This book is a collection of key legal decisions affecting Indigenous Australians, which have been re-imagined so as to be inclusive of Indigenous people’s stories, historical experience, perspectives and worldviews. In this groundbreaking work, Indigenous and non-Indigenous scholars have collaborated to rewrite 16 key decisions. Spanning from 1889 to 2017, the judgments reflect the trajectory of Indigenous people’s engagements with Australian law. The collection includes decisions that laid the foundation for the wrongful application of terra nullius and the long disavowal of native title. Contributors have also challenged narrow judicial interpretations of native title, which have denied recognition to Indigenous people who suffered the prolonged impacts of dispossession. Exciting new voices have reclaimed Australian law to deliver justice to the Stolen Generations and to families who have experienced institutional and police racism. Contributors have shown how judicial officers can use their power to challenge systemic racism and tell the stories of Indigenous people who have been dehumanised by the criminal justice system. The new judgments are characterised by intersectional perspectives which draw on postcolonial, critical race and whiteness theories. Several scholars have chosen to operate within the parameters of legal doctrine. Some have imagined new truth-telling forums, highlighting the strength and creative resistance of Indigenous people to oppression and exclusion. Others have rejected the possibility that the legal system, which has been integral to settler-colonialism, can ever deliver meaningful justice to Indigenous people.

Aboriginal title represents one of the most remarkable and controversial legal developments in the common law world of the late-twentieth century. Overnight it changed the legal position of indigenous peoples. The common law doctrine gave sudden substance to the tribes' claims to justiciable property rights over their traditional lands, catapulting these up the national agenda and jolting them out of a previous culture of governmental inattention. In a series of breakthrough cases national courts adopted the argument developed first in western Canada, and then New Zealand and Australia by a handful of influential scholars. By the beginning of the millennium the doctrine had spread to Malaysia, Belize, southern Africa and had a profound impact upon the rapid development of international law of indigenous peoples' rights. This book is a history of this doctrine and the explosion of intellectual activity arising from this inrush of legalism into the tribes' relations with the Anglo settler state. The author is one of the key scholars involved from the doctrine's appearance in the early 1980s as an exhortation to the courts, and a figure who has both witnessed and contributed to its acceptance and subsequent pattern of development. He looks critically at the early conceptualisation of the doctrine, its doctrinal elaboration in Canada and Australia - the busiest jurisdictions - through a proprietary paradigm located primarily (and constrictively) inside adjudicative processes. He also considers the issues of inter-disciplinary thought and practice arising from national legal systems' recognition of aboriginal land rights, including the emergent and associated themes of self-determination that surfaced more overtly during the 1990s and after. The doctrine made modern legal history, and it is still making it.

This book addresses the issue of Indigenous peoples' participation in genetic resource access and benefit-sharing and associated traditional knowledge for self-determination. Genetic resources from nature are increasingly used in global biodiscovery research and development, but they often use Indigenous peoples’ traditional knowledge without their consent and without sharing the benefit. The Nagoya Protocol is an instrument of the Convention on Biological Diversity intended to ensure Indigenous peoples’ traditional knowledge is used with their prior and informed consent or approval and entails benefit-sharing on mutually agreed terms. Many countries with significant Indigenous populations have signed the Nagoya Protocol and are currently grappling with implementation of its provisions. This book takes up a case study of Australia to demonstrate how Indigenous community governance in settler states can serve as a path to implementing the Nagoya Protocol. Australia’s access and benefitsharing framework is globally hailed as best practice, offering lessons for other countries implementing the Nagoya Protocol. Focusing on two Indigenous community organisations in Australia, the book establishes a unique evaluative framework for analysing and differentiating the governance arrangements used by Indigenous communities for facilitating decision-making related to traditional knowledge. This book will appeal to scholars working in the areas of international environmental law, human rights, biotechnology law, and Indigenous legal issues; as well as those directly engaged in implementing access and benefit-sharing measures and developing law reform strategies.

