DOCSLIB.ORG

Draft History

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Draft History Draft History - Murray Island Group, national heritage assessment Murray Island Group and the Meriam People The people of the Murray Island group are known as the Meriam people and Miriam Mir is their language. The Murray Island Group is three Torres Strait islands, Mer (also referred to as Murray Island), Dauar, and Waier (both uninhabited) on the north eastern fringe of the Torres Strait Islands. Collectively they are referred to as the eastern Torres Strait. The other seventeen inhabited islands are divided into the central and western Torres Strait, with no common genealogical and language base connecting them (MS 9518 1990:75-78). At the time of European contact, generations of Meriam people had been engaged in small scale agriculture and farming on the fertile and permanently inhabited Mer Island, while their central and western neighbours were fisher people (MS 9518 Moynihan 1990:10-15; 82). Gardening was considered incompatible with fishing and appropriate rituals and prohibitions existed to separate these (MS 9518 Moynihan 1990:11-15). A major distinction of the social organisation of the Murray Island Group was the absence of totems and the focus on enhancing individual garden productivity (MS 9518 Moynihan 1990:78). Prestige was dependent on gardening prowess with techniques passed from father to son by descent or adoption and associated with the growing of coconuts. Excess produce was available for exchange for death, marriage and adoption ceremonies and to sustain those engaged in cultural rituals. In 1871 the London Missionary Society (LMS) arrived in the Torres Strait with Samoan teachers (MS 9518, Moynihan 1992:100). This event is referred to and celebrated annually as 'The Coming of the Light' (Keon-Cohen 2000:21). In 1877 the LMS established their headquarters on leased or purchased land on Mer, building a church in 1879. They withdrew from the island in 1891 (Keon-Cohen 2000:11). The Pacific Island Protection Act 1872 set up to protect islanders and stamp out blackbirding, was amended to include the Murray Islands in 1875 (High Court of Australia 1992:3). In 1878 the Thursday Island Police Magistrate administering the islands, set up an informal law and order system to assist in keeping the peace. Meriam Islanders were asked to select a 'Mamoose' or 'chief', who was responsible for the good behaviour of his countrymen (MS 9518 Plaintiffs' Statement of Fact 1990:10). The Mamoose was supported by local constables and provided with a government boat. Most notably, the Torres Strait Islands came under Queensland's administrative control when it was annexed under the Queensland Coast Islands Act in 1879 (MS 9518 Moynihan 1990:102). The purpose of the annexation was to: command the Torres Strait and sea lane to India, control the fishing and pearling industries, protect the natives (who were now British citizens) and their property; defend the area; and extend their jurisdiction to non-British subjects (High Court of Australia 1992:5). The Murray Islands has never had any permanent immigrant population (High Court of Australia 1988:2; High Court of Australia 1992:1). In the early 1890's requests were received from the Mamoose to the Queensland authorities to remove Murray Islanders tenants (currently living on the South Sea Islands) who were in dispute with their landlords over the ownership of crops (MS 9518 Plaintiffs Statement of Facts 1982:9-10). This included 'objectionable characters' considered trespassers (High Court of Australia 1992:5). In 1891 Alfred Haddon led the first Cambridge Anthropological Expedition to study and record details of Torres Strait Island life including mapping land ownership and recording customs, genealogies and a Bomai-Malo cult ceremony (MS 9518 Moynihan 1992 162-173). J S Bruce was appointed school Headmaster, government adviser and Treasurer to the Murray Islands in 1892, when courts were established in Queensland Aboriginal communities (Keon-Cohen 2000:16). Bruce resided on Mer till 1934 and: recorded births, deaths and marriages; oversaw the 'system of self government'; maintained and updated Island Court records; and sent Annual Reports to the Director of Aboriginal Affairs Queensland. This included overseeing the Mamoose's actions, to deal with minor offences including land disputes and the spending of local fees (MS9518 Moynihan 1992:142); (MS 9518 Plaintiffs' statement of fact 1990:13; High Court of Australia 1992:6-7). From 1899 elected councillors assisted the Mamoose and in 1923 an elected Chairman replaced him. In 1912 the Torres Strait Islands including the Murray Islands became permanent Aboriginal Reserves for the use of the Aboriginal inhabitants and an Island Fund was set up to administer them. The Queensland Government purchased several portions of land in 1913 for administrative purposes including a Court House, Jail House and recreation reserve, public hall and school (MS 9518 Plaintiffs Statement of Facts 1982:18). In 1924 a public meeting discussed government interference in the payment of locals working as pearlers. In 1928 the people of Dauar moved to live on Mer. In 1936 Torres Strait Islander fishermen