Indigenous People in Australia - Case Study Example

Indigenous Land Claims Since time immemorial, issues of land have been of great concern. This comes from the significance of land in the survival of humans, animals, and development. The net value attached to land is always high arguably because land is immovable, not flexible, and a very scarce resource. Indeed, it is the most fundamental factor of production. Land is power, supports life, and accords residence. Naturally, tracks of land in any nation originally belong to the indigenous or traditional people. Colonial masters sought to acquire the huge and most productive pieces of land to disable the colonized nations and individuals. In fact, even after gaining independence and sovereignty, the colonial masters have always been reluctant to hand over indigenous land to the indigenous people. Landlessness is one of the significant indicators of extreme poverty levels across the globe. Actually, poor citizens mostly live in rural areas, rely on agriculture, and agricultural labor to survive. However, they do not own these pieces of land (Landesa, 2012, p.1). In the modern times, all land belongs to the government with the citizens exercising use and care over land. Through various government land commissions, the government issues ownership certificates to qualified individuals, regulates and controls use of all land in a given state. Possession, use, registration, or even land claims are important yet very difficult procedures in matters relating to land. It is usually very difficult for the government to honor indigenous land rights and land claims have always resulted to violence and court cases. However, there have been various claims over land all over the world by the indigenous people in specific nations from the government, colonial masters, or caretakers. A land claim is a formal statement submitted to the federal and/or provincial government by an Aboriginal community asserting violation to commitments or obligations relating to Aboriginal land rights (Darling, 2012, p.1). While it is much easier to launch a land claim against a registered land, it is much difficult to claim a right over unregistered land. This paper will address the content and significance of the central land rights claims made by indigenous people, mostly indigenous people in Australia. Like other traditional inhabitants, the indigenous people of Australia have been in existence, occupying, and using indigenous land for more than 60 000 years. Although they have greatly evolved with time just like the uses of land, the significance of land in sustaining people and their culture remains. The significance of land to the indigenous people of Australia is in economic, identity, self-determination, and religious purposes (Young, 1995, p.45) In fact, they regard land as the central core of their spirituality to this date. Hence, they claim Aboriginal indigenous land rights that are exclusive to indigenous people over land and exercised individually or collectively. However, when the colonialists inhibited Australia, they did not know of the attachment between the indigenous people of Australia and land. Thus, the land claims by the indigenous people of Australia over Aboriginal indigenous land rights. The struggle for land rights started during the European colonization of Australia (Davis, 1997, p.12). Similar to all land struggles, the land claims by the indigenous people of Australia ended in violence and displacement of the indigenous people from their ancestral land. Indeed, the struggle continues to this date though in different avenues of legal and political systems. In recent times, significant results in fighting for Aboriginal indigenous land rights exist. The court systems have shown utmost respect for these rights and progress of all Australians. Actually, since colonization and after it, different governments and international relations, address Indigenous land claims in varying levels relying on common law, national constitutions, legislations, international law, and treaties. Of concern is that the government of Australia was treating its Aboriginal citizens in an unpleasant manner. It dispossessed them of their land, marginalized them, and even murdered some (Cultural Survival, 2010, p.1). However, the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act of 1976 allows and dictates the requirements and basis for the indigenous people of Australia to claim land rights on cultural grounds. In fact, about 45 % of the Northern Territory is now under the ownership and control of by Aboriginal people (Economic and Social Council, 2007, p.5). Relevantly, In Australia, indigenous people transact land dealings including land claims via the Central Land Council that represents them against the federal government (Dodson et al, p.110-117). The indigenous people have fought and won many land- right claims against the federal government through the Central Land Council. As a result, the Commonwealth, and state or territory governments of Australia grants land to the indigenous people of Australia. Additionally, there have been many land right amendments and laws in Australia allowing the grant of land to Indigenous Australians under specific terms. This has subsequently led to legal ownership and issuance of land titles for traditional purposes to the Indigenous people legal ownership of that land. The native or Aboriginal title confines the land