The struggle for indigenous civil rights in Australia How does a nation deal with its past? RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS The struggle for indigenous civil rights in Australia

Indigenous Australians occupied Australia for between 40,000 and 60,000 years before white settlers arrived in 1788. With the arrival of British colonists, many Aborigines were killed, both intentionally and through disease, and those remaining were driven from large parts of their traditional land. Government policies throughout the history of white settlement caused changes among Indigenous societies; the effects of which are still being felt today.

TERRA NULLIUS Sir Richard Bourke, the NSW Governor, established the concept of terra nullius in 1835, a Latin term that means ‘nobody’s land’. While the British recognised the existence of Indigenous Australians, they did not recognise Indigenous occupation or use of the land. Bourke’s proclamation meant that indigenous Australians were not legally able to sell or acquire land. Terra nullius became the basis of Australian law until 1992.

NO RIGHTS TO LAND UNEQUAL RIGHTS TO VOTE On 1 January 1901, when the Commonwealth of Australia was proclaimed, its new Constitution made it clear that, except for NT, responsibility for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples was left to the states. It also indicated they would not be included in the census and were not entitled to Commonwealth regulations and benefits, such as wage rulings and pensions. At the start of the 20th century, Australia did not recognise Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders’ rights to their traditional lands. Indigenous peoples were not considered equal members of society and did not have the right to vote in Qld or WA (though they were entitled to in the other states). They were also not allowed to enrol to vote in Commonwealth elections unless already registered in their own state at the time of Federation, denying many of them the vote at federal level.

DAY OF MOURNING, 1938 In 1938, Indigenous activist William Cooper, together with JT Patten and William Ferguson, organised a protest to coincide with the 150 year anniversary of British colonisation. The ‘Day of Mourning’ was held in Sydney on 26 January 1938 at the Australia Hall. Cooper, Patten and Ferguson released a public declaration for the protest, entitled Aborigines Claim Citizenship Rights.

DAY OF MOURNING PROTEST It coincided with a procession of historical floats, a re-enactment of Governor Arthur Phillip’s arrival. William Cooper – “For us it is a Day of Mourning. This is the day we lost our land, lost our spirit culture, lost our language. Today we have no land. No rights.” 1000 Aborigines from different areas met in the Town Hall and presented the “Aborigines Claim Citizenship Rights”. They demanded the federal government to take control of Aboriginal affairs to implement national policy ATSI peoples be granted full citizenship right, including equal rights to education, equality with European workers in pay and conditions, access to pensions, and equal rights to own land, have bank accounts and receive cash wages. It was presented to the Prime Minister Joseph Lyons but no action was taken

ASSIMILATION Governments across Australia favoured assimilationist policies. Assimilation was the idea that Aboriginal people should be made to become as much like European Australians as possible, both culturally and physically. Indigenous culture, language and knowledge were regarded by assimilationists as inferior, and they argued that Aboriginal societies were doomed to die out.

REMOVAL OF CHILDREN A solution proposed by assimilationists was to raise and educate Aboriginal children, where possible, within white households or white-run institutions, in the hope that they would eventually merge into European Australian society. In practice, it meant the break-up of Aboriginal communities, the destruction of culture and the removal of children from their parents (which became known as the Stolen Generations). This caused great suffering for Aboriginal people. Many thousands of children were removed from the mid 1930s to the early 1970s. Additionally, Aboriginal people were often told where to live, what kinds of work to do and even the people they were (and were not) allowed to marry.

LIMITED CITIZENSHIP GAINS In 1941-42, the Commonwealth benefits of child endowment and aged and invalid pension payments were gradually extended to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples. From the 1940s, they could apply to state governments for citizenship certificates which gave them exemption from state protection laws and some basic rights, including the right to attend school and to vote in state elections. However, these certificates required them to abandon their communities and kinship groups and give up their traditional culture. Some people applied for them as they felt the benefits outweighed the sacrifices. Others felt the injustices outweighed the benefits and they did not apply.

EARLY 1960s By the 1960s, Indigenous life expectancy and health outcomes were still much worse than those enjoyed by other Australians. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples still received inferior pay, were not considered citizens and were unable to vote. But attitudes were starting to shift. In 1962, all Indigenous Australians were granted the right to vote in federal elections.

