22 INDIGENOUS LAW BULLETIN July / August 2011, ILB Volume 7, Issue 25 was areversalofallpreviousofficialpositions. indigenous peoples should be included inanew preamble Aboriginal peoples andTorresAboriginal Islanders’. Strait ofAustralia custodianship and occupancy original by new preamble shouldcontain:‘Acknowledgment ofthe a Convention recommendedthat The 1998 has arisen. should be altered torecognise Australia’s First Peoples This isnotthefirsttimeissueofwhetherPreamble available ifthepreambleweretobechanged. options various merely indicatedthe new preamble,but Republic Advisory Committee did notrecommend a Australians. some form ofpreambularrecognitionIndigenous political partiesforatleast by thethreemajor support” kind’. a referenceto‘rights but didraisecautionabout presence’, Aboriginal to areference to‘prior no objection an Advisory Committee’s recommended preamble, to the 1988 ConstitutionalCommissioncriticised Asubmission preamble. constitutional the in peoples potential legalconsequencesofareferencetoIndigenous the about warnings historical been numerous There have to potentialundesirablelegalconsequences. identifying thereferencetoAboriginalpeoplesasleading our foundational legal document. legal foundational our consensus on the place Indigenous Australians have in national build a to new opportunity a represents 2010 in The ExpertPanel assembledbytheAustralian Government their degreeofcommunitysupportinDecember2011. for thereferendumand with proposals the Government for aLaborminoritygovernment, Australianthe support requisite the forming Greens in AustralianLabor Party, IndependentAndrewWilkie and agreement madebetweenthe of an bi-product political authors. about constitutionalimplications ‘notforeseen’ by the to makeanyspecificrecommendationincludedconcern Indigenous peoples.’ as Australia’sby virtueoftheirstatus rights continuing that Aboriginal people and Torres Strait islanders have matter tobe ‘considered’ forinclusionwas:‘Recognition Recognising Peoplesinthereamble: Indigenous 12
Malcolm Turnbullsubsequently citedthe advice 11
The adviceoftheActingSolicitor-General had 3 The Expert Panel The to back report due to is Implic 6
Such consensusthatareferenceto ations, Issuean 1 Whilst the Panelthe Whilst the is 2 thereis“inprinciple (updated byKristynGlanville,2011) 10 9
The failure The failure
5 7 The 1993
A further of any by AnneWinckel 4 8
realising substantivechange. that anewpreamblemightbe asteppingstonetowards for wider constitutionalreforminthefuture, butconsider of Australia’. occupation prior Aboriginal as issues such controversial is probablyfarsafer,‘It to makereference not then, Solicitor-General,of theActing the timethat: at writing the preamble’snonlaw-makingstatus. Aboriginal peoples in the preamble, and so they emphasise of areferenceto for reconciliation symbolic importance of thereformers.Theidealists motivations to Indigenous peoples has highlighted the diverse Debate overthelegalsignificanceofareference Indigenous peoplesinanewpreamble. ‘irrelevant’ and ‘outofplace’ toinclude areference to Australians’ • • • matters: the following generally includedinformationabout have Proposedpeoples references toIndigenous preambular land, and Indigenous cultural status. land, andIndigenouscultural of the of theland,care(orcustodianship) to occupation party orconstitutionalconvention:namelymattersrelated enjoyed adegreeofendorsementbysomepolitical have that preamble arethose some future in implementation The matters thathave the greatest likelihood of • • view thatpreambular recognition should be accompanied Commissioner MickGoodaareofthe as SocialJustice place of our first peoples’ first ofour place the uniqueandspecial ‘[recognising] terms: circumspect the Liberals have framed their support inrather more • sovereignty, andtraditionalownership. in termsofrights, the Greenshasframedthisrecognition and TorresPeople Islander Strait only ingeneralterms, all three majorparties supportrecognisingAboriginal dispossession oftheland; ownership oftheland; occupation oftheland; distinct culturalstatus; care oftheland; continuing rights. d In 24 13 terpretation respectively.
