in the Kimberley region were massacred for killingcattle. Killings, along with the casualties in theAboriginal wars of resistance, meant that theirpopulation plummeted to a low of 60,000 by theyear 1900.The statistics today• The infant mortality rate for Aborigines ismore than three times the national average• The suicide rate is six times higher forAborigines than for other Australians• The proportion of Aborigines imprisonedis 14 times the national average• Since January 1980 over 130 Aborigineshave died in police custodySince 1900, the population has increased to atleast 250,000 (including the Torres Strait Islanders,indigenous people who are ethnically and culturallydistinct from Aborigines).For much of the 20th century, the governmentpursued a policy of taking small children fromtheir parents and giving them to white families– so that all knowledge of Aboriginal ways wouldbe erased, and their languages would die out.Fighting backAborigines have always resisted the theft of theirland, but the modern land rights movement reallystarted in 1966, when the Gurindji people walked offthe Wave Hill cattle station in the Northern Territoryin protest at their appalling work conditions. Thisinspired Aborigines around the country, as well asfocusing attention on the dismal social conditionsof many Aboriginal communities. With a sense oftheir own identity and self-respect assaulted by twocenturies of racism and violence, the Aborigines havesuffered from high levels of despair, ill-health andalcoholism. They were not even granted Australiancitizenship until 1967. Since then, they haveorganised themselves into Land Councils to fightfor recognition of their rights to their lands. Theycontinue to suffer discrimination and persecution.TodayToday roughly half of all Aborigines live in towns,often in ‘fringe dweller’ camps where housing andhealth conditions are very poor. In an effort toreverse this, the ‘outstation’ movement has recentlyencouraged many Aboriginal groups to return totheir lands. (Survival has helped fund such projects.)This may involve ‘squatting’ on land that officially‘belongs’ to cattle stations.In June 1992, the High Court made a historic rulingknown as the Mabo case: essentially it recognised‘native title’ to land in common law. This meant thatlarge areas of Aboriginal land officially held by theCrown can now, at least in theory, be reclaimed bytheir Aboriginal owners. (Before the ruling, theprinciple underlying Australian land rights law wasknown as ‘terra nullius.’ This stated that Australiawas uninhabited before the British arrived; a deviceused to dispossess Aboriginal peoples of their landfor the last 200 years.) As a result of the case, inJanuary 1994 Parliament passed the Native Title Act.Under this Act, all freehold and residential leasesthreatened by the Mabo decision were validatedand any native title over such lands was extinguished.Vacant state land, however, could be claimed byAborigines showing a ‘close and continuingassociation’ with a particular area. Mining leasesdid not extinguish native title, which runs alongsidethe leases until they are renewed or expire. The issueof whether native title could still be claimed on landcovered by pastoral leases - the huge cattle rancheswhich cover much of the Australian outback, andwhere many Aborigines continue to live - was notresolved. A fund was set up to compensateAborigines for the loss of native title and to acquireland. Aborigines would have a right to negotiate,but no veto, over development on Native title land.Tribunals would arbitrate in cases of dispute. Stategovernments can override tribunal decisions ‘in thestate or national interest’.The Native Title Act did not, unfortunately, resolvewhat became a bitter public debate betweenpoliticians, farmers, miners and Aborigines. The issuebecame even more controversial when a 1996 legaldecision known as ‘Wik’ clarified what ‘native title’meant. In particular, it was clear that native titlecould still exist on land that was covered by ‘pastoralleases’ - the huge sheep and cattle ranches whichcover much of outback Australia, where manyAborigines continue to live.These two legal decisions, while still leaving Australiafar behind many ‘Third World’ countries in itsrecognition of indigenous rights, have been fiercelyopposed by the powerful farming and miningindustries. As a result, the government is trying toundermine the Aborigines’ legal victories to such anextent as to render them almost meaningless.The Prime Minister, John Howard, has proposeda new piece of legislation called the Native TitleAmendment Bill. Crucially, this will make nativetitle on pastoral leases worthless, and would leavemany Aborigines unable to claim native title in thefirst place. Together, these measures would leavethe huge majority of Aborigines with no rightsover their land. Sadly, it seems that justice forAustralian Aborigines is as far off as ever.Background ReadingRoberts, Jan, From Massacres to Mining,War on Want, London, 1978. (Out of print butavailable in libraries.)Reynolds, Henry, Dispossession, Allen & Unwin,Australia, 1989.Layton, Robert, Australian Rock Art, CUP, 1992.For childrenNile, Dr Richard, Australian Aborigines,Wayland, Hove, 1992.Survival Newsletter, Nothing to Celebrate,London, 1988.People of the Dreaming © Survival 1998.For copies of other background sheets ormore information about Survival’s work contact:Survival, 6 Charterhouse Buildings,London, EC1M 7ET, United Kingdom.Tel: 020 7687 8700, Fax: 020 7687 8701.Survival is a worldwide organisationsupporting tribal peoples. It standsfor their right to decide their ownfuture and helps them protect theirlives, lands and human rights.