代写essay,代写assignment,DRS英国论文代写留学推荐网站

代寫assignment服務

五年專注墨爾本代寫assignment 信譽保證
turnitin檢測 保證原創率 高分通過

本公司成立以來,在assignment代寫領域獲得了不錯的口碑,98%以上的客戶順利通過..歡迎大家進行咨詢和享受公司為你提供的全方位服務!不論你的assignment有多難,deadline有多急,我們將給你帶來最專業可靠的代寫assignment服務。

Order Now

Native Title Rights and Interests代寫

    Native Title Rights and Interests
    Native title is the recognition by Australian law that some Indigenous people have rights and interests to their land that come from their traditional laws and customs. There are fundamental differences between land rights and native title. Land rights are created by the Australian Government or State and Territory governments, and usually comprise a grant of freehold or perpetual lease title to Indigenous Australians. In contrast, native title arises as a result of the recognition, under Australian common law, of Indigenous rights and interests according to traditional Indigenous laws and customs. It is not a grant or right created by governments
    The native title rights and interests held by particular Indigenous people will depend on both their traditional laws and customs and what interests are held by others in the area concerned. Generally speaking, native title must give way to inconsistent legal rights held by others. The capacity of Australian law to recognise the rights and interests held under traditional law and custom will also be a factor.
    Native title rights and interests may include rights to:
    ·         live on the area
    ·         access the area for traditional purposes, like camping or to do ceremonies
    ·         visit and protect important places and sites
    ·         hunt, fish and gather food or traditional resources like water, wood and ochre
    ·         teach law and custom on country.
    In some cases, native title includes the right to possess and occupy an area to the exclusion of all others (often called ‘exclusive possession’). This includes the right to control access to, and use of, the area concerned. However, this right can only be recognised over certain parts of Australia, such as unallocated or vacant Crown land and some areas already held by, or for, Indigenous Australians.
    Native title rights and interests differ from Indigenous land rights in that the source of land rights is a grant of title from government. The source of native title rights and interests is the system of traditional laws and customs of the native title holders themselves.
    The Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) provides as follows:
     Section 223
    (1) The expression native title or native title rights and interests means the communal, group or individual rights and interests of Aboriginal peoples or Torres Strait Islanders in relation to land or waters, where:
    a) the rights and interests are possessed under the traditional laws acknowledged, and the traditional customs observed, by the Aboriginal peoples or Torres Strait Islanders; and
    b) the Aboriginal peoples or Torres Strait Islanders, by those laws and customs, have a connection with the land or waters; and
    c) the rights and interests are recognised by the common law of Australia
    The Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) was enacted as a result of the decision made by the High Court of Australia in Mabo v Queensland (No.2) 1992. The Federal Parliament reviewed and amended the Act in 1998, 2007, 2009 and 2010.
    The Federal Court of Australia is responsible for the management of all applications made under the Native Title Act for a determination of native title or for compensation for the loss or impairment of native title. These applications must be made to the Court.
    The Court has wide powers to manage native title cases. It can:
    ·         make directions about how the application is to be progressed
    ·         decide whether or not the application should be referred to the National Native Title Tribunal or another appropriate person or body for mediation
    ·         determine who are the ‘parties’ to the application (the people involved in a case)
    ·         adjourn the proceedings to allow time for the parties to negotiate 
    ·         make orders to ensure that native title applications which cover the same area are dealt in one proceeding
    ·         strike out or dismiss an application, which brings the case to an end
    ·         set an application down for hearing
    ·         make a determination recognising that native title does, or does not, exist
    ·         decide whether compensation for the loss or impairment of native title should be paid.
    National Native Title Tribunal
    The National Native Title Tribunal was set up under the Act and assists people to facilitate timely and effective native title outcomes. The Tribunal is an independent source of information and assistance for everyone involved in native title and the wider public. It mediates native title determination and compensation applications referred to it by the Federal Court. During mediation, the parties meet to discuss the claim and try to reach agreement about the appropriate outcome.
    The Tribunal is not a court and does not decide whether native title exists or not.
    The Tribunal also administers part of the future act process - that is, generally, the process that deals with future acts relating to mining and some compulsory acquisitions. The Tribunal's role includes mediating between parties, conducting inquiries and making decisions (called ' future act determinations') where parties can't reach agreements.
    Representative bodies for Indigenous Australians
    Under the Native Title Act, Native Title Representative Bodies are organisations with the primary role of representing Indigenous Australians within their designated region by providing support for native title determination and compensation applications, responding to proposed future acts and negotiating indigenous land use agreements.
    Please see the Native Title Representative Bodies map (attached) for the location and details of these organisations. [NB: Not all claimants are represented by native title representative bodies or service delivery agencies. Some claimants choose private solicitors or other people to represent them or are unrepresented.]
    Government agencies
    The Commonwealth Attorney-General is responsible for Commonwealth courts and tribunals. The Attorney-General also approves the state and territory alternative native title regimes.
    The Attorney-General's Department of the Australian Government administers a legal aid fund for non-Indigenous parties responding to native title claims.
    As managers of Crown lands or state lands and waters, state and territory governments are involved in every native title application within that state or territory. State and territory governments also provide the land tenure information the Tribunal requires for public notification and deal with most of the future act process.
    The Australian Government has an interest in ensuring that the Native Title Act 1993 is interpreted in a way that is consistent with the Australian Parliament's intentions.
