Antinuclear

Muckaty Court Report Day 6- June 9    Day 6 – Federal Court comes to Muckaty  Beyond Nuclear Initiative, By Padraic Gibson, 10 June 14,  The nuclear waste dump trial traveled to the Muckaty Aboriginal Land Trust on Monday June 9, to hear testimony from Traditional Owners opposed to the nomination of their land.

First, a convoy of ten vehicles traveled out to the nominated site. The site is located about 12 kms west of the Stuart Highway, on the southern boundary of the Land Trust. It can be reached along a bituman “haulage road”, built to cart manganese from the Bootu mine out to the Adelaide – Darwin railway line. Having the dump on this well developed road, with access to two major transportation routes – the highway and the railway line – would be perfect for the government, helping explain why they are fighting so hard to defend the Muckaty nomination.

Senior Warlmanpa man Dick Foster, one of the applicants challenging the waste dump, gave the court (and a throng of journalists) a short explanation of the dreaming stories that are significant to the nominated site and how these impact on the rights and responsibilities of different clan groups. His account is in sharp contradiction with the anthropology relied upon by the NLC to justify the waste dump nomination. His traditional knowledge and cultural authority is respected by all sides of this dispute. Mr Foster will give detailed evidence next week.

The convoy then proceeded further north into the Land Trust, stopping at an outstation about 5kms from the Stuart Highway to set up properly to hear evidence.

There was only time to hear the start of evidence from Bunny Nabarula, an 84 year old Warlmanpa Elder who has been a leading spokesperson in the campaign against the dump for 7 years now……….

Evidence from more Traditional Owners opposed to the dump will be given in the court house at Tennant Creek for the rest of this week. For many people, who feel they have been pushed aside and ignored through this whole process, they are eager to put their case to the court. It’s important to note that both the Commonwealth and the NLC argued strongly against the Court coming to the NT. Both parties strongly defend their consultation process. But they also argue that whether or not this nomination was put forward with genuine consent should not actually matter legally, due to draconian provisions in the Commonwealth Radioactive Waste Management Act passed in 2005. http://beyondnuclearinitiative.com/muckaty-court-report-day-6-june-9/