Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Aboriginal land rights in australia uk essay
History of health status of aboriginal young people
Aboriginal land rights in australia uk essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Aboriginal land rights in australia uk essay
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders were hunters and gatherers back to the time of the Dreaming. The concept of land ownership as it was not a part of their world view. The reason why, is because the land is the Aboriginal peoples ‘Mother’, who has supported and protected the people for many tens of thousands of years. To the indigenous peoples, arguing over who owns the land, was like two fleas arguing over who owns the kangaroo they were living on. The ‘Mother’ or land, was something that cannot be owned. If anything the ‘Mother’ owns the people, and the Aboriginal people are obligated to maintain the lands natural balance. As such when the British colonies arrived, the Aboriginal people made no claim to the lands. The invading Colonies …show more content…
They were deprived of their lands and scared sites. Punished and humiliated in detention camps. The Aboriginal population was overwhelmed by diseases brought in the wake of European settlement. For which they had no immunity, and many died. The change of diet brought by the Europeans, upset the natural and balanced diet that was found from hunting and gathering. Diabetes, heart disease, obesity and alcoholism are now common problems among the Aboriginal population. The indigenous people were also exploited as cheap labour, if they were lucky enough to get payed. More often than not, they were paid with food or alcohol. Once the European way of life was imposed on the people, they were denied the right to practise their own culture, language and Dreaming. This meant a significant loss of Aboriginal identity. (Australians-Together, …show more content…
It supported the removal of Aboriginal children from their families. It was thought at the time that children would be more easily assimilated into white society. Unfortunately it was founded on the assumption of black inferiority and white superiority. As such this legislation was aimed at allowing the Indigenous people to “die out” through a process of natural elimination, or to integrate where possible into the white community. These children became the stolen generations. Over 100,000 children were forcibly taken from their families and communities and place in a white societies. Many grew up never knowing their parents, heritage, language and culture. There are still many families that suffer from the devastating events of the past
Indigenous Australians have faced many changes to their original life style, with numerous policies being brought in. These policies had an incredible affect on how the indigenous Australians lived. The policies inflicted on the indigenous Australians varied widely and had numerous impacts. The policies of assimilation, protection and integration had mainly negative impacts on the community, causing loss of identity, language and religion. The policies of self-determination and reconciliation, had mostly positive effects to the indigenous Australian community, creating a stronger bond between black and white Australians, encouraging the concept of closing the gap between indigenous Australians and non-indigenous Australians. These policies had an incredible influence on the indigenous Australians life, changing many ways they lived. The policies changed the path of history for all Australians.
The National Apology of 2008 is the latest addition to the key aspects of Australia’s reconciliation towards the Indigenous owners of our land. A part of this movement towards reconciliation is the recognition of Indigenous Australians and Torres Strait Islanders rights to their land. Upon arrival in Australia, Australia was deemed by the British as terra nullius, land belonging to no one. This subsequently meant that Indigenous Australians and Torres Strait Islanders were never recognised as the traditional owners. Eddie Mabo has made a highly significant contribution to the rights and freedoms of Indigenous Australians as he was the forefather of a long-lasting court case in 1982 fighting for the land rights of the Torres Strait Islanders. Eddie Mabo’s introduction of the Native Title Act has provided Indigenous Australians with the opportunity to state claim to their land, legally recognising the Indigenous and the Torres Strait Islanders as the traditional owners.
Parbury (1999:64) states that Aboriginal education “cannot be separated” from the non-Aboriginal attitudes (racially based ethnocentricity that were especially British ie. white and Christian) towards Aborigines, their culture and their very existence. The Mission Schools are an early example of the connection between official education policies and key events in Aboriginal history. Aboriginal children were separated from their parents and placed into these schools which according to McGrath (as cited by Parbury, 1999:66) it was recommended that these establishments be located ‘as far as possible’ from non Aboriginal residents so as to minimize any heathen influence that Aboriginal children might be subject to from their parents. Mission Schools not only prepared Aboriginal youth for the manual labour market but also, adds Parbury (1999:67) their aim was‘to destroy Aboriginal culture and replace it with an Anglo-European work and faith ethic.’ Despite the NSW Public Instruction Act (1880) which made education free, secular and compulsory for all children Aboriginal children could be excluded from public schools based on prevailing dominant group attitudes. Consequently, the NSW Aborigines Protection Act (1909) was introduced as a result of a perceived public education crisis and Laws had already been passed, similar to protectionist type policies. This Act gave the State the power to remove Aboriginal children from their families whereby this period of time has become known as ‘Stolen Generations.’ It was during this time that Aboriginal children were segregated from mainstream schools. (Parbury, 1999; Lippman, 1994).
Struggles by Aboriginal and Torres Strait islander people for recognition of their rights and interests have been long and arduous (Choo & Hollobach: 2003:5). The ‘watershed’ decision made by the High Court of Australia in 1992 (Mabo v Queensland) paved the way for Indigenous Australians to obtain what was ‘stolen’ from them in 1788 when the British ‘invaded’ (ATSIC:1988). The focus o...
The journey for the Aboriginals to receive the right to keep and negotiate land claims with the Canadian government was long but prosperous. Before the 1970's the federal government chose not to preform their responsibilities involving Aboriginal issues, this created an extremely inefficient way for the Aboriginals to deal with their land right problems. The land claims created by the Canadian government benefited the aboriginals as shown through the Calder Case, the creation of the Office of Native Claims and the policy of Outstanding Business.
