Mabo v. Queensland (No. 2)

The decision of the High Court of Australia in Mabo and Others versus thing Queensland (No. 2) (usually cited as Mabo v. Queensland (No. 2) ) from 1992 is a leading case on the legal status of indigenous peoples within the Commonwealth of Australia. My 1988 was the decision Mabo and Another v. The State of Queensland and Another ( Mabo v. Queensland (No. 1) ) headed.

The decision makes it clear that even before the British colonization of Australia had the local indigenous people a kind of territorial sovereignty over their respective territories and in the colonization thus not exclusively Terra nullius was present. Although the original type of territorial sovereignty could be modified according to occupation by the new sovereign or entirely replaced, but was this a purposeful act of the State necessary.

The Mabo case

In 1982, Eddie Mabo ranged and other indigenous activists claiming through the Murray Islands, which affected both water and land.

In response, the Queensland Government adopted in 1985 the Queensland Coastal Islands Declaratory Act, according to which all the traditional land rights of the islanders had been lost, as the Torres Strait Islands were a part of the colony of Queensland.

Mabo fought the new law with success. It was not accepted in court because of its racist content.

The case Mabo - the demand of the Murray Islands - was taken up again in 1991. Although Eddie Mabo himself was no longer involved in it ( he died in 1992 from cancer ) was the court case is still his name. Since 2001, the manuscripts are included in the list of the UNESCO.

The judgment

After a ten -year process of the High Court of Australia on 3 June 1992 precipitated the decision in the case Mabo v. Queensland, no. 2

According to the judgment, the Aborigines can have rights on public lands such as national parks or had been operated on land on which mining. As yet been no land rights they have on areas where public structures, such as roads or post offices are built.

This right is called Native Title. It includes collective or individual rights to land, which transmits the Aborigines their own legal system, with all its traditional customs and practices.

The Aboriginal people get their Native Title not easy. You need to prove first that they had never taken the country or declared their claims in any way invalidate the government. Under British law extinguished the land rights of Aborigines, once the government has acted with the country, it has sold or leased to individuals. The English crown had always the right to invalidate the traditional right of Aborigines to land and to appropriate without compensation. Second, had to prove the indigenous applicant that they are connected to their traditional right to the land.

The holders of native title will be determined by the law of the Aborigines. Right holder can only be members of the landowning unit (clan / tribe ) or by the indigenous law of succession designated offspring.

The rights to native title have been recorded in the Native Title Act of 1993. You can include hunting, collecting or fishing rights.

The judgment can be summarized in the following points:

• The Murray Islands in the Torres Strait are not the land of the crown.
• The Meriam - nation is entitled to use the islands as the owner.
• Australia was at the time of British colonization of Terra Nullius no, not the continent virtually uninhabited in 1788. Rather, lived and wirtschafteten indigenous peoples with their own culture in Australia for thousands of years before European colonization.
• The right of indigenous peoples is not extinguished by the mere acquisition of sovereignty by the English.

Damages for extinct land rights of indigenous people rejected the law on the other hand.

For leases to cattle farmers in the Mabo judgment two categories were distinguished. In the first part leases that were issued prior to 1975, in the second, that after the enactment of the Racial Discrimination Act in 1975. Former were still valid, the latter, however, lost its validity because they contravened the Racial Discrimination Act.

Impact and response

The ruling had on the different states have different effects. There were a number of laws at the state level, but also at the federal level adopted. On 1 January 1994, the Native Title Act of took effect in 1993. He is to ensure that the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders be given the recognition and status, the toll them because of their history, culture and rights.

In the Northern Territory land claims can now be asserted due to traditional ownership. In Queensland and New South Wales receivables based on historical relationships or needs to be charged.

The verdict sparked as it was to be expected, a wave of different reactions. They ranged from shocked refusal to facilitated enthusiasm. The people of the Meriam evaluates the " Mabo judgment" as a huge success. It even began his story into sections before and graded according to Mabo. Mining and mining companies, however, feared financial losses.

In December 1992, then Prime Minister Paul Keating apologized to the Aborigines: It had been done to them on the part of whites wrong. In addition, apologized on 13 February 2008, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd on behalf of the Australian government in a speech to the Australian Parliament for over two centuries wrongs.