objected to the control and regulation of their pearling boats and earnings by the Protector of Aboriginals and went on an extended strike. The first Triennial Council of all Torres Strait Islanders was held in 1937 (MS 9518 Plaintiffs Statement of Facts 1982:9-19). The Island Court was formalised by the Torres Strait Islander Act (Queensland) in 1939 '…in accordance with Island customs and practices and can make and execute by-laws' (MS 9518 Plaintiffs Statement of Facts 1982:20). Unresolved cases could be appealed by the eastern islands representative to the Torres Strait Islands Representative Council and to the Director of The Department of Aboriginal and Islander Advancement, on occasion. The Island Court was still operating in 1981, at the time of the commencement of the High Court case (MS 9518 Moynihan 1990:44; High Court of Australia 1992:6). Meriam People's identity and autonomy Meriam people wanted 'to sustain and reinforce their separate and distinct culture and society' within the Torres Strait (MS 9518 Moynihan 1990:112). From the 1960's, Murray Islander identity was revived with a focus on orally recording and publishing Malo foundation stories for the Murray Islands. Between 1973 and 1978 Torres Strait Islanders petitioned the Queensland government when borders were negotiated and redrawn between Australia and Papua New Guinea. From the plaintiff's perspective, the Queensland Government supported their aspirations to assert their unique cultural and political identity, and retain their rights to their islands and their Australian citizenship (MS 9518, Plaintiffs Statement of Facts, 1990:23). The 1982 Torres Strait Triennial Conference recorded ninety-nine percent of Meriam people had expressed their desire to have freehold title to their land (MS 9518, Plaintiffs Statement of Facts, 1990:25). In 1984 a Commonwealth Government survey of traditional seas and fishing rights concluded Meriam people 'own and use the fish traps, clam gardens, crayfish houses and have fishing rights on the fringing reefs and claim an area of the sea, reefs and banks around Murray Island' (MS9518 Plaintiffs Statement of Facts 1982:26). Although closely administered by Queensland, Meriam people not only considered they owned the land but they also had a degree of autonomy. From the plaintiff's perspective; the community had controlled access by allowing and removing tenants and had never allowed an immigrant population to settle; Murray Island Court decisions were binding; and Murray Islander representation evolved over time from a government appointed Mamoose to elected representation on the Murray Islands and regional Torres Strait Representative Councils. References to the incorporation or adherence to Torres Strait Islands customs was acknowledged in some of the rhetoric supporting the subsequent Queensland Acts and numerous Queensland reports. For example: the Torres Strait Islander Act (Queensland) 1939 claimed it was in accord '… with Island customs and practices and can make and execute by- laws' (MS 9518 Plaintiffs Statement of Facts 1982:20), and the 1958 Deputy Director of Native Affairs report stated: 2 'A complete system of self government, which gives to them home rule and a very definite control in their guidance of their destiny as a race within the Commonwealth of Australia. It also preserves the dignity and the traditions of the Torres Strait people and permits the incorporation in their by-laws of self government, many of the finer tribal laws and traditions' (MS 9518 Plaintiffs Statement of Fact 1992:21). In the early 1980's the Queensland Government enacted several pieces of legislation for the Torres Strait, including de-gazetting or revoking Aboriginal reserves under DOGITS (Deeds of Grant in Trust), the most influential of which for the Meriam People's case, was the Queensland Coast Islands Declaratory Act 1985. Among other things, these changes threatened to limit Murray Islander residency and replace their Council with a Trustee under the Land Act 1962 (QLD) 'with the power to lease and power to terminate traditional occupation' (High Court of Australia of Australia 1988:2; Keon-Cohen 2000:8). At the same time many families moved from the Murray Islands to the mainland in response to the lack of fresh water and limited work opportunities (Keon-Cohen 2000:15). Indigenous rights In the national and international arena, universal human and Indigenous rights were being challenged and recognised through: conventions such as Article 5 of the United Nations International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination 1966; acts such as the Racial Discrimination Act (Commonwealth 1975); and the Yolngu people's (Gove) Native Title case in the Northern Territory High Court. Prior to 1967, under the Australian Constitution the Commonwealth could not make laws for Aboriginal people in the states. On 27 May, 1967 a National Referendum resulted in an overwhelming ‘Yes’ vote, and gave the Commonwealth power to legislate for Aboriginal people (potentially over-ruling State arrangements) as well as counting them in the census.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Eddie Mabo and Others V. the State of Queensland, 1992. 1 the Significance of Court Recognition of Landrights in Australia
