Rights and Freedoms. Australia
After World War II, Aboriginal Australians intensified their fight for rights and freedoms, inspired by their wartime service and global movements for equality such as the Civil Rights protests in the USA. Despite serving in WW2 alongside non-Indigenous soldiers, they returned to ongoing discrimination such as being barred from RSL clubs, denied land grants, and excluded from basic civil rights like voting.
Major protests, such as the 1946 Pilbara strike for fair wages and the 1938 Day of Mourning, highlighted demands for equal treatment and citizenship. Activism grew through the 1950s and 1960s, leading to gradual reforms, including the right to vote in 1962, the 1968 referendum and the fight for land rights
Significant dates before 1965
The Day of mourning 1938. 150th anniversary of British colonisation. It marked the beginning of the modern Aboriginal political movement.
In 1948, Aboriginal people were granted the right to receive federal pensions, maternity allowances, and other social service benefits
The 1962 Commonwealth Electoral Act gave Aboriginal people the right to vote in federal elections.
To do: Introduction to Indigenous rights and freedoms
Define terra nullius.
Describe the significance of the National day of mourning (1938)
How did the Australian constitution recognise Australian Aboriginal people after 1901?
Which branch of government had responsibility for Australian Aboriginal people in 1945?
List examples of the social discrimination experienced by Australian Aboriginal people?
Extra: Why do you think some Indigenous people were excluded from voting before 1962?
1. The Freedom Rides (Australian version)
The Freedom Rides 1965
In 1965, a group of students from the University of Sydney, inspired by the United States 1961 Freedom Rides, got on a bus and toured through regional towns in NSW to highlight the experience of racial segregation by Aboriginal Australians in country areas. The Freedom Riders also hoped to promote the campaign for a referendum (1968) that would remove discrimination against Indigenous people from the Australian Constitution.
The freedom riders were extremely successful in publicising the discrimination faced by Aboriginal Australians. It was reported as a ‘stinging challenge to the whole country’. The freedom rides had ended the long silence. ‘They had pointed to signs that at restrooms and cafe tables that said “No aborigines”.’ and they had pointed at the people in these towns that let these condition exist. This event had pricked the national consciousness.
Aboriginal activist, Lyall Munro Jr witnessed the freedom rides in Moree when he was 14 years old. He later reported, ‘We always realised the injustice of our treatment, but that was all we had ever known. That was just the way things were. You can't fight City Hall. Then the students came, and the ban was lifted. City Hall, in the person of the Moree Council, had backed down. When the students left, the ban came back. But it was too late.'
Lyall Munro and his friends had seen that it was possible.
To do: Freedom Riders Belair Bugle article
You have been asked by your editor to write an article about the Freedom Ride 1965.
Be sure to detail:
○ The purpose of the Freedom Ride
○ The towns visited (include a map)
○ The reactions of people when you visited the towns
○ What you think/hope can be achieved by the Freedom Rides
○ If a profile piece, be sure to explain one individual contribution to the Freedom Ride
○ Use lots of photographs
2. The 1967 Referendum
The Australian Constitution sets out the basic laws for the government of Australia. Because they were not recognised in the constitution, Aboriginal people couldn't access federally funded services like social security and education.
Referendums are the only way that the Australian Constitution can be changed. A majority of Australians must vote Yes for a referendum question to be accepted. On 27 May 1967, 90.77 per cent of Australian voters voted ‘Yes’ to the changes to the constitution.
The 1967 Referendum sought to change two sections of the Constitution in relation to Aboriginal people..
Section 127 specified that Aborigines be excluded from the national census. This effectively made Australia's Aboriginal population invisible, the federal government only provided funding for the country's non-Aboriginal population. This meant that states could only offer very limited services to Indigenous communities.
Section 51 (xxvi) specified that federal laws – designed to protect all Australians – didn't apply to Indigenous people. 'The Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth with respect to the people of any race, other than the aboriginal people in any State, for whom it is deemed necessary to make special laws'
To do: Referendum questions
Explain the purpose of referendums in Australia.
What did the 1967 referendum ask Australians to vote on? Explain it to me like I am 10.
Use quotes and examples to explain how Section 51 of the Constitution discriminated against Aboriginal people?
Use quotes and examples to explain how Section 127 of the Constitution discriminated against Aboriginal people?