    To this end, the Australian Government always becomes a party to native title applications which involve claims for compensation, or include offshore sea areas or Australian Government property interests. The Native Title Unit is responsible for advising the Attorney-General on Australian Government participation in the mediation and litigation of native title claims.
    Currently the Australian Government is a party to about 145 native title applications of the approximately 458 applications lodged with the Federal Court. A number of the applications are actively being litigated before the Federal Court. Most of the remainder have been referred to the National Native Title Tribunal or a Court appointed independent mediator for mediation.
    The Australian Government seeks to resolve matters through mediation, where possible. If mediation is successful, a consent determination of native title may result. The Australian Government's involvement in mediation is governed by the following objectives:
    •       resolution of claims through negotiation rather than litigation, wherever possible
    •       adopting a flexible and creative approach to negotiations
    •       avoiding unduly narrow and legalistic approaches to negotiations
    •       achieving sustainable, long-term outcomes for communities
    These objectives reflect the view that native title negotiations should not be caught up in technicalities, and can be the source of real and long-term outcomes for Indigenous people.
    As at 12 February 2012, there were 131 determinations of native title. Ninety-two determinations found that native title exists in at least some of the determination area. Of the 131 determination decisions, 81 were consent determinations (mediated outcomes), 22 were litigated determinations and 264 were unopposed. The Australian Government has been a party to 13 consent determinations and seven litigated determinations. A summary of Australian Government activity in native title can be found in the Attorney-General's Department annual reports.
    Up-to-date details may be found on the National Native Title Tribunal website for native title applications and native title determinations (determinations by consent and litigation). Information about key Federal Court judgments may be found in the Australian Government Attorney-General's Department Annual Report.
    The History of Native Title
    Up until 1992, Australian courts had proceeded on the basis that when Australia was discovered by Captain Cook in 1788 it was terra nullius, an empty land. Although there were obviously indigenous people living in different parts of Australia, they were regarded as nomads with no settled right or interest in or over any part of the land. Accordingly the British colony was established and proceeded on the basis that the Crown in right of the British Government (and after 1901 the crown in right of the Australian Government) owned all of the land in Australia from the moment of colonisation.
    The Mabo Decision
    All this came to an abrupt end on 3rd June 1992 when the High Court of Australia delivered its landmark Mabo decision. The Meriam people led by Eddie Mabo claimed title to the Murray Islands in the eastern part of the Torres Strait Islands between Australia and Papua New Guinea based on their continuous occupation of those islands both before and since colonisation. The judges held that, "... the Meriam people are entitled as against the whole world to possession, occupation, use and enjoyment of the lands of the Murray Islands."
    Importantly, Chief Justice Brennan said "... there may be other areas of Australia where an Aboriginal people, maintaining their identity and their customs, are entitled to enjoy their native title."
    It was clear from the time of the decision that this case did not threaten the title of those who had been granted land by the government of the day and those who had purchased land which had been the subject of earlier grants. The decision was however of crucial importance to land which still belonged to the governments of Australia or any of the states or territories.
    The effect of Mabo
    The effect of the decision was that potentially aboriginal communities which had maintained their identity, their customs and their relationship with their traditional lands could claim native title over those lands - provided that the lands had not already been the subject of a land grant by the government. Potentially this also applied to vast tracts of Australia which were still owned by governments but were the subject of long-term leases to Australian graziers.
    The Native Titles Act
    In response to the Mabo decision, the Australian Government introduced the Native Titles Act in 1993. The main objects of this Act were: to provide for the recognition and protection of native title; to establish ways in which future dealings affecting native title may proceed and to set standards for those dealings; to establish a mechanism for determining claims to native title; and to provide for, or permit, the validation of past acts, and intermediate period acts, invalidated because of the existence of native title.
    This legislation created the Native Title Tribunal which has determined claims for native title since that time. There have been major amendments to the Native Titles Act but the broad purpose and thrust of the legislation remains.
    Areas of contention
    One of the main areas of contention which has arisen since 1992 relates to claims for native title over land which is rich in minerals or which is sought by private enterprise to establish or develop major industries. Such disputes are not likely to go away any time soon.
    However community concern and therefore government attention can also be aroused when claims are made for native title over land which has become popular for community recreational purposes. One such area of contention that has become prominent in recent years relates to fisheries legislation. Certainly the Native Title Act makes it clear that members of the indigenous community are not required to purchase a fishing licence if they want to fish for domestic purposes. However the position is a lot less clear when it comes to commercial fishing.
    Commercial fishing is an important industry in Australia and commercial fishermen have since the early part of the 19th century been required to hold a commercial fishing licence. Fishing was obviously a traditional activity of indigenous Australians. The question is whether commercial fishing could be regarded as a traditional activity and therefore be subject to a claim of native title. That is an important question because in many places around Australia commercial fishing has effectively been banned. Is this binding on indigenous fishermen?
    The generally held view is that there can be no claim for native title for commercial fishing but there are cases before the court which may yet challenge that view.
     

在線客服

售前咨詢
售后咨詢
微信號
Essay_Cheery
微信
Assignment代写,【essay代写】美国作业代写-留学代写ESSAY网 Dueduedue论文服务-【美国论文代写】加拿大论文ESSAY代写服务 ESSAYCASE |essay代写|assignment代写|paper代写,全球在线写作中心 EasyDue™-北美地区论文作业ESSAY代写服务机构,作业代写-覆盖100+全学科 EssayBerry:美国论文ESSAY代写服务,代写essay,统计代写,代写文章 EssayWill-论文代写网|经济代写,数学,CS代写,Assignment代写 Essaymint:专注软文代写和代写作业等服务|作业代写-100%原创高分 Essay代写,论文代写,Report代写,网课代修-浩天教育 Essay代写-Assignment「免费修改」Paper代写,-51Due留学教育 Essay代写-各学科论文代写|留学作业网课代修代做|优质的代写文章的网站