rights of the indigenous Australian people to traditional tenure. An Aboriginal land trust holds the communal title on behalf of the community and only grants interests to other parties upon receiving approval from the traditional owners. The title recognizes sovereignty and is inalienable (Davis, 1997, p.26). Hence, it can pass to the Crown, but is not subject to sale or mortgaging. There are generally two forms of land right claim that include the comprehensive and the specific land claims. The two forms apply selectively. A comprehensive claim arises from a situation where there is a violation on a treaty or a legal regulation on aboriginal land claims and aboriginal land rights. Conclusively, a comprehensive land claim will foster the making and implementation of a land treaty. On the other hand, a specific land claim arises from a disagreement on an existing treaty or legal obligation between the government and the indigenous people. In such a case, the indigenous people believe that the government has failed in adhering to a given commitment on land rights (Darling, 2012, p.1). These are the most common land claims. In the recent times, the indigenous people of Australia demonstrate more organization in their adamant way of claiming for the Aboriginal indigenous land rights (Cultural Survival, 2010, p.1). The most central land rights that the indigenous people of Australia claim for are respect to crown lands, natural resources, and private property. They also claim for recovery of land and statutory land rights, indigenous land use or native title rights, right to protecting of Aboriginal culture and sacred sites, right to prevention of unwanted development and assist with economic projects on Aboriginal land, and right to negotiations on exploration and mining. The statutory land rights and recovery of land are some of the significant land claims by the indigenous Australian people. The British colonies disempowered and dispossessed the indigenous people of Australia from their land and distributed it to the white settlers (MCNEIL, 2004, p. 272). This took place in absence of consultations and compensation to the traditional owners. Hence, the claim for surrender and statutory rights is significant for the oppressed traditional landowners who had no land. The fight gained momentum in the 1990s when the Australian High court started addressing the realities of dispossession by colonial masters and favored indigenous ownership. The statutory rights involved grant of various indigenous interests under legislation (Economic and Social Council, 2007, p.4). The significance of these rights manifests when there is grants to indigenous people land interests. Because of the statutory land right claims, the legal system has established transfer of land processes under law. Hence, the indigenous people can own land. As such, Many Australians now support government efforts in recognizing the indigenous land rights (Woods, n.d, p.1). The Indigenous Land Use or Native title rights and interests is another fundamental claim on land right by the indigenous people. The native title right include right to use, possess, occupy, and enjoy land. It also includes other privileges like the right to gather and hunt. Native title rights involve government recognition of preexisting land rights and interests. Under the Australian law, Native title recognizes the fact that some Indigenous people derive traditional and customary laws, which allow then to continue holding rights to lands and waters (Economic and Social Council, 2007, p.4). Unfortunately, the colonial masters and early governments did not accord these rights to the indigenous people. However, in 1992 the Australian High court recognized indigenous land ownership and ruled that the traditions and customary laws of the Indigenous owners of the land will determine each case native title (Frewen, 2010, P.1). This significantly led to the enactment of the Native Title Act 1993 (NTA) to provide a system for recognizing of these native title rights (Economic and Social Council, 2007, p.4). The government of Australia is also in the process of initiating regulations that will ensure effective implementation of these rights and giving native titleholders and claimants the right to negotiate about some future acts on indigenous land. The native rights also demonstrate their significance by providing social and economic benefits to the Indigenous people of Australia. The indigenous people can now enjoy ownership, possess land, and use it for their benefits. They can also pass ownership to their future generations as the law pertains this. Protecting Aboriginal culture and sacred sites is perhaps the most central land right according to the indigenous Australia people. Land is actually, the core of all spirituality in indigenous Australia (Australian Museum, 2010, p.1). When the Europeans invaded Australia, they did not understand the peoples society, the system of land ownership, as well as the spiritual attachment that the indigenous people had with land (Wood, n.d, p.1). As such, the Europeans dispossessed the Australians from their cultural and sacred sites with uttermost ignorance. However, the Central Land Council represents the indigenous land claims and interests that ensure protection of Aboriginal culture and sacred sites (Dodson et al, p.110-117). These rights are significant in that they accord the indigenous people of Australia