Introduction
Australian society is characterized by a high degree of diversity in terms of ethnic, cultural, and economic aspects. The country has a colonial past that is still associated with numerous unresolved issues and debatable topics. One of the problems haunting contemporary Australian society is the inadequate representation of indigenous people in the legal sphere of the country. The Uluru Statement from the Heart is proposed as a tool to address the issue and ensure the active involvement of First Australians in the legal and political life of the nation. Dani Larkin and Kathrine Galloway state that this instrument can be an effective solution as it gives voice to indigenous people whose sovereignty can be regained. This paper includes an analysis of the implication of the Uluru Statement from the Heart in terms of the Australian legal and constitutional domains and the evaluation of the position articulated by Larkin and Galloway.
Potential Constitutional and Legal Consequences
It is noteworthy that it can be hard to predict the legal and constitutional consequences of the Uluru Statement from the Heart as it is still unclear whether it will or can be implemented. It is also rather unknown in what ways its propositions will be implemented. Hence, the assumptions regarding potential implications are uncertain. Nevertheless, it is possible to pay attention to some of the possible scenarios in case the Uluru Statement from the Heart is integrated into the legal canvas of the country.
First, the constitutional change aims at enhancing the involvement of indigenous people in the voting process. Therefore, it is expected that a larger population will be enrolled to participate in federal elections and referendums. The parliament’s structure will be altered as a new body will be integrated. The status of the new chamber is quite vague as described in the Uluru Statement, although it is proposed to make it a consultative body. The legal landscape of the country will also be altered as it is deemed that aboriginal interests and needs will become a part of the so-called settler’s law. It is assumed that First Australians, through their true representation in the Australian parliament, will affect decision-making and law-making processes to ensure meeting the needs of indigenous people.
The Evaluation of the Position of Larkin and Galloway
Representation and Making Voices Heard
The position of Larkin and Galloway is characterized by several serious flaws that make the authors’ argument rather weak. One of the major inconsistencies and vague propositions is linked to the status of the so-called Makarrata Commission. The authors emphasize that the Commission does not target full participation in law-making and shaping the legal traditions of the country. It is stated that the Commission is a necessary entity that will ensure that the voices of indigenous people are heard during all meaningful discussions.
However, the representation of First Australians can hardly be enhanced or improved by the creation of a new body with poorly-set responsibilities and status. The Makarrata Commission will serve as a consultative body contributing to the development of treaties to ensure meeting the needs of aboriginal people. The power of these inputs and the extent to which the position of the Commission will affect the decision-making process remains unclear. On the one hand, the creation of the branch focusing on the needs of a specific group will make this group a privileged one. However, in reality, the weight of the representation and the very sovereignty of these people can turn out minimal. The Commission may bear the signs of a decorative branch with no meaningful power.
At the same time, indigenous people already have a right and responsibility to form the parliament by giving their votes to a representative or exact political force. First Australians are expected to participate in the political life of the country and voice their wants and needs through the existing voting system. The creation of another branch of parliament will result in a distorted balance. In simple terms, indigenous people will have a representation in three bodies that make up the parliament while other cohorts will be represented in two branches only. The principle of equity can hardly be followed under such circumstances. The introduction of a new body is likely to lead to more tension in society and destroy the emerging consensus on the need to make the voices of indigenous people more heard. Thus, instead of initiating a broad discussion of potential changes to the legal system, the Statement can lead to the polarization of the society.
At this point, it is necessary to note that the authors mention the need for a new referendum regarding the sovereignty and involvement of first nations. Larkin and Galloway argue that a new referendum will enact the implementation of the Uluru Statement with the Makarrata Commission. However, another referendum is likely to lead to more confusion as the exact role and purpose of the Commission remain poorly described. The referendum of 1967 was a considerable breakthrough and the associated campaigns led to significant shifts in Australian society. Prior to the second part of the twentieth century, Australians paid little attention to the affairs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities’ affairs. Indigenous people were subjected to assimilation that was often associated with neglect and abuse.
The struggle of Aboriginal Australians and settlers for equality and basic human rights for the former that had been held for decades resulted in the referendum mentioned above. The nation expressed quite a straightforward position stressing that indigenous peoples had equal rights and could (or rather had to) participate in the process of decision-making and shaping political and social agendas of the country. The Uluru Statement is aimed at enhancing this sentiment, but the initiative as it is will have opposite effects. Modern Australians understand the benefits of diversity and acknowledge the disproportionate distribution of opportunities among different groups. Contemporary Australians are willing to solve the issue and make their country stronger by making it truly democratic. The recent advances associated with the empowerment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities can be seen as an illustration of the major changes in Australia in this respect.
Indigenous people have become more active players in the decision-making process. For instance, it has been acknowledged that a third of Australian lands are managed by indigenous peoples. This group draws the general public’s attention to the issues of diversity and first nations’ needs in various spheres, including health care and education. The voices of this population are heard and responded to in many ways. At that, the introduction of a new governmental entity with vague functions and responsibilities can have a negative impact on the balanced achieved by older generations’ struggle. The rest of the society may feel that the indigenous community will acquire a privileged position, while the true influence of these communities is likely to remain unchanged due to the ill-defined role of the Commission and the overall Statement.