Sir Harry Gibbs argued that it was basically Sir HarryGibbsarguedthatitwasbasically 16 20 23 and ‘recognition of Indigenous ofIndigenous ‘recognition and 17 19 15 26 and
Indeed, commentators such Indeed,commentatorssuch 18 21 25 Whilstatpresent, hope Thestrategistshope 14 22 focus onthe Laborand preamble islikelytodo. about thedispossession ofIndigenous peoplesasany distraction fromthecoremattersofreform. scepticism, peopleswith ofIndigenous recognition preambular a desire reformscausesthemtoapproach for substantive of the instrument. preamble isstillconsideredtobeanonlaw-makingpart a is adopted,inallinstances, interpretation constitutional anapproachtoNo matterhowradicallyprogressive peoples S breadth of the reference. the thatpoliticalpressurewillconstrain but preamble, is behindthecalltorecogniseIndigenouspeoples in the reform-oriented groups,recognisethatpublicopinion Pragmatiststhegroups and conservative , fromboththe by othersubstantivechanges: admissible incourt. and their recital,butprimafacieevidenceofthetruth; the opinionsofLegislature;nottruebyvirtue preamble, istoacknowledge thatthey are evidence of The traditionalapproachtostatementsoffactina others have arguedthat others considered tobe partiallyinaccurate. the currentpreambularreference totheCrown is now be subjecttojudicialdisregard inthefuture,justas means thatthefactsrecitedwithin itmightconceivably In anycase,thenonlaw-making natureofapreamble ownership ordispossessioninapreamble. a referenceto reject to caused somecommentators has is inaBillofRights. in anew preamble, asthe appropriate place forsuchaword argued thatitisimportanttoavoidusingtheword ‘rights’ McKenna Mark ofapreamble, status non law-making has the with consistent remain to order In culture. of that culture’ would not automaticallymakelawfulallaspects preambular recitals.Similarly, areference to ‘continuing respect toIndigenous peoples, purely by virtueofthe with would notbeauthorisedtolegislateonanymatter in propertylaw. Furthermore,the Federal Government legal title of landwouldnotestablish ownership about would notbeadeclarationoflaw;andstatement rights’ tatus to ofthereference Indigenous discrimination –namelyss25and51(xxvi). of the Constitution that permit, enable or anticipate racial – it will also allowus to remove the provisions within the body chance toreconstructour national identity throughrecognition [The forthcomingreferendum]notonlyprovidesuswitha 29 considering the preamble proposal to be a to preamble proposal the considering 31 32 33 Thus, a referenceto ‘continuing Itispartlythislegal status that Mabo’s Case 36 28
Finally, therearethosewhose 35 established as much as established 37
27 30 34
However, preambles. governing of theordinaryprinciples the application with in fact thejudgmentsarelargelyconsistent indicates that Australian constitutionalpreamblebytheHighCourt people, ormustbe only beneficial tothem. to Aboriginal be detrimental power can under therace over whetherlawscreated debate hasoccurred Judicial ‘for whomitisdeemed necessary tomakespeciallaws’. Firstly, theracepowerins51(xxvi)includesstatement, provisions. of atleastthreeconstitutional interpretation the to respect with arguments could foreseeablyleadto A reference toIndigenous peoples inanew preamble actually is. of stemmed fromamisunderstanding what“preamble” the significanceoaapreamblehasactually surrounding of Australia.”Much oftheconfusionandmisinformation something completelynewlikea“declarationofthepeople were proposed was notactuallya“preamble”butrather assess than the verydifferent scenario, whereifthe text that easier to of suchtextismuch significance constitutional nature aspartofanActParliament. Thelegaland “preamble” –withreferencetothepreamble’sestablished is infactdraftedasa Constitution before thesubstantive constitution assumes thatany new preamble inserted Analysis ontheinterpretiveroleofpreambleto peoples Indigenous Interpretive role to ofthereference of Australia. preambles wereintendedtobeappliedtheConstitution statutory the ordinaryprinciplesgoverning indicate that and courts, commentators by earlydrafters, Comments inform thesentencingoutcomesofAboriginaloffenders. Wales courtshaveutilisedAboriginal Customarylawto the criminal law,issue within contentious asNewSouth is the status oflaw.Aboriginal customary Thisisalready a culture, Indigenous continuing of adebateabout context which couldpotentiallyberaised inthe Another matter of Australia. federal structure of the very fabric the challenges which such asLesMalezer have arguedforself determination, the RightsofIndigenousPeoples, manyAboriginalleaders of the light recently in decades, andmore would beleftopen.Thirdly,recognition preambular for altered by would beentrenchedor position this whether that thejusttermsprovisiondoesapplytoAboriginalLand, 51(xxxi). Whilst for theacquisitionofpropertyonjusttermsinsection can arguablyberelevanttotheapplicationofprovision issues ofIndigenousownershipanddispossessionland 38 44 However there is no doubt that the distinctive thereisnodoubtthatthe distinctive However 43 A review of the treatment of thecurrent Areviewofthetreatment Wurridjal vCommonwealth 39 40
