Resources and publications

This report provides insights into a digital approach to returning native title materials using digital forensic analysis. Great volumes of hardcopy and digital materials can be interrogated with a keyword search once ingested into a NUIX database to retrieve relevant documents. It provides step-by step diagrams and the ETNTAC Native Title Materials Policy and Procedure.

This report, conducted for the Department of Regional Development, addresses the question of how effective agreements arising from native title determinations are at meeting the needs and aspirations of Aboriginal peoples who have achieved, or are pursuing (through registered native title claims), legal recognition as native title holders. The report research is based on a review of relevant academic and ‘grey’ literature as well as case studies of the experiences of three Western Australian Aboriginal native title groups in their efforts to leverage agreements with government and industry to enhance their wellbeing and pursue their aspirations.

Since 2016, AIATSIS has contributed to a number of reviews of the CATSI Act including the Technical Review of the CATSI Act (2017) and CATSI Review Phase 1 (2020). Throughout this report, the AIATSIS researchers refer to the AIATSIS submissions for both of these reviews.

In Australia today there are an estimated 8000 to 9000 Indigenous organisations, many of which are incorporated under Commonwealth, state or territory legislation. Their governance work is often seen by Indigenous people as nation-building: an expression of self-determination and a way of reconceptualising relations with governments and asserting unique cultural traditions.

The effective governance of these organisations is critical to attracting funding, promoting sustainable economic activity and building resilient communities. It is now recognised that Indigenous governance and the governance of governments are intertwined and the latter is receiving greater critical scrutiny.

A growing number of research projects, governance building initiatives and practical resources are providing evidence of what works, what doesn’t and why. But the opportunities to evaluate this evidence, consider strategic priorities and build collaborations are limited.

On 29–30 July 2014, AIATSIS and AIGI convened an Indigenous governance forum in Canberra to provide such an opportunity. In preparation, a survey of Indigenous governance research, practical resources and future needs was widely circulated. This report provides a synthesis of ideas, comments, issues and possibilities identified through the survey and the forum.

This report marks the first major review of ‘connection’ in native title claims—central to native title determinations—since the introduction of the Native Title Act. The report also examines authorisation of persons bringing native title claims and joinder of parties, and includes 30 recommendations for reform.

The Prescribed Body Corporate (PBC) research snapshot series has been developed to share findings from the Native Title Research Unit’s (NTRU) investigation into the constitutions and financial reports of PBCs. This research forms part of the PBC Capability project which aims to develop a long-term national picture of the PBC sector. This snapshot examines the decision-making processes identified by PBCs within their constitutions including voting processes, quorum requirements and the use of independent directors.

The Prescribed Body Corporate (PBC) research snapshot series has been developed to share findings from the Native Title Research Unit’s (NTRU) investigation into the constitutions and financial reports of PBCs. This research forms part of the PBC Capability project which aims to develop a long-term national picture of the PBC sector.

This snapshot looks at the dispute management processes within PBC constitutions, examining the use of NTRBs, independent mediation and elder’s councils to resolve disputes.

In the Native Title ‘hot tub’ outlines the history and development of expert conferencing and expert concurrent evidence in Australia, including in the Federal Court. These approaches to expert evidence are a major development of the last decade, greatly reducing the hearing time of Native Title proceedings and the costs to the parties involved. The authors explore how expert conferences and concurrent evidence can narrow the issues in the Native Title claims of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, discussing in particular their experiences in four recent cases.

For native title holders, the ability to exercise native title rights for commercial purposes is crucial to full and meaningful participation in the social, cultural and economic life of Australia. This article examines the extent to which native title gives its holders the power to manage resources, govern their use and exploit them commercially.