access to and maintenance of their places of worship. This restores the traditional cultures and way of worship thus maintains continuity of traditions by enabling passage to future generations. This spiritual relationship between the indigenous people of Australia and their indigenous land is the basis of all indigenous activities. The right to control development, to prevent unwanted development, and assist with economic projects on Aboriginal land is economically significant to the indigenous Australian people. These land rights faces many critics from both the government and other stakeholders. The right included an almost absolute control of the Aboriginal land by the traditional owners. These rights are enshrined in the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act of 1976. Significantly, the exploration and mining rights on Aboriginal land relate to both Northern Territory Mining Act and the federal Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act. Specifically, the Aboriginal Land Rights Act advocates for negotiations before reaching a conclusion on exploration and extraction of minerals on Aboriginal land (Dodson et al, p.110-117). Under the Act, the Australian government cannot override the traditional owners’ wishes regarding development, exploration, and even mining. In case of such proposed activities, the government and the traditional landowners through the land trust, engage in conclusive negotiations regarding the use of the Aboriginal Land for exploration or mining (Young, 1995, p.62). This enables the spending of generated income for long-term economic and social development in the indigenous society. This is of greater economic significance to the indigenous people of Australia. Indeed the traditional landowners make the decision to lease a particular Aboriginal land for development. The owners Land councils offer professional advice to the traditional owners for them to reach at a communal agreement regarding the land in concern (Dodson et al, p.110-117). Upon giving a go ahead to lease the land for development, the Central Land Council acts on behalf of the traditional owners in negotiating a development agreement with the concerned parties. This ensures that the wishes and interests of the traditional owners apply in the agreements relating to exploration and mining on Aboriginal land. Upon getting a mining lease over Aboriginal land, the mining company pays royalties on the value of the minerals extracted from the land through the government to the immediate traditional owners and other victims of the mining project (Dodson et al, p.110-117). This ensures equitability, compensation, and sustainability of indigenous land and life. Actually, the government enforced this right by amending Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act in 2006, to dictate the distribution of 30 per cent turn over from mining to traditional owners and victims of mining in the Aboriginal land. This provides another leeway for getting income after the land resource is taken over by another party. Moreover, the traditional owners can deny the miners exploration license hence hindering mining on Aboriginal land trust area. As a result, the significance of this central land right is undeniable (Dodson et al, p.110-117). In conclusion, I note that issues of land ownership and land use have existed for many decades. There have been conflicts between the European colonialists and the indigenous people of Australia regarding land claims. The indigenous people of Australia faced discrimination and dispossession of their traditional land by the white settlers. The indigenous people of Australia had a sacred and spiritual relationship with their dispossessed land, fought violent, and court battles to reclaim it. It was until 1990s when the high court considered their land claims. The Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act of 1976 and the Central land Council address land claims to the benefit of the traditional landowners and ensure attainment of the central land rights. The various central land rights are significant to the economic, social, and spiritual lives of the indigenous people of Australia. Works Cited Australian Museum 2010, The Land Australian Museum 2010, Viewed 22 March 2012, < http://australianmuseum.net.au/Indigenous-Australia-The-Land> Cultural Survival 2010, Aboriginal Australians—the State of Play Cultural Survival 2010, Viewed 22 March 2012 < http://www.culturalsurvival.org/australia?gclid=CNj01pL8-a4CFcZc3wodIDIlzg> Darling, G 2012, Land Claims and the Six Nations in Caledonia Ontario University of Alberta 2012, Viewed 22 March 2012, Davis, G 1997, Ar̲atjara: aboriginal culture and literature in Australia, Rodopi. Dodson, M et al 2012, the role of the Central Land Council in Aboriginal land dealings Australian National University 2012, Viewed 22 March 2012, Economic and Social Council 2007, INDIGENOUS LAND REFORM IN AUSTRALIA UN 2007, Viewed 22 March 2012,  Frewen, J 2010, Indigenous Land Rights in Australia Our future planet 2010, Viewed 22 March 2012, Landesa 2012, Securing land rights for the world’s poorest people Landesa 2012, Viewed 22 March 2012, Mcneil, Y 2004, The Vulnerability Of Indigenous Land Rights In Australia And Canada, Viewed 22 March 2012, Woods, S n.d, Aboriginal Land Rights in Australia, Viewed 22 March 2012 Young, E 1995, Third World in the first: development and indigenous peoples, Routledge. Read More