Antinuclear

Former Prime Minister Howard aimed to take away any real land rights from Aboriginal people

In his endeavours to protect country for non-Aboriginal people, John
Howard was unclear and ambiguous as to “which land areas should be
classified in the ‘national interest’, but (this) was done with a
clear desire to take away any rights for Aboriginal people”

Australia: Howard Knew Aborigines Had A Sovereignty Based Land Right
Indigenous Peoples Issues and Resources, 2012, 3 Jan 2013,
A prominent Aboriginal sovereignty campaigner argues that former prime
minister, John Howard, amended the Native Title Act in 1998 because he
was fully aware of the inherent power of Aboriginal peoples based on
their continuing sovereignty.

“With the passage of time it is now painfully obvious that former
Prime Minister, John Howard, fully realised that Aboriginal peoples
maintain a very powerful position in Australia,” Michael Anderson
writes.

Mr Anderson is spokesman of the Sovereign Union of First Nations and
Peoples in Australia, launched on 26 January in Canberra, and leader
of the Euahlayi nation. He is the last survivor of the four men who
founded the Aboriginal embassy in Canberra 40 years ago.

By amending the Native Title Act in 1998 with his Ten Point Plan,
Howard demonstrated the inherent power of Aboriginal peoples, stemming
from their continuing sovereignty, Mr Anderson argues. “It is
necessary to understand that when Native Title claimants are to prove
continuing connection to country, we are claiming our sovereign rights
to the native vegetation, waters, soil, and to that which is below and
that which is above, that we have the stories about and have knowledge
of,” he writes.

“This affirms a greater right of law under the Native Title regime
than ordinary non-Aboriginal proprietary claim to land. Without being
able to show connection to all things natural under our law and
custom, we cannot win Native Title under this regime. It must be
understood that our interests are sovereign interests.”

This is a point non-Aboriginal and Aboriginal lawyers fail to inform
their Aboriginal clients about, Mr Anderson alleges.

“No white or black lawyer registered to practice in this country will
tell you, nor admit to Aboriginal people that we do have sovereign
title to this country.

“We must remind ourselves that each of these lawyers has made a
pledge, which commits themselves to the Crown and the courts that
belong to the Crown. I remind people that it has always been said that
the only ones that are benefitting out of Native Title are the
lawyers, who assert they are experts on Native Title claims. At the
grassroots MABO stands for Money Available Barristers Only.”
“I implore every Aboriginal person, who is trying to get their country
back through the Native Title process, to take a close and second look
at what they are doing and to be very careful about accepting the
legal advice given by the non-Aboriginal lawyers purporting to be
looking after your interests.”

In his endeavours to protect country for non-Aboriginal people, John
Howard was unclear and ambiguous as to “which land areas should be
classified in the ‘national interest’, but (this) was done with a
clear desire to take away any rights for Aboriginal people”, Mr
Anderson writes.

“One finds a dreadful need of government to give the appearance of
absolute patriotism and protection of country, but in fact the law
itself is absolutely racist and, in Australia’s case, it is
ingeniously subtle at disguising intended racism.”

The fact that pastoral leases and mining are allowed to co-exist with
Native Title was “a clear indication by the Howard government that
somehow the Australian government must acknowledge the need to
co-exist with the true sovereign people of the soil. This part of the
amendment affirms our continuing sovereignty,” Mr Anderson writes.

“It is most unfortunate that the lawyers who purport to act in our
interest fail to inform the applicants of these entrenched rights and
thereby continue the denial of Aboriginal people to have access to
their ancient lands and sacred sites.”

On Howard’s Point 10, “Indigenous Land Use Agreements will be created
to promote co-existence”, Mr Anderson comments: “From my position as a
political activist of many years, this clearly reaffirms the question
mark that successive Australian governments have with respect to our
continuing sovereignty, because clearly they seek to co-exist with us.
It is from this position that we should be asserting our sovereign
rights to ensure a brighter and much more prosperous future for our
current and future generations. In this regard we only have to use
what John Howard and his government acknowledged in the Ten Point
Plan.”
Mr Anderson’s release in full:……
http://indigenouspeoplesissues.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=16995:australia-howard-knew-aborigines-had-a-sovereignty-based-land-right&catid=24:australia-indigenous-peoples&Itemid=57

January 4, 2013 - Posted by Christina Macpherson | aboriginal issues, AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, legal