    Kunapipi Volume 14 Issue 1 Article 3 1992 Eddie Mabo and Others v. the State of Queensland, 1992. 1 The Significance of Court Recognition of Landrights in Australia Merete Falck Borch Follow this and additional works at: https://ro.uow.edu.au/kunapipi Part of the Arts and Humanities Commons Recommended Citation Borch, Merete Falck, Eddie Mabo and Others v. the State of Queensland, 1992. 1 The Significance of Court Recognition of Landrights in Australia, Kunapipi, 14(1), 1992. Available at:https://ro.uow.edu.au/kunapipi/vol14/iss1/3 Research Online is the open access institutional repository for the University of Wollongong. For further information contact the UOW Library: [email protected] Eddie Mabo and Others v. the State of Queensland, 1992. 1 The Significance of Court Recognition of Landrights in Australia Abstract In Australia, Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders have made much less use of the courts in the struggle for recognition of their rights to the land than, for example, the Indians in North America have. There have only been two major landrights cases in Australia; the first one, Milirrpum and others .v Nabalco and the Commonwealth, was brought by the Yolngu of north-eastern Arnhemland in 1969 in protest against the granting by the federal government of a mining lease to Nabalco on their land. The case was decided by the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory in 1971. The second case, Mabo and others v. the State of Queensland was an action initiated in 1982 by the Meriam people from the Torres Strait Islands to prevent an increase in government powers over their land.
    [Show full text]
  • TORRES STRAIT REGIONAL AUTHORITY Docip ARCHIVES
    TORRES STRAIT REGIONAL AUTHORITY doCip ARCHIVES 19'" SESSION OF THE WORKING GROUP ON INDIGENOUS POPULATIONS 23-27 JULY, 2001 GENEVA ADDRESS BY THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE TORRES STRAIT REGIONAL AUTHORITY MR TERRY WAIA Madame Chair Distinguished Members of the Working Group Minister Ruddock Indigenous Members of the World Ladies and Gentlemen Once again, this is indeed an honour and a pleasure. To meet with all of you here today who have travelled from every comer of the globe to share your experiences, hopes and aspirations, is not only a rewarding experience but is most encouraging as we continue to persevere towards our many and varied goals. My name is Terry Waia and I stand here today as a representative of the people of the Torres Strait Islands in Australia. This is the second time that I have had the privilege to represent my people at a session of this Working Group and I welcome this opportunity to inform you of the progress we are making in our region. The Torres Strait is a unique and beautiful part of the world, home for my people, the Torres Strait Islanders. We are of Melanesian origin and our population of approximately 8000 live amongst 17 island communities scattered across a 150km expanse of sea separating mainland Australia from the south coast of Papua New Guinea. In the Torres Strait I hold two key positions, that of Chairperson of Saibai Island, one of the region's northern most islands, and Chairperson of the Torres Strait Regional Authority (TSRA), a Commonwealth Government authority that was established in 1994 by the Parliament of Australia.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix a (PDF 85KB)
    A Appendix A: Committee visits to remote Aboriginal and Torres Strait communities As part of the Committee’s inquiry into remote Indigenous community stores the Committee visited seventeen communities, all of which had a distinctive culture, history and identity. The Committee began its community visits on 30 March 2009 travelling to the Torres Strait and the Cape York Peninsula in Queensland over four days. In late April the Committee visited communities in Central Australia over a three day period. Final consultations were held in Broome, Darwin and various remote regions in the Northern Territory including North West Arnhem Land. These visits took place in July over a five day period. At each location the Committee held a public meeting followed by an open forum. These meetings demonstrated to the Committee the importance of the store in remote community life. The Committee appreciated the generous hospitality and evidence provided to the Committee by traditional owners and elders, clans and families in all the remote Aboriginal and Torres Strait communities visited during the inquiry. The Committee would also like to thank everyone who assisted with the administrative organisation of the Committee’s community visits including ICC managers, Torres Strait Councils, Government Business Managers and many others within the communities. A brief synopsis of each community visit is set out below.1 1 Where population figures are given, these are taken from a range of sources including 2006 Census data and Grants Commission figures. 158 EVERYBODY’S BUSINESS Torres Strait Islands The Torres Strait Islands (TSI), traditionally called Zenadth Kes, comprise 274 small islands in an area of 48 000 square kilometres (kms), from the tip of Cape York north to Papua New Guinea and Indonesia.
