Thousands protest NT intervention on 'sovereignty day'

On February 12, almost 2000 people gathered in the rain at the Aboriginal Tent Embassy in Canberra, before marching, in the sunshine, to Parliament House to demand an end to the federal government's racist "intervention" in the Northern Territory.

The protest, organised by the Sydney-based Aboriginal Rights Coalition (ARC) and Aboriginal communities from all over Australia, was the focus of a week of actions and meetings in Canberra, as Aboriginal, Torres Strait Islander and non-Indigenous activists gathered to send a message to the new Labor federal government that saying sorry was just the first step.

On February 10, the new National Aboriginal Alliance (NAA) held its second meeting. The alliance was formed last year in response to the Howard government's NT "intervention".

Sol Bellear was chosen as president and Pat Eatock secretary. The alliance intends to meet four times a year, and aims to build a new national organisation for Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders.

On February 11, more than 200 people attended workshops on the implications of the UN Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and heard first-hand reports from communities in the NT affected by the ongoing intervention.

However, the main focus of the convergence on Canberra was the protest in opposition to the intervention on February 12. 

Native Title – Regional Land Use Agreements and Indigenous Governance

Introduction 
In the fifteen years since the 1992 decision in Mabo [No. 2],[1] and the subsequent passage through Federal Parliament of the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) (“the NTA”),[2] the prospect of Native Title recognition has fundamentally transformed the formal recognition of indigenous land use and ownership, and the political and legal structures within which indigenous affairs are carried out.

The potential for symbolic, as well as legal, recognition of indigenous priority in Australia, for even a merely implied recognition of sovereignty, and for Native Title to help provide a means to overcome poverty and exclusion, has proved an attraction for some indigenous rights organisations and sympathisers ever since. In reality, it has opened something of a Pandora’s Box, not only for those fearful of its effects on their own interests, but for those hoping to gain the recognition it promised.

The Native Title processes have proved frustrating, expensive, uneven, and often unrewarding, and government, and corporate, opposition to Native Title have further bogged the process down. In recent years, alternative and hybrid approaches to indigenous land claims have evolved, often involving negotiation, agreement and shared use of land – perhaps the most notable of which are the Indigenous Land Use Agreements (ILUAs), an alternative introduced in the 1998 amendments to the NTA as a result of lobbying.[3] However, major problems also shadow their use during the negotiation process, as well as their implementation and their review. 

In response to some of the challenges of the negotiated settlement process, the concept of making Regional, or Statewide, Framework Agreements (RFAs, SFAs) in order to streamline negotiations has gained some popularity. I will look at some of the recent developments in this area below, in particular the process underway in South Australia since 1999, which holds some promise as a template for future negotiations on a similar scale, as well as the development of a more coordinated and effective form of indigenous governance.