Extra: Conditions before the 1967 referendum
Daisy and Angel Imari, Kalgoorlie, 1960
'Daisy Imari and Angel are a grand Aborigine couple who have always worked faithfully as station hands wherever work was to be found. Now that they are ageing it is difficult to get station work, so they take work in the bush and Angel cuts wood. It happens that they are not always paid and there is no redress.'
Joyce Maher (Tapakari), with Bernadette and Roderick, 1960
'A station hand's wife and young family: Tapakari (Joyce Maher) with Bernadette (1½ years) and Roderick (3 mths). The eldest son, Raymond, aged 14 works on a station. The second son died at Norseman Mission. The low wages for Aborigines enables (state) institutions to remove their children.'
Letter by Doug Nichols (VAAL) published in the Age, 16 May 1967
….in the past. Commonwealth parliamentarians have, unfortunately, interpreted the exclusion of the Aborigines from their power to mean that 'they must exclude Aborigines from the special benefits of Commonwealth law. Until 1961. for instance. Aborigines were excluded specifically from the benefits of the Social Services Act although they paid taxes and fulfilled responsibilities similar to other Australians.
The amendment of Section 51. will simply allow Parliament to provide special assistance to help Aborigines bridge the tremendous economic and social gulf which exists…
To do: questions
Explain how the experience of Daisy, Angel and Joyce and her family would have changed after the successful 1967 referendum.
How are station records useful for an historian?
Use evidence from the sources to explain how the federal government interpreted the constitution in relation to Aboriginal people.
Referendum sources
Source 1. Table of Aboriginal Rights,1962 referendum petition leaflet
Questions
In which states and territories are the greatest inequalities evident? (1)
What was the only restriction in place for all states and territories? (1)
Source 2. 'Vote Yes on May 27'
Aboriginal children supporting a YES vote at a protest rally at Brisbane University with support from the Builders Labourers Union (1967).
Questions
List two examples of non-Aboriginal support for the vote 'Yes' campaign? (2)
Source 3. Referendum results by state, Australian parliamentary library.
Questions
Use evidence from the source to describe the results of the 1967 referendum.(2)
3. Native title rights
The 1967 referendum was only a step in the gradual empowerment of Indigenous people in Australia.
The fight for native title aimed to have Indigenous traditional rights to land legally recognised. For much of Australia’s history, Indigenous land rights were ignored under the doctrine of terra nullius, which falsely claimed the land belonged to no one before British colonisation.
This changed with the 1992 High Court decision in Mabo v Queensland (No 2), which recognised that native title existed where Indigenous people maintained a continuous connection with their land through traditional laws and customs.
The subsequent Native Title Act 1993 established a legal framework for Indigenous Australians to claim native title. However, claimants must prove ongoing connection. This can be difficult due to historical dispossession and development.
To do: Native Title Rights timeline
Create a timeline in a document or PowerPoint that explores the history of the fight to gain recognition and land rights for Aboriginal people in Australia.
Include the following events in your timeline:
Yirrkala bark petitions 1963
The Gurindji Strike (The Wave Hill walk off) 1967
Gurindji people receive leasehold title 1975
The Mabo decision 1992
The 1992 Mabo high court decision recognised native title if continuous occupation could be demonstrated
The Native Title Act 1993
The native title act provided a framework for native title claims in response to the high court decision
The Wik Decision 1996
The Wik decision found that pastoral leases didn't extinguish native title
Ensure you include the following information for each event:
An iconic photo
The date
A brief description of what happened and its importance to the larger struggle for land rights.
The Mabo decision 1992
On 3 June 1992 the High Court of Australia ruled that a group of Torres Strait Islander people, led by Eddie Mabo, owned the island of Mer (Murray Island). The Court ruling paved the way for recognition that all Indigenous people in Australia have rights to their land. It proved that Australia was not terra nullius (land belonging to nobody) when it was claimed by Britain in 1770.
The Mabo decision achieved the following:
Overthrew notion of terra nullius
Recognised the existence of native title-for Indigenous Australians who continue to live on the land in accordance to Aboriginal traditions, laws and customs.
The Native Title Act 1993
The Mabo decision led the Australian Government to pass the Native Title Act 1993, this framework allowed all Aboriginal people to claim their traditional lands.
To prove that they had a claim, Aboriginal people had to provide evidence of the following:
A continuous link with the land since 1788
That their interests had not been extinguished by private land ownership
To do: questions
How did Australian law treat Aboriginal traditional native title claims before the Mabo decision?