Discussion Ancient Aboriginals were the first people to set foot on the Australian continent, over 40,000 years or more before colonization (Eckermann, 2010). They survived by hunting and gathering their food, worshipping the land to protect its resources, and ensuring their survival. The aboriginal community has adapted to the environment, building a strong framework of social, cultural, and spiritual beliefs (Eckermann, 2010). Colonisation of Australia began in 1788, when Englishman Captain Cook claimed the land as an empty, uninhabited, continent giving it the classification Terra Nullius and leaving it open to colonization. Eckermann (2010), stated that the English failed to recognise the aboriginal tribes as civilized, co-inhibiters of the land, feeling they had no right to a claim.
In 1992, the doctrine of terra nullius was overruled by the High Court in the case Mabo v Queensland (No.2) [1992] HCA 23. After recognising that the Meriam people of Murray Island in the Torres Straits were native title landholders of their traditional land, the court also held that native title existed for all the Indigenous people in Australia prior to European contact. To make the legal position of landholders and the processes that must be followed in claiming native title clear, the federal government passed the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth). The Native Title, which was drafted in 1993, attempted to provide a fair and just method of dealing with land in the future. However one of the fundamental flaws of the native title system is that the concept of native title was based on the prejudiced principle that the Crown had the power to extinguish traditional indigenous ownership of the land. Although the government could have been able to amend the flaws of the Native Title Act following the High Court’s decision in relation to the Wik Case, which laid the rules for co-existence and reconciliation of shared interests in the land, they failed to do so. Amendments to the Native Title Act in 1998 undermined any benefits the Indigenous people could have received, and provided the already-powerful non-Indige...
Before the Indigenous Australians gained Land Rights in Australia, in 1788 the East Coast of Australia was claimed by the English Monarch and was called Crown Land. The reason behind the English Monarch's claim for Crown Land was that they believed that that land was “terra nullius”, meaning land belonging to no one”. In 1976 the Northern Territory was the first state government to allow Indigenous Australians to claim Crown Land and reserves in the Northern Territory that no one had the use for. Commission and increased funding was also granted to Indigenous Australians through the 1975 Racial Discrimination act made by the Whitlam Government. These acts and decisions were then overruled against in 1985 by the High Court. Article 8 “everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution of law” and Article 16 “the family (...) is entitled to protection by society and the State” of the UDHR are evidence of the discrimination Indigenous Australians faced by the government as they were once again stripped away of their human rights and land titles. Indigenous Australians only began to grant land from the English Monarch after the case between Mabo and others versus the State of Queensland took place that decided in favour of
Indigenous Australian land rights have sparked controversy between Non Indigenous and Indigenous Australians throughout history. The struggle to determine who the rightful owners of the land are is still largely controversial throughout Australia today. Indigenous Australian land rights however, go deeper than simply owning the land as Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders have established an innate spiritual connection making them one with the land. The emphasis of this essay is to determine how Indigenous Australian land rights have impacted Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, highlighting land rights regarding the Mabo v. the State of Queensland case and the importance behind today’s teachers understanding and including Indigenous
Many Native groups, because they were nomadic, didn't see land as belonging to one person. The idea that someone could come in, claim a piece of land and ban them f...
Since the time of federation the Aboriginal people have been fighting for their rights through protests, strikes and the notorious ‘day of mourning’. However, over the last century the Australian federal government has generated policies which manage and restrained that of the Aboriginal people’s rights, citizenships and general protection. The Australian government policy that has had the most significant impact on indigenous Australians is the assimilation policy. The reasons behind this include the influences that the stolen generation has had on the indigenous Australians, their relegated rights and their entitlement to vote and the impact that the policy has had on the indigenous people of Australia.
The decision upheld the claims of five plaintiffs from Murray Island that Australia was occupied by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people who had their own laws and customs, and whose 'native title' to land survived the Crown's invasion. Therefore, the court recognised the presence of native title as part of Australian common law.
The Australian Government believed that in the early 1900’s in order to maintain white culture they should subject all indigenous to their beliefs. The removal of children from Aboriginal parents was not a new idea, it had been happening for almost a decade before becoming the Stolen Generation. The removal policy was stepped up with the introduction of the assimilation policy. The whites believed that they were the dominant culture and their way of life and culture was the only way. Throughout the stolen generation the Australian public were led to believe that Aboriginal children were disadvantaged in their own homes and would benefit more in a white household. The “Aboriginal Protection Board” believed that if the children were living in white families being separated from their families, community, land and culture it would eventually phase out the indigenous peoples. However this decision to remove the children was not beneficial and has caused much hatred from the Aboriginals toward the Australian government.
Overall the colonization of Australian is a major health determinant for Indigenous Australians in many ways. Many Indigenous Australians are still being affected by the invasion and are trying to live life in a new way to what they are accustomed to. The colonization led to many deaths, diseases, wars, violence and lifestyle changes which will all continue to make life difficult for the Indigenous.
When the English settlers arrived on Australian shores in 1776 (The Story of the Australian People, 2010), they didn’t see anything that represented that the land was owned, so they claimed it as their own under ‘terra nullius’ in 1776. “In International Law 'terra nullius' describes territory that n...