During the past decade, a remarkable transference of responsibility to Indigenous children’s organisation has taken place in many parts of Australia, Canada, the USA and New Zealand. It has been influenced by Indigenous peoples’ human rights advocacy at national and international levels, by claims to self-determination and by the globalisation of Indigenous children’s organisations. Thus far, this reform has taken place with little attention from academic and non-Indigenous communities; now, Decolonising Indigenous Child Welfare: Comparative Perspectives considers these developments and, evaluating law reform with respect to Indigenous child welfare, asks whether the pluralisation of responses to their welfare and well-being, within a cross-cultural post-colonial context, can improve the lives of Indigenous children. The legislative frameworks for the delivery of child welfare services to Indigenous children are assessed in terms of the degree of self-determination which they afford Indigenous communities. The book draws upon interdisciplinary research and the author’s experience collaborating with the peak Australian Indigenous children’s organisation for over a decade to provide a thorough examination of this international issue. Dr Terri Libesman is a Senior Lecturer in the Law Faculty, at the University of Technology Sydney. She has collaborated, researched and published for over a decade with the peak Australian Indigenous children’s organisation.

Through theoretical and empirical examination of legal frameworks for court diversion, this book interrogates law’s complicity in the debilitation of disabled people. In a post-deinstitutionalisation era, diverting disabled people from criminal justice systems and into mental health and disability services is considered therapeutic, humane and socially just. Yet, by drawing on Foucauldian theory of biopolitics, critical legal and political theory and critical disability theory, Steele argues that court diversion continues disability oppression. It can facilitate criminalisation, control and punishment of disabled people who are not sentenced and might not even be convicted of any criminal offences. On a broader level, court diversion contributes to the longstanding phenomenon of disability-specific coercive intervention, legitimates prison incarceration and shores up the boundaries of foundational legal concepts at the core of jurisdiction, legal personhood and sovereignty. Steele shows that the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities cannot respond to the complexities of court diversion, suggesting the CRPD is of limited use in contesting carceral control and legal and settler colonial violence. The book not only offers new ways to understand relationships between disability, criminal justice and law; it also proposes theoretical and practical strategies that contribute to the development of a wider re-imagining of a more progressive and just socio-legal order. The book will be of interest to scholars and students of disability law, criminal law, medical law, socio-legal studies, disability studies, social work and criminology. It will also be of interest to disability, prisoner and social justice activists.

Protection of traditional knowledge and resources is of critical concern not only to the groups involved but also to the international trading community for which these resources are of increasing economic importance. This work examines the concept of 'community', intellectual property models and additional sources for protection at international law (including environmental and human rights frameworks). Intellectual property law is critiqued as an inadequate framework to address the fundamental object of protection for the communities themselves - the management of traditional use, as well as the biological and cultural sustainability of this use. The work sets out an international framework based on the concept of 'community resources', recognizing the unique claims embodied in traditional knowledge, incorporating customary law, and facilitating community management of resources. International in perspective and scope, the book will be a valuable resource for academics and researchers in law, international relations and cultural studies.

'This book debunks in spectacular fashion some of the most treasured, over-inflated claims of the benefits of native title.' Professor Mick Dodson, ANU Centre for Indigenous Studies 'David Ritter's fascinating account of the evolution of the native title system is elegant and incisive, scholarly and sceptical; above all, unfailingly intelligent.' Professor Robert Manne, La Trobe University 'An unsentimental, richly informed account of a fascinating period in the history of Australia's relationships with its indigenous people.' From the Foreword by Chief Justice Robert French After the historic Mabo judgement in 1992, Aboriginal communities had high hopes of obtaining land rights around Australia. What followed is a dramatic story of hard-fought contests over land, resources, money and power, yielding many frustrations and mixed outcomes. Based on extensive research, enriched by intimate experience as a lawyer and negotiator, David Ritter offers both an insider's perspective and a cool-headed and broad-ranging account of the native title system. In lucid prose Ritter examines the contributions of the players that contested and adjudicated native title: Aboriginal leaders and their communities, multinational resource companies, pastoralists, courts and tribunals, politicians and bureaucrats. His account lays bare the conflicts, compromises and conceits beneath the surface of the native title process.

In a break from the contemporary focus on the law's response to inter-racial crime, the authors examine the law's approach to the victimization of one Indigenous person by another. Drawing on a wealth of archival material relating to homicides in Australia, they conclude that settlers and Indigenous peoples still live in the shadow of empire.