What are land rights?
People often forget that the development and prosperity of Australia is in great part a result of dispossessing Aboriginal people of their lands, forcing them into slave labour and and denying them basic human rights.
Australia has long refused to give genuine land rights to Aboriginal people. Sovereign land rights would include the full value of minerals and others resources, prompting conflict with the powerful resources industry.
Land rights would also include genuine autonomy. Together with access to adequate housing they provide the foundation for an economic base so Aboriginal people can be independent and don’t need to rely on government support.
Access, ownership and control of land by Aboriginal people allows for long-term planning and development that will eventually raise their economic, health and social status.
Ross Watson, a Murri from the Dawson River, explains land rights from an Aboriginal perspective : “Land rights means a spiritual and economic base (not in a profit and loss way) and the opportunity to once again become a self-determining people. We are not asking for Land rights to be given or granted – we are demanding recognition of our rights to our own land. Land rights include religious, fishing, hunting and camping rights if currently forbidden on all relevant ‘crown’ land. Land Rights includes our right to refuse mining on any part of our land.”
We appreciate the fact that Indigenous people have rights to their land.—Prime Minister Tony Abbott when visiting the gravesite of land rights campaigner Eddie Mabo on Murray Island in August 2015 
Native Title, Land Rights Act—what’s the difference?
Two powerful legislations about Aboriginal land exist. The Aboriginal Land Rights Act and native title legislation which came from the High Court’s Mabo decision in 1992.
- Native title legislation is about recognising Aboriginal peoples’ connection and rights to land and water.
- Land rights legislation in NSW is about compensating Aboriginal people for past dispossession, dislocation and removal of land.
1966: Start of the land rights movement
In the 1960s, mining occurred on Aboriginal reserves and on Aboriginal land without any consultation or negotiation with Aboriginal people. But in 1966 the issue of land rights was placed firmly into the national spotlight.
In August 1966, 200 Aboriginal stockmen of the Gurindji people and their families walked off Wave Hill pastoral station in the Northern Territory, initially in protest over their wages.
The strike soon spread to include the more fundamental issue about their traditional lands. The Wave Hill walk-off had started the first Aboriginal land claim.
Gary Foley, a Gumbaynggirr historian, recalls : “In the 60s and 70s, we were talking about real land ownership; land that we could have control over, so we could say ‘no, you can’t come in here’ or ‘we want to do this with our land’. That’s what self-determination is – the power to control your own affairs. Ownership of land is fundamental to this in terms of creating the basis for people to survive the attack of colonialism. Land rights is important because it would provide the means by which the Aboriginal community could go through the process of reconstruction and recuperation.”
Ten years later the government ratified the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976.
Although a significant step in the land rights social justice movement, the Northern Territory Act didn’t apply to NSW.
Video: Aboriginal land rights movement
Watch a short documentary on Aboriginal Land Rights in Australia. Created for a Year 10 history assessment.
1983: Land rights movement close to reaching its goal
In 1982 and 1984 Labor Party national conferences endorsed nation-wide land rights, including the core principles that Aboriginal people would control mining on Aboriginal land, as well as enjoy mining royalty equivalents and negotiated compensation for lost territory .
The early 1980s were a time where the Aboriginal land rights movement came very close to achieving its main goal.
In the 1983 federal election the Hawke government had promised legislation to ensure “land rights are achieved for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people throughout Australia and their cultural sites and objects are fully protected” .
In a statement in 1983, Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, Clyde Holding, outlined the government’s five land rights principles :
- Inalienable freehold title for Aboriginal land;
- Full legal protection of sacred sites;
- Aboriginal control over mining on Aboriginal land;
- Access to mining royalty equivalents;
- Compensation for lost land.
1984: Mining industry fights back
Two things thwarted these good intentions: Under Australia’s federal political system, state governments could still make laws of their own, and they also implemented federal land right policies differently or not at all.
And then there was the mining industry.
In resources-rich Western Australia, the mining industry and the pastoral industry, strongly supported by WA Labor Premier Brian Burke, mounted a major scare campaign against land rights .
By December 1984 Burke had successfully introduced legislation which denied Aboriginal communities the right to veto mining or exploratory activities, and restricted land applications to regions of limited economic consequence.
Although the Labor Party had “solemnly pledged” to legislate Aboriginal land rights , Prime Minister Bob Hawke opposed the move. He withdrew his commitment to the Aboriginal veto over mining activities when Burke convinced him that it could cost Labor as many as eight seats in Western Australia.
Hawke blamed the public for being “less compassionate”; but a secret, 64-page report to the party showed that most Australians supported land rights. It was leaked to The Australian newspaper, whose front page declared, “Few support Aboriginal land rights”, the opposite of the truth, thus feeding an atmosphere of self-fulfilling distrust, “backlash” and rejection of rights that might have distinguished Australia from South Africa .