Why was the Mabo decision so important for native title rights?
Why was the Australian commonwealth government response to the Mabo decision so important?
“The nation as a whole must remain diminished until there is an acknowledgement of and a retreat from those past injustices ”
Task 3: Mabo film analysis
Eddie Koiki Mabo was a Torres Strait Islander man who played a pivotal role in Australian history by challenging the legal doctrine of terra nullius. Born on June 29, 1936, on Mer (Murray Island) in the Torres Strait, Mabo grew up deeply connected to his Meriam culture and land. In 1982, Mabo and four other Mer Islanders initiated a legal claim in the High Court of Australia for ownership of their ancestral lands. This case, known as the "Mabo Case," lasted for ten years. On June 3, 1992, five months after Mabo's death, the High Court ruled in favour of the plaintiffs, recognising for the first time in Australian law the rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples to their traditional lands. This landmark decision overturned the concept of terra nullius and led to the Native Title Act 1993.
Source questions - Download the questions here
In the film Mabo, what were some of the experiences of discrimination/paternalism that led to Eddie Mabo joining the Aboriginal Advancement League in Cairns? (2 mark)
Use examples to describe how Mr Mabo proves his ongoing connection with the land of Mer Island (3 marks)
What conclusions can be drawn from the film about the legal and social status of Australian Aboriginals before the Mabo decision in 1992? (3 marks)
How does the film explain the legal concept of terra nullius and its impact on Aboriginal land rights. (3 marks)
Assess the usefulness and limitations of using the film Mabo as a source of evidence for an historian investigating the Mabo decision and the fight for the recognition of land rights. In your response consider content, and reliability. (4 marks)
Using your own knowledge and with direct reference to the film, Mabo, evaluate the following proposition.
The Australian High Court decision to overturn terra nullius was only relevant to the Meriam people of North Queensland. (5 marks)
10 Sources Analysis Answer Guide
Don’t forget: Quote often and begin your response with name of the author, not the Source number. Put the source number in brackets at the end of the quote/paraphrasing.
For example:
This is supported by Jones who states that 'History students would be more popular at parties if they used this method.' (Source 3)
More successful responses:
contain relevant evidence (quotes and observations) from sources when required.
Less successful responses
provide responses without reference to any evidence from the source
state that sources are limited without explaining why using evidence
do not assess the nature of sources clearly
do not explain how the nature and origin of the sources are a strength or limitation
do not include the source in the response.
4. The Wik decision
Did the Wik decision push the land rights pendulum to far?
The Wik decision (1996) was a High Court case (Wik Peoples v Queensland). The court examined whether the granting of pastoral leases in Queensland extinguished native title rights. The High Court, by a 4:3 majority, found that pastoral leases did not necessarily grant exclusive possession to leaseholders and therefore did not automatically extinguish native title.
Did the Wik decision push the pendulum too far toward the Aboriginal side?
Use your knowledge and research to complete the following questions to examine the High Court Wik decision.
To do: questions
Explain the legal concept that allowed Captain Cook to claim Australia for England
What is a pastoral lease? Why didn't the British government want to give the squatters freehold?
List some of the reasons squatters could have given to demand freehold over their properties?
Use evidence to explain the changes to Australian legislation that were possible after the Mabo decision.
Explain the proof that Aboriginal people needed to provide, in order to claim native title over land.
Imagine you are a pastoralist, what would your response have been to the Wik decision in 1996?
What was the purpose of the the Ten Point Plan
Task 4. Rights and freedoms essay
Our final task is a student choice essay (800 words).
Select a question from the R & F topic to examine.
Propose a ‘reasoned historical argument’, a question that invites an investigation into more than one point of view.
Example questions:
'The Australian federal government was very supportive of Land Rights for Indigenous people'. Discuss
'The Wik decision did not do enough to provide justice for dispossessed Indigenous Australians'. Discuss
The forced removal of children affected multiple generations of Indigenous families in Australia. Discuss
Why did the 1967 Referendum receive such overwhelming public support?
You are required to:
apply the skills of historical inquiry to evaluate sources
develop a reasoned historical argument, based on analysis and interpretation of evidence from at least three sources
draw conclusions supported by evidence
use subject-specific language
appropriately acknowledge the sources used
