queensland, and The Land Fund and Indigenous Land Corporation Bill 1995 are potentially the most remarkable contributions made to Indigenous rights in Australia. Both Mabo and the Native Title Act 1993 Cth had said that leases on Crown land had automatically extinguished native title, but the Wik decision created an exception to this. Prior to Mabo, the policies of Terra Nullius and Crown Land were seen as an unfair violation, and no representatives from the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community decided to litigate it in court until Mabo and others from Murray Island took initiative. The Wik and Thuyorre people, who were co-claimants in the case, are the traditional owners of an area on the western side of the Cape York Peninsula. That is one reason why I staunchly oppose blanket extinguishment of native title on pastoral leaseholds. Did judicial activism involve recourse to international legal materials rather than relying on Australian precedent? The Native Title Amendment Bill 1997 Cth was drawn up to implement the plan.

Next