The Traditional Owners of this land are those who identify as
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples.

Sovereignty was never ceded.

ANTAR pays respect to Elders past, present, and emerging through our dedicated advocacy for First Nations Peoples’ justice and rights.

ANTAR acknowledges the responsibility of committing to a truth-telling process that promotes an honest and respectful path forward for future generations to build upon.

Enter website
4 minutes

About native title

Last edited: June 4, 2024

Who was Eddie Koiki Mabo and what was the landmark ‘Mabo Decision’ in 1992? Learn about key events in native title and land rights since invasion and what happens when native title fails.

After years of resistance and resilience in the face of colonisation and a system of denial, the claim of native title by Eddie Koiki Mabo was recognised by the High Court of Australia – overturning two centuries of the lie of terra nullius. What followed was the creation of the Native Title Act (1993), which embedded native title at the forefront of the representation of the falsity of terra nullius. In the Preamble, it states:

Justice requires that, if acts that extinguish native title are to be validated or to be allowed, compensation on just terms, and with a special right to negotiate its form, must be provided to the holders of the native title. However, where appropriate, the native title should not be extinguished but revived after a validated act ceases to have effect.

Native title is the recognition under Commonwealth law that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples have rights and interests to lands and waters according to their traditional laws and customs.

Native title laws enacted in 1993 were intended to ‘rectify past injustices’ and raised hopes that the lives of First Nations Peoples would be measurably improved. The Native Title Act attempted to clarify the legal position of non-Indigenous landholders and the process for claiming, protecting and recognising native title in the courts. The native title system ‘lumbers on’, but questions remain about how fair or equitable it is.

Over the last 30+ years, the native title system has become complex, costly and slow, with the odds weighted against Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

Looking back on the more than three decades since the Mabo decision, it is clear that we have made significant progress. But the promise of Mabo has not yet been fulfilled.

TIMELINE

A history of land rights & native title in Australia

 

WHEN NATIVE TITLE FAILS

Although the achievements of Native Title and its progress in Australia is significant, it is an imperfect system that has failed to uphold First Nations interests on many occasions.

  • The failures of Native Title can be seen in the legalised destruction of the culturally significant site Juukan Gorge that was over 45,0000 years old by mining company Rio Tinto. Puutu Kunti Kurrama and Pinikura (PKKP) people negotiated with Rio Tinto in 2011, resulting in an Indigenous Land Use Agreement. Rio Tinto also used section 18 (titled ‘consent to certain uses’) under the Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Act 1972 (WA) as consent to legally impact the rockshelters. In 2015 the PKKP were recognised as Native Title Holders and were given non-exclusive rights to the land, this did not vastly improve the negotiation position for the PKKP. Direct requests to not mine Juukan Gorge were ignored and without notice or consultation the destruction went forward. The legal destruction of Juukan Gorge highlights the prioritisation of mining companies and commercial interests over First Nations Peoples rights and interests, and the inability of Native Title to protect Aboriginal Cultural heritage. Learn more here…
  • Again the limitations of Native Title were demonstrated in August 2019 as the Queensland Government extinguished Native Title and ignored potential breaches of the Queensland Cultural Heritage Act. This allowed and enabled the mining company Adani to destroy multitudes of cultural artefacts in the Charmichael mine. Read more here…
  • Providing evidence to the Yoorrook Justice Commission in April 2024, the Victorian Minister for the Environment, Steve Dimopoulos, acknowledged royalties agreements were intentionally legislated and designed to effectively exclude Aboriginal people from their share of more than $1.5 billion in land use revenue. Dimopoulos agreed that “it was clear that all Crown grants, most forms of leasing, and many forms of licensing will effectively extinguish Native Title”.

To extinguish Native Title is to erode the fundamental basis of First Nations sovereignty on which it was built. Native Title speaks to the inaccuracy of terra nullius, to the rights of First Nations Peoples as the Traditional Owners and custodians of the land, to remove that is to continue to colonise and oppress First Nations Peoples.

Eddie Mabo (left) and Jack Wailu at home on the island of Mer in the Torres Strait Islands in 1990, during the High Court hearings in the Mabo Case, which eventually recognised First Nations Peoples’ title to their lands. Mabo Day is celebrated on 3 June each year.

Resources
Plan
ANTAR Strategic Plan 2024 Read
Factsheet
Land Back Read
Report
ANTAR Impact Report 2019-2023 Read
Submission
Path to Treaty Bill Qld Read
More
Native Title & Land Rights
Native Title & Land Rights Native title vs land rights Read More
Native Title & Land Rights Land Back Read More
Native Title & Land Rights Comprehensive Settlements Read More
Native Title & Land Rights The Timber Creek compensation case Read More