Aborigines given ownership of Perth by judge

Now this is an interesting development from Down Under.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

By Kathy Marks in Sydney
Published: 21 September 2006

Aborigines have been declared the traditional owners of Perth and given the right to hunt and fish in the area, in the first successful claim by indigenous people to an Australian state capital.

The landmark ruling by the Federal Court astonished Aboriginal groups, with one community leader, Noel Pearson, welcoming the "absolutely extraordinary" decision. The judgment opens the way for similar claims over cities such as Sydney and Melbourne.

However, the state government of Western Australia said it would appeal, and it may be joined by the federal government. The Prime Minister, John Howard, said his initial reaction was "one of considerable concern".

The judge, Justice Murray Wilcox, granted the Nyoongar people "native title" over more than 6,000 sq km of land, including Perth and its surrounds. That means they can use it for traditional activities such as hunting, camping and fishing, as well as looking after sacred sites and generally caring for the land.

The judgment will not affect homes or businesses, as the Australian courts have ruled that native title does not apply to land owned on a freehold or long-lease basis. Mr Justice Wilcox cautioned that it was "neither the pot of gold for the indigenous claimants nor the disaster for the remainder of the community that is sometimes painted".

Native title claims in the past have prompted scare campaigns by mining and agricultural companies. But the judge said that his decision would have no impact on "people's backyards".

For native title, Aborigines must prove a continuing and unbroken link with the land that they owned until British colonists arrived. That was thought to be an almost impossible task in densely settled metropolitan areas.

In 2002 the High Court, which is superior to the federal courts, rejected a claim by the Yorta Yorta people over a heavily populated swath of south-eastern Australia. Mr Pearson said the latest ruling restored indigenous rights in relation to cities and southern regions.

Fred Chaney, the deputy chairman of the National Native Title Tribunal, said the Nyoongar people had been "subjected to pretty incredible interference and dislocation ... they've been shifted around, shunted around, their families have been broken up".

He added: "The extraordinary thing is that they've been able to demonstrate to the judge that there is still continuing Nyoongar law and culture, which is understood, which still binds them to the country, and which regulates their relationships. So it's an amazing example of cultural survival under extremely adverse circumstances."

One conservative politician in Western Australia warned of dire consequences, claiming that the public could be charged a fee to use parks and waterways. Alan Eggleston, a state Liberal senator, said: "This really could have quite profound and significant implications, and change our way of life."

Aboriginal Australian groups dismissed his claims as baseless "scaremongering". Glen Kelly, head of the South West Aboriginal Land Council, told ABC radio that the Nyoongar would seek a say in the management of parkland and state forests, but that "in general life will go on as it currently is".

Mr Justice Wilcox ruled that the Nyoongar are the traditional owners of the entire area to which they claim native title: 200,000 sq km of south-western Australia. But he has yet to decide whether to grant native title to land outside the Perth metropolitan district.

The state government said it would appeal as the judgment contradicted the High Court's Yorta Yorta ruling, which decided that native title had been "washed away by the tide of history".

Mr Howard said: "Many people will regard it as somewhat incongruous - there could still be some residual native title claim in a major settled metropolitan area."

Seems to be a rational and well-balanced view by the judge - is spite of tidbit comments such as:

Quote:

---

Alan Eggleston, a state Liberal senator, said: "This really could have quite profound and significant implications, and change our way of life."

---

No kidding, Sherlock. You mean like what happened to them when you dumped the aborigines off their land in the first place?

:2thumbsup:

Hmm... This is quite contrary to the Imper.. ahem... Commonwealth Spirit. We must dispatch a regiment of Light Horse at once to quell these pesky aboriginal usurpers and that damned judge. Thence we should send the 7th Armoured Brigade to enforce the proper rights of the British High Commissioner and Her Britannic Majesty's Government.

What is the state of ownership on public land such as parks, highways, etc?

I think America proved the way here: give them some dismal scrap of land and make them sign over the rest by threatening to kill them if they don't. Then completely forget about the whole thing and blame the Aborigenes for the whole thing. :thumbsup:

~:smoking:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rory_20_uk

I think America proved the way here: give them some dismal scrap of land and make them sign over the rest by threatening to kill them if they don't. Then completely forget about the whole thing and blame the Aborigenes for the whole thing. :thumbsup:

~:smoking:

---

Hey! I resemble that remark! ~;p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rory_20_uk

I think America proved the way here: give them some dismal scrap of land and make them sign over the rest by threatening to kill them if they don't.

---

We Americans learned from the masters, Sensei! :2thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Duke Malcolm

Hmm... This is quite contrary to the Imper.. ahem... Commonwealth Spirit. We must dispatch a regiment of Light Horse at once to quell these pesky aboriginal usurpers and that damned judge. Thence we should send the 7th Armoured Brigade to enforce the proper rights of the British High Commissioner and Her Britannic Majesty's Government.

---

Those aborigines have pointy sticks and ... *gasp* bows. I think the Light Horse might just not cut it. I mean they're, like, armed.

Is this a joke? Teh ****!

The real question is if they will be able to build a casino on the land? ~D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Proletariat

We Americans learned from the masters, Sensei! :2thumbsup:

---

Yeah, when it came to oppressing indigenous people, America really had it's work cut out trying to keep pace with European colonialism in Africa and Asia. :yes:

I think this decision is silly- good luck finding a place on earth where somewhere in time some ethnic group wasn't forced out by another. It's not something that people look kindly on now, but it's a reality. We can't go around giving back every scrap of land to nations when others have stolen it fair and square. :wink:

This is revisionism, its like pardoning deserters because we wouldn't shoot them now.

I think if they can find wilderness in the areas they have been granted then they should get those bits. It really does look decidedly dodgy for public space in general. Whether they can tax people for using those public spaces or not I don't know.

Me likey bread sticks, me likey breadsticks.