Outlines the treatment of income tax under native title agreements

In August 2016, the traditional owners of Timber Creek in the Northern Territory, the Ngaliwurru and Nungali peoples, were awarded over $3.3 million for the loss of their native title rights. $1.3 million of this award was a solatium payment, that is, compensation for hurt arising from damage caused by the loss of connection to the land. Griffiths v Northern Territory of Australia (No 3) [2016] FCA 900 (Timber Creek), which was heard by Justice John Mansfield, is the courts first litigated award of compensation for the loss or impairment of native title rights. In making his decision, Justice Mansfield relied on the evidence of anthropologists when assessing not only connections to country, but also the qualities and consequences of the social impacts that accompany the loss of connections to country. This paper considers the implications of the Timber Creek decision for the work of native title anthropologists and highlights some of the conceptual and methodological shifts required for research on native title compensation claims. The author draws attention to the demanding nature of native title compensation cases and the potential for research to aggravate existing trauma associated with loss of country, arguing for the need for all involved to be attentive to this risk when pursuing future claims.

Recommended citation: 

McGrath, PF 2017, Native Title Anthropology after the Timber Creek Decision, Land, Rights, Laws: Issues of Native Title series, vol. 6, no. 5, AIATSIS Research Publications, Canberra.

Under the Native Title Act 1993, the Social Justice Commissioner is required to prepare a Native Title Report each year for federal Parliament. Through these reports the Commissioner gives a human rights perspective on native title issues and advocates for practical co-existence between Indigenous and non-Indigenous groups in using land.

The report focuses on the amendments to the Native Title Act 1993 which were passed on 8 July 1998. 

Under the Native Title Act 1993, the Social Justice Commissioner is required to prepare a Native Title Report each year for federal Parliament. Through these reports the Commissioner gives a human rights perspective on native title issues and advocates for practical co-existence between Indigenous and non-Indigenous groups in using land. 

The Native Title Report 1999 considers the principles upheld by the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) in light of the 1998 ammendments to the Native Title Act.

Under the Native Title Act 1993, the Social Justice Commissioner is required to prepare a Native Title Report each year for federal Parliament. Through these reports the Commissioner gives a human rights perspective on native title issues and advocates for practical co-existence between Indigenous and non-Indigenous groups in using land. 

This report examines:

human rights and native title

• the extinguishment of native title
• native title and sea rights 
• indigenous heritage and native title.

Under the Native Title Act 1993, the Social Justice Commissioner is required to prepare a Native Title Report each year for federal Parliament. Through these reports the Commissioner gives a human rights perspective on native title issues and advocates for practical co-existence between Indigenous and non-Indigenous groups in using land.

This report examines human rights standards relevant to the recognition of native title and the legal recognition of native title.

Under the Native Title Act 1993, the Social Justice Commissioner is required to prepare a Native Title Report each year for federal Parliament. Through these reports the Commissioner gives a human rights perspective on native title issues and advocates for practical co-existence between Indigenous and non-Indigenous groups in using land.

This report examines,

• native title and the right to development
• native title policies throughout Australia
• native title and agreement making.

Under the Native Title Act 1993, the Social Justice Commissioner is required to prepare a Native Title Report each year for federal Parliament. Through these reports the Commissioner gives a human rights perspective on native title issues and advocates for practical co-existence between Indigenous and non-Indigenous groups in using land.

Under the Native Title Act 1993, the Social Justice Commissioner is required to prepare a Native Title Report each year for federal Parliament. Through these reports the Commissioner gives a human rights perspective on native title issues and advocates for practical co-existence between Indigenous and non-Indigenous groups in using land.

Under the Native Title Act 1993, the Social Justice Commissioner is required to prepare a Native Title Report each year for federal Parliament. Through these reports the Commissioner gives a human rights perspective on native title issues and advocates for practical co-existence between Indigenous and non-Indigenous groups in using land.

Under the Native Title Act 1993, the Social Justice Commissioner is required to prepare a Native Title Report each year for federal Parliament. Through these reports the Commissioner gives a human rights perspective on native title issues and advocates for practical co-existence between Indigenous and non-Indigenous groups in using land.