Secondly, the determined Declaration of 41 42
23 INDIGENOUS LAW BULLETIN July / August 2011, ILB Volume 7, Issue 25 24 INDIGENOUS LAW BULLETIN July / August 2011, ILB Volume 7, Issue 25 to theintendedmeaningoftext. of thedrafterswithrespect a goodguidetotheintentions to the preamble -emphasisesthefactthatis role andacontextual a constructive both accords - which A traditional Actof Parliament approachtointerpretation make nodifference to the current constitutional situation. peoples could any referencetoIndigenous that arguable which areunder-agepolygamous orinvolving girls. marriages be usedtoprohibit power ins51(xxi)cannot distinct Indigenouscultureindicatesthatthemarriage a reference to preambular a that to argue untenable is it Forstatus. substantive the preamblea according instance, in constitutionalinterpretationwithoutinadvertently there couldbelittleinfluence in thewiderConstitution, peoples. However,a principlewasreflected unlesssuch of protectiontheequalityandrightsIndigenous could leadprinciple to theinferenceofaconstitutional rights or culture Indigenous to reference preambular interpretation ofambiguousprovisions.Potentially, a principles, andthepreamblemightindicateapreferred confirm theexistenceofvariousunderlying constitutional adopted, then potentially apreamble could be used to If amore progressive Act of Parliament approach is matters ofself-determination areraised. be influencedandno would not provision terms the just be restrained, power couldnot race the environment, this the preamble,thensubstantivetextwillprevail.In the textintendstoapplybeyondscopeof clear that were applied to a new constitutional preamble, new constitutional a were appliedto preambles statutory governing principles traditional the If and literalism. intention oforiginal approaches alongside thetraditional judicial progressiveapproaches areincreasingly being seen demands of constitutional interpretation mean that the amended s51(xxvi).Iftheminority viewofKirbyJin was confirmation of aprinciple already evident in the a progressivecourtmightconsider thatanewpreamble been the subject of debate because of its ambiguity, and respect totheracepower. Theracepowerhasalready However, adifferentargumentmightbeputwith the argument. new preamblecouldprobablybeusedonbothsidesof as aguide to apreferred interpretation isthefactthata result. One of the disadvantagesof using anew preamble inconceivable thatthedrafterswouldintendsuchalegal on the meaning of thetext. on themeaning substantive provision, the preamble will have no influence is comprehensivelyclearincomparisontotheambiguous Hindmarsh Island BridgeCase 45 47
Furthermore,where itis 49 46 wereadopted with Unless the preamble Unlessthepreamble
then it is it then 48 Itis negotiations. government bodies and otherprivateinterestsfollowing consented tobytherelevantIndigenouscommunities, Titleare Agreements Land Use and Indigenous claims this areaisfarmoresettled,andalargenumberofNative taken intheyearsfollowingMabo’sCase.Thelaw has insignificant incomparisonwiththedirectionthatlaw are the implications that a persuasiveargumenttosuggest orownershipofland,thereisstill refer tocustodianship as highlightedby to be altered by future amendmentstotheNative Title Act, 2008 Apologyby former Prime MinisterKevin Rudd was demonstratedthroughthe discoursefollowingthe welfare schemestargetedat Indigenous people.This facilitate communalrightsmoregenerally, forexample, for exampletheStolenGenerations,orfundingto recognition wouldattractcompensationforpastinjustices, may focusonbroaderquestionsofwhetherpreambular A potential area ofcontentionforthe presentdebates of the apology. wasowed on whetherornotcompensation on thebasis at thestationhomestead.’ suggest[ed] thatwearenothingmorethangardeners Australiansand ownersoftheland, as thecustodians offensive inthatitdeniedofIndigenous the ‘truestatus Patrick Dodson consideredthereferendum proposal constitutional interpretation. radical influencesallowed by such aliberalapproachto surely beovershadowedorswampedbyothermore occurred, then the legal effect of any preamble would constitutional interpretation,andintruth,ifsuchachange in Australianshift would beacompleteparadigm This text oftheconstitution. equal statuswiththesubstantive adopt awhollynew approach whichgivesthepreamble likely or appropriatethattheAustralianHigh Courtwill provision,itisnot to clarifyanambiguousconstitutional the possibility of progressivecourtusinganew preamble to laws thatwere ‘beneficial’ and notdetrimental. Despite power race limited the which interpretation an support that anewpreamblemightbeusedbytheHighCourtto respect tothenatureof the racepower, itisconceivable of stewardshipandcareland,notownership. word ‘custodianship’ -awordthatarguablyonlyspeaks the finalreferendumproposaldidnotevenuse recommendation ofthe 1998Constitutional Convention, new preamble.However,were includedina despitethe and compensationifareferenceto‘ownership’ofland debate wastheimplicationsformattersofnativetitle The mostcontroversialissueinthe1999referendum principles establishedinMabo’sCase 53 Also, it is now evident that the common law Also,itisnowevidentthatthecommonlaw 57 Inasimilarvein, whilstthepreambles Yorta Yorta. 52 Evenifanewpreambledid 55 50
