Resources and publications

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 Productivity Commission’s inquiry into regulation of the Australian marine fisheries and aquaculture sectors sought to identify opportunities to improve fisheries regulations without compromising fishery policy and environmental objectives. The terms of reference included the extent to which fisheries management regimes align with and protect the interests of the wider community, including Indigenous fishing interests, and the extent to which fisheries management regimes support greater participation of Indigenous Australians, incentivise Indigenous communities to manage their fisheries, and incorporate traditional management practices.

The AIATSIS submission responds to the Commission’s draft findings, providing advice on recognising Indigenous customary fishing as a sector in its own right, and recommending that Indigenous peoples are made active partners in the regulation and management of marine fisheries, rather than just being consulted.

The submission notes that while any changes to the regulation of these sectors must be consistent with native title rights, customary fishing as a recognised sector should not be confined to Indigenous groups which have recognised native title. New regulatory definitions of customary fishing also do not necessarily need to exclude commercial fishing activities.

Management of fisheries must be done in partnership with Indigenous peoples, and requires greater understanding of the diverse benefits that customary fishing brings to Indigenous communities, the historical processes which have led to the exclusion of Indigenous fishers, and the capacity of Indigenous land and sea management organisations to play a direct role in fisheries management with appropriate support.

The submission also recommends greater regulatory support for increasing Indigenous participation in the commercial fishing sector, as a means of creating sustainable livelihoods for many Indigenous communities.

This paper discusses the current state of play regarding income tax and GST issues in relation to native title agreements, including recent reforms and ongoing areas of uncertainty.

This paper argues that weak links are being made between increasing opportunities for economic development (including private home ownership) and the need for Indigenous land tenure reform. The paper draws on a considerable body of background research and analysis, including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples’ collective views about Indigenous land tenure reform and their aspirations for protecting and not diminishing their hard-won gains through native title determinations and statutory land rights grants or acquisitions; the composition and location of the Indigenous estate and
the land titling revolution that has taken place over the past 50 years; the geographic spread of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander population around Australia and on the Indigenous estate; the origins of the Commonwealth’s Indigenous land tenure reforms from the Reeves Review of the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976 (Cth) in 1997 and its trajectory to June 2016; the current land dealing provisions (private sale, leasing and mortgaging) in the statutory Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander land rights schemes and the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) and how they facilitate or hinder economic development and/or private home ownership aspirations; and how the mainland states and the Northern Territory have (or have not) responded to the Commonwealth’s Indigenous land tenure reform agenda over the past decade.

A large and profitable Indigenous heritage management industry has emerged in the wake of the resources boom of recent decades, with thousands of Indigenous heritage impact assessments conducted every year. Yet few governments have successfully reformed heritage laws to accommodate native title rights, and conflict over site destruction is regularly front page news.

The right to protect sites brings together a range of authors who explore native title and Indigenous heritage regimes around the country, and charts the history of advocacy and policy development, highlighting the successes, limitations, inequalities and opportunities of current arrangements.

This article evaluates the taxation concessions and other advantages that flow from being a charity and how these might apply to native title groups under the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth). Specifically, it examines the role of the Prescribed Body Corporate (‘PBC’) under the Native Title Act and the potential for, and limitations of, these bodies carrying on business, engaging in community development and accumulating funds whilst also having charitable status. 

Mr Hughston SC will discuss the approach taken by the Court in Griffiths v Northern Territory of Australia (No 3) [2016] FCA 900 (Timber Creek) to the assessment of compensation and in particular the division of the award of compensation into components of economic and non-economic loss. Mr Hughston SC will discuss the uncertainties associated with both components.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community governance can be greatly impacted by the nature of the land tenure held or managed by the community. The fragmented system of national and state regimes which provide grants or titles of land to Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander people has enabled a governance landscape where there are often overlapping rights to land. This creates a situation where relationships within an Indigenous community – and even within a traditional owner group – are competing for power and control. This is most notable with respect to how different community organisations compete for community funding, the durability of culturally appropriate governance structures and the taking of natural resources.

The ability of an Indigenous community to resolve potential conflicts, created by the recognition of native title and adapt to the post-determination landscape also impacts upon a communities’ ability to respond to external pressures such as land use planning, water management and government initiated tenure reform processes. Often these conflicts appear between Registered Native Title Bodies Corporate and community or local shire councils – who have historically played the role of land manager and program administrator. This paper looks at the role of cultural governance in supporting the recognition of Indigenous landholdings and the reasons that Indigenous landholdings, in their current form, have failed to be effective in adequately mobilising economic, social and cultural resources to achieve social, cultural, environmental and health benefits in remote Indigenous communities in Western Australia and Queensland.