YOLNGU BARK PETITION, 1963 In 1963 the federal government allowed bauxite mining at Yirrkala in the NT. Yolngu leaders objected to the lack of consultation and secrecy. They sent a petition mounted on bark to federal government. Although the petition gained national and international attention, the government did not change its decision. The Yolngu leaders took their case to the federal high court in 1971. Bound by the principle of terra nullis, the judges had to dismiss it, however they recognized for centuries the Yolngu people had been connected to Yirrkala land.

EQUAL PAY, 1965 In 1965, the Arbitration Commission decided to award equal pay to Indigenous workers — a decision that led to some Aborigines losing their jobs as their employers claimed they could no longer afford to pay them.

FREEDOM RIDE, 1965 In 1965, a group of student activists led by Charles Perkins, inspired by the ‘freedom rides’ of the US civil rights movement, started freedom rides of their own. Travelling in buses around NSW, the Australian Freedom Riders sought to highlight everyday practices of racial discrimination against Aborigines in rural Australia. They wanted to show that, in some towns, Aboriginal people were refused entry to pubs, swimming pools and RSL clubs. The Freedom Riders encountered violence, were spat upon and encountered abuse. But they did succeed in showing wider the extent of discrimination that still existed. The Freedom Ride Interview with Charles Perkins

WAVE HILL WALK-OFF GURINDJI LAND CLAIM, 1966 - 1972 The Wave Hill Station walk-off on 23 August 1966 was in response to the British Vestey Company’s refusal to pay the Gurindji pastoral workers wages of $25.00 per week. The Commonwealth had granted ‘equal pay’ to Aboriginal workers a year earlier, but employers were not obeying, and the Wave Hill workers chose to take a stand. The walk-off highlighted the discrimination that existed in Australian society. But it also brought attention to land rights. The Gurindji people petitioned the Governor-General in 1967, arguing that morally the land was theirs and should be returned to them. This claim was refused by the Governor-General.

WAVE HILL WALK-OFF GURINDJI LAND CLAIM, 1966 - 1972 The walk-off finally ended in 1973, and in 1975 one of the decisive moments in Indigenous Australian history took place. Prime Minister Gough Whitlam symbolically poured earth into Vincent Lingiari’s hand as he handed over 3300 square kilometres of land to the Gurindji people. The Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1976 (NT) granted the Gurindji and other Aboriginal tribes in the Northern Territory title to some of their traditional land. For the first time, a specific group of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples had recognition of their connection to their land. From Little Things Big Things Grow

FEDERAL REFERENDUM, 1967 In 1967, the federal Liberal government led by Harold Holt called a referendum asking the Australian people whether the Constitution should be amended to allow Aborigines to be included in the Australian census. The referendum also sought authority for the federal government to make laws for Aboriginal people. The referendum was overwhelmingly passed in all six states with over 90 per cent of voters voting for the changes.

In spite of these successes, many challenges still remained. The issues of land rights, political representation and the Stolen Generations were still unresolved. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people continued to endure inadequate access to health services and education.

ABORIGINAL FLAG, 1971 In 1971, Aboriginal artist Harold Thomas designed the Aboriginal flag. The colours of the flag can be interpreted in different ways: the black could represent the Aboriginal people’s colour or the night sky; the red can be seen as the red earth or as the blood that was shed when the Europeans arrived; the yellow is usually interpreted as representative of the sun.

TENT EMBASSY, 1972 An Aboriginal Tent Embassy was established on the lawn in front of the Australian parliament in 1972, before Whitlam’s election, where it has remained in order to keep the issue of Aboriginal rights in the public eye. The embassy was erected in response to the slow process of land rights. The embassy sought to draw attention to Aboriginal wrongs and grievances. It did so successfully. One of its placards linked it to land rights, reading: ‘White Australia you are living on stolen land.’