54 havethepotential 51 56
vision’. butalsothe‘nation’s which areimportant, Constitution reminded usthatitisnotonlythesubstantiveclausesof of New SouthWales, Glanville toreflectmorerecentdevelopments. 2000) 214.The 2000 Case Study has been updated by Kristyn Presentand Future (LLMThesisUniversityofMelbourne, Preamblethe Past,Constitution, the Commonwealth to Winckel,The Constitutionaland LegalSignificanceof This article is based ona Case Study contained in Anne on the part of thelegislature. on thepart and defensiveness of insincerity impression create an to is arguablybothunnecessary,and bound inappropriate, approach an referendum. Such the 1999 failed at which accompany preambles–includingtheproposeds125A provisions thathavebeen non-justiciability proposedto power ofapreambleisparttherationaleforvarious misguided viewaboutawildly elevated viewofthelegal provide foramuchbroaderjudicialreferencepoint.This and so a preamblecouldbetreatedlikeBillofRights, in Australia.Court that would bemisguidedtothink It of Parliamentto preamblesusedbytheHigh approach Act permitted bythetraditional goes farbeyondanything People.proposed judicialtreatmentofapreamble Such ofIndigenous tolimittherights purports legislation which to pay compensation or curtailing them from enacting governments forcing or determininglawsuits, legislation courts mightutilise the preamble when interpreting recognitions providedappearstoreflectthefearthat ofthe nature Theexpresslynon-binding meaning. recognition attractsnorights,liabilitiesorinterpretive Australians,Indigenous the that they alsoexpresslystate have allbeen State Constitutionsamended to recognise of symbolismintheConstitution. commentators, to lose sight of the equally important issue a new preamble hascausedtheGovernment,andother to oflegalityinrelation matters with preoccupation Such accompanying non-justiciabilityclause. would betohavean then thecommonsenseapproach the peopleofAustralia” ratherthanatrue“preamble,” proposed text is actually more like a“declaration of a nation. and rare opportunity, toreframe and reset our relationship as and moving forward as one, united nation... Thiswillbea great people... It's notaboutlookingback. It's aboutlookingforward reform is not just about Aboriginaland Torres Strait Islander [I]t isimportantthatallAustralian’s areawarethatconstitutional 63 InthewordsofMickGooda: 64 58 Victorian 61 Nevertheless, if thefinal Nevertheless, 59 and Queensland 62 GatjilDjerrkura 60
21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 ‘Communique’, 4 3 2 1 Act 1991 See, thepreambles tothe rights’: Frank Brennan(1999). Eg, ‘continuous rights’: Lowitja O’Donoghue (1996);‘continuing John Howard(23.3.99)&Referendum proposal(6.11.99). Islander Commission(1993);‘ancientandcontinuingcultures’: Eg, ‘distinct culturalstatus’:Aboriginal andTorres Strait Strait IslanderCommission(1993). (1987); ‘dispossession anddispersal’:AboriginalTorres Advisory CommitteeonIndividualandDemocraticRights Eg, ‘neverceded ownership’: ConstitutionalCommission Islander Commission(1993). ‘traditional titlestotheland’:AboriginalandTorres Strait Committee onIndividualandDemocraticRights(1987); Eg, ‘previouslyowned’: Constitutional CommissionAdvisory kinship withtheirlands’:Referendumproposal(6.11.99). Eg, ‘custodians of ourland’:Oppositionparties(29.4.99);‘deep ‘nations firstpeople’:Referendumproposal(6.11.99). Eg, ‘priorandcontinuing occupiers’: Frank Brennan(1999); Griffith Society, August1999)9. Sir HarryGibbs,‘A Preamble: TheIssues’ (Paper, TheSamuel Malcolm Turnbull, TheReluctant Republic (1993)182. Options –TheAppendices Republic AdvisoryCommittee, Ibid, 137. Ibid, 138-41. Final Report oftheConstitutionalCommission Constitution Committee onIndividualandDemocraticRightsunderthe ownership’: ConstitutionalCommission,Report oftheAdvisory owned andoccupiedbyAboriginalpeopleswhoneverceded Australiaisanancientlandpreviously peoples: ‘Whereas The rejectedproposal includedareference toindigenous Republic: TheOptions- The Report, vol1(1993)9,137. 1(1988) 2,101;RepublicAdvisoryCommittee, See, eg, Final Report Commission oftheConstitutional Ibid, 47. February 1998,vol1,ReportoftheProceedings, 46. Brennan, above n2. islander-/>. november-2010/recognising-aboriginal-and-torres-strait- November 2010)
, ,