    [Show full text]
  • Torres Strait Islanders: a New Deal
    The Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia TORRES STRAIT ISLANDERS: A NEW DEAL A REPORT ON GREATER AUTONOMY FOR TORRES STRAIT ISLANDERS House of Representatives Standing Committee on Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander Affairs August 1997 Canberra Commonwealth of Australia 1997 ISBN This document was produced from camera-ready copy prepared by the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs and printed by AGPS Canberra. The cover was produced in the AGPS design studios. The graphic on the cover was developed from a photograph taken on Yorke/Masig Island during the Committee's visit in October 1996. CONTENTS FOREWORD ix TERMS OF REFERENCE xii MEMBERSHIP OF THE COMMITTEE xiii GLOSSARY xiv SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS xv CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE.......................................................................................................................................1 CONDUCT OF THE INQUIRY ......................................................................................................................................1 SCOPE OF THE REPORT.............................................................................................................................................2 PRELIMINARY OBSERVATIONS .................................................................................................................................3 Commonwealth-State Cooperation ....................................................................................................................3
    [Show full text]
  • Cape York Region Islanders #1 Non Freehold Land Tenure Sourced from Department of Resources (QLD) March 2021
    141°0'E 142°0'E 143°0'E 144°0'E 145°0'E Buru & Erubam Le Warul Kawa Masig People Ugar (Stephens Claimant application and determination boundary data compiled from NNTT based( Doanrnbloeuyndaries with areas excluded or discrete boundaries of areas being claimed) as To determine whether any areas fall within the external boundary of an application or and Damuth Islanders) #1 data sourced from Department of Resources (Qld) © The State of Queensland foIsr ltahnadt etrhse)y # h1ave been recognised by the Federal Court process. determination, a search of the Tribunal's registers and People portion where their data has been used. Where the boundary of an application has been amended in the Federal Court, the databases is required. Further information is available from the Tribunals website at map shows this boundary rather than the boundary as per the Register of Native Title www.nntt.gov.au or by calling 1800 640 501 Topographic vector data is © Commonwealth of Australia (Geoscience Australia) Claims (RNTC), if a registered application. © Commonwealth of Australia 2021 Gebara 2006. The applications shown on the map include: Cape York Region Islanders #1 Non freehold land tenure sourced from Department of Resources (QLD) March 2021. - registered applications (i.e. those that have complied with the registration test), The Registrar, the National Native Title Tribunal and its staff, members and agents - new and/or amended applications where the registration test is being applied, and the Commonwealth (collectively the Commonwealth) accept no liability and give As part Yofa mthe transitional provisions of the amended Native Title Act in 1998, all - unregistered applications (i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • The Torres Strait Islands Collection at the Australian Museum
    TECHNICAL REPORTS OF THE AUSTRALIAN MUSEUM The Torres Strait Islands Collection at the Australian Museum Stan Florek 2005 dibi-dibi, breast ornament, Mer, AM E.17346 Florek • Torres Strait Islands Collection A M AUSTRALIAN MUSEUM Technical Reports of the Australian Museum may be purchased at the Australian Museum Shop · www.amonline.net.au/shop/ or viewed online · www.amonline.net.au/publications/ Technical Reports of the Australian Museum Number 19 TECHNICAL REPORTS OF THE AUSTRALIAN MUSEUM Director: Frank Howarth The Australian Museum’s mission is to research, interpret, communicate and apply understanding of the environments The Editor: Shane F. McEvey and cultures of the Australian region to increase their long- term sustainability. The Museum has maintained the highest standards of scholarship in these fields for more Editorial Committee: than 175 years, and is one of Australia’s foremost publishers of original research in zoology, anthropology, Chair: G.D.F. Wilson (INVERTEBRATE ZOOLOGY) archaeology, and geology. The Records of the Australian Museum (ISSN 0067- M.S. Moulds (INVERTEBRATE ZOOLOGY) 1975) publishes the results of research on Australian S.F. McEvey (EX OFFICIO) Museum collections and of studies that relate in other ways J.M. Leis (VERTEBRATE ZOOLOGY) to the Museum’s mission. There is an emphasis on S. Ingleby (VERTEBRATE ZOOLOGY) Australasian, southwest Pacific and Indian Ocean research. I.T. Graham (GEOLOGY) The Records is released annually as three issues of one volume, volume 56 was published in 2004. Monographs D.J. Bickel (INVERTEBRATE ZOOLOGY) are published about once every two years as Records of V.J. Attenbrow (ANTHROPOLOGY) the Australian Museum, Supplements.
