Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Sydney, 2007. / Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy to the Faculty of Law, University of Sydney. Degree awarded 2007. Includes bibliographical references. Also available in print form.

The High Court decision in Mabo v Queensland (No 2) was interpreted by some as bringing to an end a history of discrimination and dispossession of indigenous peoples' lands. In this respect it was located within the new history movement in Australia - a movement which has raised awareness of the impact that colonisation has had on indigenous peoples in Australia. ln this thesis the extent to which Mabo was in fact a product of the new history movement in Australia is examined. An analysis of the results in the more recent High Court cases on native title such as Western Australia v Ward and Members of the Members of the Yorta Yorta Aboriginal Community v Victoria reveals that the promises that came with native title recognition in Mabo have not been fulfilled. ln Ward the native title claim was partially accepted; in Yorta Yorta lhe claim was completely rejected. But as the analysis further reveals the shortcomings of the native title regime as demonstrated by these cases can be partly located in the Mabo decision itself. One of the contributions that some new historians have made to the writing of Australian history has been to reveal how the perceived differences between indigenous peoples and the colonists resulted in the perception of indigenous peoples as inferior beings. In turn, such perceptions worked to legitimise their dispossession in the native title context, indigenous peoples are no longer to be perceived as inferior (the rejection of the terra nullius doctrine in Mabo was an acknowledgement that indigenous peoples did have their own laws and social organisation) However the perception that they are different remains in the way that laws for them are constructed: native title may be recognised by the common law, but it is not part of the common law. As it is argued in this thesis the perceived differences in the origins of native title and the Australian common law has resulted in the inferior r treatment of native title. Potential solutions are canvassed in the thesis. Included among them is the need to give recognition to Aboriginal sovereignty However, it is concluded that if any change is to take place it must involve changing perceptions of indigenous peoples so that the protection of their interests may be more broadly construed as being in the interests of Australia.

This thesis engages in a critique of the concept of Australian native title law as a 'recognition space'. It doing so, it treats native title law as a form of identity politics, the courts a forum in which claims for the recognition of identity are made. An overview of multicultural theories of recognition exposes what is signified by the use of recognition discourse and situates this rhetoric in political and theoretical context. A critique of native title recognition discourse is then developed by reference to the insights of sociolegal scholarship, critical theory, critical anthropology and legal pluralism. These critiques suggest that legal recognition is affective and effective. This thesis highlights native title law's false assumptions as to cultural coherence and subject stasis by exploring law's demands and indigenous claimant engagement with these demands. In this analysis, law's constitutive effect is emphasized. However, a radical constructivist approach is eschewed, subject engagement explored and agency located in the limits of law's constitutive power. The effects of legal recognition discourse, its productive and enabling aspects, are considered best understood by reference to Butler's notion of provisional 'performativity'. Ultimately, claimant 'victories' of resistance and subversion are considered not insignificant, but are defined as temporary and symbolic by virtue of the structural context in which they occur.

Thesis (MA (AborStud))--University of South Australia, 1994

No description available.

Thesis (M.Geo.Sc.)--University of Melbourne, Dept. of Geomatics, 2001. / Typescript (photocopy). Includes bibliographical references (leaves 131-135).

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Murdoch University, 2006. / Thesis submitted to the Division of Arts. Bibliography: p. 437-452.

This thesis argues that native title rights are fundamental to Indigenous citizenship in Australia. It does this by developing a normative conception of citizenship in connection with a model of constitutionalism. Here, citizenship is more than a legal status. It refers to the norms of individual rights coupled with democratic responsibility that are attached to the person in a liberal-democracy. Constitutionalism provides the framework for understanding the manner in which Australian society realizes these norms. This thesis focuses on a society attempting to grapple with issues of postcolonialism. A fundamental question faced in these societies is the legitimacy of group rights based in pre-colonization norms. This thesis argues that these rights can be legitimized when constitutionalism is understood as originating in the deliberations connecting civil society with the state; which deliberations reconcile individual rights with group rights in such a way as to resolve the issue of their competing claims to legitimacy. Civil society is the social space in which politico-legal norms collide with action. The argument constructed here is that native title is built on norms that have the potential (it is a counterfactual argument) to contribute to a postcolonial civil society. This is one in which colonizer and colonized coordinate their action in a mutual search for acceptable solutions to the question 'how do we live together?'. The optimistic analysis is tempered by a consideration of the development of native title law. The jurisprudence of the High Court after the Wik's Case has undermined the potential of native title to play a transformative role. It has undermined Indigenous Australians' place in civil society, and their status as equal individuals and responsible citizens. In seeking to explain this, the thesis turns from jurisprudence to political sociology, and argues that an alternative model of constitutionalism and civil society has supplanted the postcolonial; viz., the neoliberal.

Thesis (Ph.D.) - Simon Fraser University, 2005. / Theses (Dept. of Political Science) / Simon Fraser University. Also issued in digital format and available on the World Wide Web.

This thesis argues that native title rights are fundamental to Indigenous citizenship in Australia. It does this by developing a normative conception of citizenship in connection with a model of constitutionalism. Here, citizenship is more than a legal status. It refers to the norms of individual rights coupled with democratic responsibility that are attached to the person in a liberal-democracy. Constitutionalism provides the framework for understanding the manner in which Australian society realizes these norms. This thesis focuses on a society attempting to grapple with issues of postcolonialism. A fundamental question faced in these societies is the legitimacy of group rights based in pre-colonization norms. This thesis argues that these rights can be legitimized when constitutionalism is understood as originating in the deliberations connecting civil society with the state; which deliberations reconcile individual rights with group rights in such a way as to resolve the issue of their competing claims to legitimacy. Civil society is the social space in which politico-legal norms collide with action. The argument constructed here is that native title is built on norms that have the potential (it is a counterfactual argument) to contribute to a postcolonial civil society. This is one in which colonizer and colonized coordinate their action in a mutual search for acceptable solutions to the question 'how do we live together?'. The optimistic analysis is tempered by a consideration of the development of native title law. The jurisprudence of the High Court after the Wik's Case has undermined the potential of native title to play a transformative role. It has undermined Indigenous Australians' place in civil society, and their status as equal individuals and responsible citizens. In seeking to explain this, the thesis turns from jurisprudence to political sociology, and argues that an alternative model of constitutionalism and civil society has supplanted the postcolonial; viz., the neoliberal.