1985: Land rights reduced to rubble
In February 1985, the Hawke government announced a new, revamped Preferred National Land Rights Model, dumping four of the five principles outlined in 1983.
The new model :
- Required no Aboriginal consent for mining on Aboriginal land,
- Prevented land claims over stock routes, stock reserves and Aboriginal-owned pastoral leases, and
- Restricted eligibility for excisions.
The new model omitted the Aboriginal right to veto, as well as access to mining royalty equivalents and compensation for appropriated land.
The Labor government in Western Australia and the Labor government in New South Wales both opposed the proposed national legislation but for different reasons .
The NSW government, backed by Aboriginal organisations, opposed the proposed model because it diluted Aboriginal rights, particularly those already enshrined in the NSW Parliament’s Aboriginal Land Rights Act (1983).
The WA government, backed by the mining and pastoral industries, campaigned against the proposed legislation, arguing it provided Aboriginal people too many rights.
And if that wasn’t already enough, the mining industry’s anti-land rights campaign ran a multi-million dollar advertising propaganda campaign that “any reasonable person might regard as racist” .
1986: The end of land rights
In the face of the public scare campaign by the mining industry and the withdrawal of support by the Western Australian Labor Party, the Hawke government retreated from its own commitments, feebly claiming that most states have made “advances” towards land rights .
This moment represented the end of national land rights.
What happened to land rights was that the mining industry was too powerful, the pastoral industry was too powerful and the Commonwealth government didn’t have the will to stand up to those vested interest group.—Paul Coe, Aboriginal activist, Wiradjuri nation 
Aboriginal political activists continued to campaign through the 1980s, culminating in a rally and march through Sydney on the day of the 1988 Bicentennial.
2014: Legal challenge to invader’s right to land
The Euahlayi Head of State, Michael Anderson, in 2014 demanded the New South Wales and Queensland governments hand over documents which prove their legal right to the land. He made his claim under traditional Aboriginal law .
Michael Anderson challenged the governments to produce documents that show an official transfer of title deeds from the Euahlayi, a declaration of war and a surrender, and state who officiated on behalf of both parties.
Because Anderson expects both governments to be unable to produce what is in effect their proof of ownership, he is fairly confident his challenge will succeed.
I'm claiming land title. We've been there since time immemorial. I want to know how they shifted Aboriginal law, Allodial Title from my mob to their common law system.—Michael Ghillar Anderson 
Land rights in New South Wales
In NSW, the struggle for land rights continued with a number of groups undertaking land claims throughout the state, leading to the Aboriginal Lands Trust being established in 1979.
Former Aboriginal reserves were given freehold title. The Trust had the power to sell or acquire further lands.
In 1980 a Select Committee upon Aborigines submitted its report. The Committee included representatives of all political parties.
A key recommendation of the Report was that Aboriginal land rights was fundamental to Aboriginal self-determination and autonomy, and the economic base needed for Aboriginal self-management depended on providing a viable land base.
Three years later, on 10 June 1983, the Aboriginal Land Rights Act came into effect, recognising the dispossession and dislocation of Aboriginal people in NSW. The Act is a key legislation for land rights in NSW.
The preamble to the Act acknowledges the special nature of the relationship between Aboriginal people and land.
The Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983 established a statutory fund consisting of funds derived from annual payments until 1998 of 7.5% of gross State Land Tax revenue, half of which is set aside as capital to finance Aboriginal development in the future with the balance meeting the costs of land council administration and land purchases.
Today the NSW Aboriginal Land Council does not rely on government funding and is financially independent in all its operations.
Importantly, the Act provides a system of Aboriginal Land Councils that obtain inalienable freehold title to land through the process of land claims, purchase or bequests.
Land rights are fundamental to redressing the past injustices, alleviating social and economic disadvantage.
The NSW Aboriginal Land Rights Act assists Aboriginal people on the path for social and economic independence through the acquisition of land for housing, business enterprises, education and training as well as promoting Aboriginal culture, identity and heritage.
Uluru: A symbolic high point for Aboriginal land rights
On 26 October 1985 the government handed back Uluru (formerly known as Ayers Rock) and Kata Tjuta (the Olgas) to the Anangu traditional owners, an event which marked a high point for Aboriginal land rights.
The Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park became one of the first parks in the world to be managed by a board with a majority of traditional owners .
Joint management was guided by tjukurpa - traditional Anangu law and knowledge.
The park is listed twice as a World Heritage area: for its environment in 1987 and for the global significance of the Anangu living culture in 1994.
Every year more than 300,000 visitors come to the site, with a small minority of them disrespecting the sacredness of the rock.
Many visitors link with Anunga Tours, an award-winning company owned and staffed by Aboriginal people.