    [Show full text]
  • Autonomy Rights in Torres Strait: from Whom, for Whom, for Or Over What?
    Autonomy rights in Torres Strait: From whom, for whom, for or over what? W.G. Sanders and W.S. Arthur No. 215/2001 ISSN 1036-1774 ISBN 0 7315 2650 3 Will Sanders is a Fellow and Bill Arthur a Research Fellow at the Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research, The Australian National University. CENTRE FOR ABORIGINAL ECONOMIC POLICY RESEARCH DISCUSSION PAPER NO. 215 iii Table of contents Abbreviations and acronyms ...............................................................................iv Summary .............................................................................................................v Acknowledgments ................................................................................................v Introduction ........................................................................................................ 1 Calls for autonomy, and existing and proposed governance structures ................ 4 From whom? ....................................................................................................... 8 For whom? .......................................................................................................... 9 For or over what? .............................................................................................. 12 Autonomy, Australian federalism, and regional ethnic diversity: A concluding comment ...................................................................................... 15 Notes................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Past Visions, Present Lives: Sociality and Locality in a Torres Strait Community
    Past Visions, Present Lives: sociality and locality in a Torres Strait community. Thesis submitted by Julie Lahn BA (Hons) (JCU) November 2003 for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the School of Anthropology, Archaeology and Sociology Faculty of Arts, Education and Social Sciences James Cook University Statement of Access I, the undersigned, the author of this thesis, understand that James Cook University will make it available for use within the University Library and, by microfilm or other means, allow access to users in other approved libraries. All users consulting this thesis will have to sign the following statement: In consulting this thesis I agree not to copy or closely paraphrase it in whole or in part without the written consent of the author; and to make proper public written acknowledgment for any assistance that I have obtained from it. Beyond this, I do not wish to place any restriction on access to this thesis. _________________________________ __________ Signature Date ii Statement of Sources Declaration I declare that this thesis is my own work and has not been submitted in any form for another degree or diploma at any university or other institution of tertiary education. Information derived from the published or unpublished work of others has been acknowledged in the text and a list of references is given. ____________________________________ ____________________ Signature Date iii Acknowledgments My main period of fieldwork was conducted over fifteen months at Warraber Island between July 1996 and September 1997. I am grateful to many Warraberans for their assistance and generosity both during my main fieldwork and subsequent visits to the island.
    [Show full text]
  • Ed. Kit Front & Back Cover
    IlanIlan PasinPasin this is our way Torres Strait Art EducationEducation KitKit NOTES FOR TEACHERS About The Exhibition With an identity unique to itself, the culture of the Torres Strait Islanders is relatively unfamiliar to the majority of Australians. Since European settlement non-indigenous Australians have largely subsumed Torres Strait Islanders into the culture of Aboriginal Australia. Ilan Pasin is the first major exhibition of Torres Strait Islander art ever seen in Australia and your visit will be one that you and your students will find to be an enriching and rewarding educational experience. Some things are known by mainstream Australians about the Torres Strait, one being that it is the birthplace of Eddie Mabo who fought and won the first great land rights battle. What is less known is the significance of the place of cultural objects in establishing a tradition and the occupation of land. These objects were originally gathered in 1898 by anthropologists of the Haddon expedition from Cambridge University and now 100 years later one of these holdings has come back on loan from Cambridge to sit beside the artworks of young contemporary Torres Strait Islanders. The Haddon expedition was the first to use film to document social anthropological findings and stills from these as well as other insights can be viewed on the Cambridge website at http://cumaa.archanth.com.qc.uk/museum.html Haddon belonged to a group of scientists who were developing Darwinian biology; their findings helping to depose evolutionary theories about European superiority and scientific racism. The exhibition is best considered in three sections.The first shows traditional artefacts from the time before European occupation.The second shows works of an ‘in-between’ period with western In part of the exhibition influences evident and the third and major part of the exhibition features the vibrant and alive there are a lot of prints.
