Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback Australian Indigenous Law Reporter

Editors --- "Urapunga Land Claim - Case Summary" [2002] AUIndigLawRpr 6; (2002) 7(1) Australian Indigenous Law Reporter 21

Court and Tribunal Decisions - Australia

Urapunga Land Claim

Report of the Aboriginal Land Commissioner Justice H W Olney

7 June 2001

Claim No 159

Aboriginal Lands Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976 (Cth) — inquiry into land claim — pastoral lease — whether any ‘traditional Aboriginal owners’ exist — whether land should be granted as Aboriginal land

Facts:

On 10 November 1996 the Northern Land Council (the NLC) lodged a land claim under the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976 (Cth) (ALRA) to Urapunga Station, a Perpetual Pastoral Lease of approximately 183,300 hectares, located east of Katherine on the Roper River. Prior to the lodgement of the land claim the NLC had, with funds from the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission (ATSIC) and in accordance with a purposes deed, purchased the Station.

Six groups who identify as Ngalakgan People were put forward as the traditional owners by the NLC. Many of these people live on the Station or in a community living area that had been excised from the Station. The land tenure system of the Ngalakgan and their immediate neighbours, had been the subject of investigation in previous traditional land claims (such as Yutpundji-Djindiwirritj (Roper Bar) Land Claim) and native title applications (Wandarang, Alawa, Marra and Ngalakan Peoples v Northern Territory [2000] FCA 923; (2000) 104 FCR 380; (2000) 177 ALR 512; (2001) 6(3) AILR 21 and Ngalakan People v Northern Territory [2001] FCA 654; (2001) 186 ALR 124; 6(3) AILR 43). Materials regarding the social organisation and land tenure system of the Ngalakgan people were lodged together with information regarding sites and spiritual connections with the claimed area.

Prior to the hearing the claimants requested that the NT consider settling the claim by scheduling the area as Aboriginal Land. The NT made an offer of ordinary freehold title but was not accepted by the claimants who decided to pursue a grant under the ALRA.

Findings, Recommendation and Comments

Pursuant to the ALRA the Aboriginal Land Commissioner is required to inquire into whether or not there are traditional Aboriginal owners of the claimed area, to have regard to the strength of attachment of the claimants to the land and to make a recommendation as to whether the land should be granted as Aboriginal land to a Land Trust. The Commissioner is to have regard to principles regarding securing title for claimants living on, or desiring to live on, their traditional country. The Commissioner is also required to comment on the nature and extent of advantage that would accrue to the traditional owners should the land be granted, detriment to other persons or communities, any effect on existing or proposed patterns of land usage and the cost of acquiring any interests of persons (other than the Crown).

Findings

1. That the claim area was alienated Crown land in which all estates or interests not held by the Crown were held on behalf of Aboriginal people. Both the NLC and ATSIC had ‘estates or interests’ in the area and had consented in writing to the claim. Olney J found that ATSIC gave the necessary consent when it executed the deed despite argument from the NT that the requirement of written consent had not strictly been met. Accordingly, the Commissioner had jurisdiction to inquire into the claim.

2. That each of the elements of the definition of ‘traditional Aboriginal owners’ had been established in respect of the whole claim area. It had been established that:

• there are six local descent groups whose traditional countries together encompass the whole of the claim area;
• members of each local descent group have the requisite spiritual affiliations and primary spiritual responsibilities;
• the group members have by Aboriginal tradition an entitlement to forage over the land as of right.

And, accordingly, that the members of the six claimant groups are traditional Aboriginal owners.

Recommendation

Having regard to the strength of the traditional attachment of the claimants and the principles expressed in s 50(4) of the ALRA, Olney J recommended to the Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island Affairs and to the Administrator of the NT that the whole of Urapunga station be granted to a Land Trust for the benefit of Aboriginals entitled by Aboriginal tradition to the use or occupation of that area of land, whether or not the traditional entitlement is qualified as to place, time, circumstance, purpose or permission.

Comments

1. The number of Aboriginal people with traditional attachments to the area who would be advantaged exceeds 1200.

2. In the event that the land is granted to a Land Trust the public right of access over land to waterways presently preserved under s 79 of the Pastoral Land Act (NT) would cease and the NT would require the consent of the traditional owners to establish new bores, gravel pits or dams on the land.

3. Subject to the above, no person or community would suffer detriment if the land were granted to a Land Trust.

4. A grant would not affect existing or proposed land use patterns.

5. No cost would be involved in acquiring the interests of the NLC and ATSIC in the land.

Postscript

On the recommendation of the Minister, on 27 March 2002 the Governor-General signed a deed of grant, granting the whole of the claimed area to the Urapunga Aboriginal Land Trust. On 17 May 2002, at a ceremony at Urapunga Station, the Commonwealth Attorney-General handed over the deed to the traditional Aboriginal owners.?