COMMONWEALTH RACIAL DISCRIMINATION ACT, 1975 The Racial Discrimination Act made racial discrimination unlawful in Australia and overrode inconsistent States and Territory legislation, making the State or Territory law ineffective to the extent of the inconsistency. The power of the national Parliament to pass this over-riding law arises under the "external affairs" power contained in section 51(xxix) of the Australian Constitution. Racial discrimination occurs when someone is treated less fairly than someone else in a similar situation because of their race, colour, descent or national or ethnic origin.

WHITLAM GOVERNMENT’S POLICY OF SELF DETERMINATION, 1975 When the Whitlam Labor Government came to power in 1972, it introduced significant changes including upgrading the Office of Aboriginal Affairs to the Department of Aboriginal Affairs. The policy of self determination

THE ABORIGINAL AND TORRES STRAIT ISLANDER COMMISSION, 1990 In 1990 ATSIC (the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission) was created.

COUNCIL FOR ABORIGINAL RECONCILIATION, 1991 The Council for Aboriginal Reconciliation was formed in 1991 with the purpose of fostering harmony and reconciliation between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians.

MABO HIGH COURT DECISION, 1992 The Mabo case of 1992 overturned the principle of (the idea that Indigenous people had not ‘owned’ the land before European settlement) In 1982 five Torres Strait Islanders, including Eddie (Koiki) Mabo, began legal proceedings to establish title for the Meriam people to Murray (Mer) Island. It rejected the doctrine of terra nullius which meant the Australian legal system recognised that Indigenous ownership of land may have continued after the British colonisation of Australia. When the High Court said that Australian law recognises native title, it meant that the law recognises the ongoing existence of the customs and traditions through which Indigenous people have a connection to their land. It is legal recognition of those rights that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people have always had. The High Court also confirmed that when Britain gained sovereignty over Australia, it gained 'radical title' over, but not 'full beneficial title' to, the land. This means that while the government has the ultimate power over the land, it does not automatically gain full ownership of it. The government is able, however, to extinguish native title to land when it uses its sovereign power in a way that shows a 'clear and plain intention' to do so. In the Mabo decision, the High Court said that native title had been extinguished on all freehold land and certainly the vast majority of leasehold land. The Fejo case, concerning another land claim, confirmed that a grant of a freehold title to land extinguishes native title to that land permanently. Native title can also be recognised over water, though the full extent of this recognition remains undecided in the courts.

WIK DECISION, 1996 The Wik decision of 1996 asserted that native title could exist alongside pastoral leases. The High Court said that native title can only be extinguished by a law or an act of the Government which shows clear and plain intention to extinguish native title. The laws creating pastoral leases in Queensland did not reveal an intention to extinguish title. The Court found that Queensland pastoral leases had been created to meet the needs of the emerging pastoral industry. The rights and interests of a pastoral leaseholder had to be determined by looking at the relevant statute and at the lease itself. This process showed that the leases in question did not give the leaseholders a right to exclusive possession of the land. Therefore, the granting of a pastoral lease did not necessarily extinguish native title. Native title could exist with the rights of the leaseholder. However, where there is a conflict in the exercise of those rights, native title rights were subordinate to those of the pastoral leaseholder. The rights of pastoralists prevail over any rights of the native title holders.

THE “BRINGING THEM HOME” REPORT, 1997 In 1997, the Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission released the “Bringing Them Home” report on the separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their families, stating that the removal of children had been widespread and continued to have a devastating impact on Indigenous people.

REJECTION OF AN OFFICIAL APOLOGY In 1997, Prime Minister John Howard rejected the idea that an official apology to Indigenous people was needed. During his term, John Howard made it clear that no apology would be made to Australia’s Indigenous people for the past actions of non-Indigenous people or to groups such as the Stolen Generations.

APOLOGIES BY STATE GOVERNMENTS Contrary to the Federal Government’s view, a groundswell of opinion saw state premiers offering such apologies. Queensland started the process with a parliamentary apology on 26 May 1997. Western Australia followed on 27 May South Australia on 28 May the ACT on 17 June New South Wales on 18 June Tasmania on 13 August Victoria on 17 August the Northern Territory on 28 October 2001.

CLOSING THE GAP

KEVIN RUDD’S APOLOGY, 2008 In 2008 the new Labor Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, formally apologised on behalf of the nation