    [Show full text]
  • Mabo Screening with Rachel Perkins at University of Johannesburg
    Mabo Screening with Rachel Perkins University of Johannesburg 19 April 2017 Welcome and let me add my thanks to all of you for attending today’s screening of the film, Mabo. My name is Ben Playle and I’m the Australian Deputy High Commissioner to South Africa. I’m particularly grateful to our partners here at the University of Johannesburg for hosting us today: Professor Ade Adebajo of the Institute for Pan-African Thought and Conversation; Dr Rookaya Bawa of the Library; and Professor Phyllis Dannhauser of the Department of Journalism, Film and Television. Many thanks to you and your staff. Above and beyond even our hosts, allow me to thank our special guest, Ms Rachel Perkins, for accepting the Australian High Commission’s invitation to visit South Africa for the first time. It’s a great pleasure to have you in town for a few days. As I’m sure you’ve already experienced, the legacy of apartheid continues to cast a long shadow across South Africa, including in relation to the issue of land. The forced movement of particularly black South Africans during the apartheid era has given rise to calls for redistribution of land, including calls from some for the expropriation of land without compensation. Those calls are rarely far from the surface of South African politics, and sometimes, as recently, make controversial headlines. 1 The issue of land is also at the centre of the film directed by Rachel that we’ve just seen. Rachel has spent the past 25 years telling the stories of Indigenous Australians, our Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, through film.
    [Show full text]
  • English Text Summary Notes
    ENGLISH TEXT SUMMARY NOTES Mabo Text guide by: Peter Cram & Kay Perry Mabo 2 Copyright © TSSM 2017 TSSM ACN 099 422 670 ABN 54 099 422 670 A: Level 14, 474 Flinders Street Melbourne VIC 3000 T: 1300 134 518 F: 03 90784354 W: tssm.com.au E: [email protected] Mabo 3 Contents AUTHOR NOTES ......................................................................................................................................... 5 HISTORICAL CONTEXT ............................................................................................................................ 5 TEXT STRUCTURE ..................................................................................................................................... 6 Location ..................................................................................................................................................... 6 Historical context ....................................................................................................................................... 6 Social context ............................................................................................................................................. 6 Economic context ....................................................................................................................................... 6 Political context ......................................................................................................................................... 6 Significance of the setting .........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Australian Aboriginal Land Rights in Transition
    University of Arkansas System Division of Agriculture [email protected] | (479) 575-7646 An Agricultural Law Research Article The Mabo Decision: Australian Aboriginal Land Rights in Transition by Gary D. Meyers & John Mugambwa Originally published in ENVIRONMENTAL LAW 23 ENVTL. L. 1203 (1993) www.NationalAgLawCenter.org ARTICLE THE MABO DECISION: AUSTRALIAN ABORIGINAL LAND RIGHTS IN TRANSITION By GARY D. MEYERS* AND JOHN MUGAMBWA** In Eddie Mabo and Others v. The State of Queensland, the High Court of Australia recognized the existence of native title to lands hitherto annexed under Imperial Authority. In so doing, the Court rejected the fiction of terra nullius and found that native title was not inconsistent with the Crown's radical title over its acquired lands. The existence of native title, the Court held, does not depend upon positive acts of recognition, rather it arises from proof that a group has a right to use or occupy particular land­ including uses tied to the community's traditional lifestyle. In drawing upon international law to bolster its conclusions, the High Court ushers in a new era for aboriginal land claims and portends new directions for Australian jurisprudence. I. INTRODUCTION No English words are good enough to provide a sense of the link between an Aboriginal group and its homeland. Our word 'home,' • Senior Lecturer in Law, School of Law, Murdoch University, Perth, West­ ern Australia. LL.M. 1991, University of Pennsylvania; J.D. 1982, Northwestern School of Law of Lewis and Clark College; B.A., cum laude 1970, University of Southern California. •• Senior Lecturer in Law, School of Law, Murdoch University, Perth, West­ ern Australia.
    [Show full text]