It has also been acknowledged that indigenous people communities are heterogeneous, and the nature of relationships between settlers and Aboriginal Australians differ across the country. Therefore, it is critical to make sure that these peculiarities are taken into account when policies and laws to address particular problems are developed and introduced. When advocating for the development of the Commission and introducing constitutional changes, Larkin and Galloway fail to mention this aspect.
At the same time, local authorities develop successful programs that lead to the empowerment of indigenous people and facilitate the development of proper relationships between different groups. It has been acknowledged that the adoption of the principles of the Makarrata in the political agenda of the country can have a positive influence on its development. Moreover, these positive effects have been acknowledged at the local level. The shifts in settlers’ attitudes towards the rethinking of the past and future have also occurred partially due to the adoption of this indigenous tradition. However, the use of this principle is not confined to the establishment of a body declaring its focus on the Makarrata but failing to provide a clear agenda. The Uluru Statement is based on Makarrata principles, but this initiative lacks clarity. The manifestation of ideals and principles, instead of creating an effective instrument or pathways to address the existing issues, can be harmful to Australian society.
Telling the Truth
Another point brought to the fore by Larkin and Galloway is related to informing people and accepting the past. Telling the truth is one of the pillars of the Statement. Therefore, the authors stress that the Uluru Statement offers the instruments that enable indigenous people to draw the attention of the rest of the society by telling the entire truth about First Australians. It is noteworthy that many researchers concentrate on this aspect, believing that the Uluru Statement will be the most effective platform for discussing the past and the future of the nation with a focus of the history of the indigenous people of Australia. The Commission is expected to become the body that will initiate the development of programs and initiatives aimed at discussing the truth about the hardships of Aboriginal people. The new body will consult the government and authorities, as well as organizations, on possible ways to inform the public about various aspects of the past of aboriginal communities.
At the same time, numerous institutions and governmental bodies have been involved in the development of initiatives to address the past of the nation. Importantly, researchers and historians now play an important role in achieving the reconciliation that is needed in Australian society. Historians pay specific attention to exploring the nature of the relationships between colonizers and first Australians, committed crimes, reasons for silencing the truth, and ways to voice the crimes of the past. Clearly, many Australians feel anxious and resistant when it comes to the discussion of the past and implications for the future. However, the overall trend in modern Australian society is characterized by an increase in people who are ready to unveil the truth and discuss associated topics. The introduction of a new governmental body that will have some consultancy responsibilities related to truth-telling seems quite an inadequate response to the existing issue. Instead of introducing new bodies with vaguely identified objectives, it is necessary to develop actual initiatives and programs facilitating the discourse linked to the nation’s past.
Conclusion
In conclusion, it is necessary to note that the Uluru Statement from the Heart can be regarded as a roadmap for further steps to address the issues related to relationships between indigenous people and settlers. However, Dani Larkin and Kathrine Galloway provide quite an erroneous assessment of the initiative as this incentive raises more questions rather than provides solutions. If implemented as it is, the Uluru Statement can have adverse effects on the emerging consensus regarding the past and the future of the nation. Although Aboriginal Australians face many challenges, their empowerment and participation in the social and political life of the country are steadily increasing. The introduction of the incentive itself is an illustration of this empowerment as first Australians maintain the needs of their communities within the focus of the larger public. The discussion of the initiative unveils the existing challenges and potential solutions.
Thus, reconciliation rooted in the adoption of Makarrata principles can be achieved in the near future. However, in order to achieve this goal, it is critical to develop clear solutions and strategies, as well as laws and regulations. Becoming active participants in the discussion through social and political participation within the boundaries of the existing political structure can result in the development of Australian society.
Bibliography
Appleby, Gabrielle and Megan Davis, ‘The Uluru Statement and the Promises of Truth’ (2018) 49(4) Australian Historical Studies 501.
Attwood, Bain, ‘Denial in a Settler Society: The Australian Case’ (2017) 84 History Workshop Journal 24.
Davis, Megan, ‘The Long Road to Uluru: Walking Together: Truth before Justice’ (2018) 60 Griffith REVIEW 32.
Fleay, Jesse John and Barry Judd, ‘The Uluru statement’ (2019) 11(1) International Journal of Critical Indigenous Studies 1.
Fredericks, Bronwyn and Abraham Bradfield, ‘‘More Than a Thought Bubble…’: The Uluru Statement from the Heart and Indigenous Voice to Parliament’ (2021) 24(1) M/C Journal.
Larkin, Dani and Kathrine Galloway, ‘Uluru Statement from the Heart: Australian Public Law Pluralism’ (2018) 30(2) Bond Law Review 335.
Lee, Emma et al., ‘The ‘Uluru Statement from the Heart’: Investigating Indigenous Australian Sovereignty’ (2020) 23(1-2) Journal of Australian Indigenous Issues 18.
Little, Adrian, ‘The Politics of Makarrata: Understanding Indigenous–Settler Relations in Australia’ (2020) 48(1) Political Theory 30.
Mayor, Thomas, ‘The Torment of Our Powerlessness: The Uluru Statement and Enshrining a Voice for Indigenous Peoples’ (2018) 87 Australian Options 7.
Nelson, Tahlia, ‘Rewriting the Narrative: Confronting Australia’s Past in Order to Determine Our Future’ (2018) 4 NEW: Emerging Scholars in Australian Indigenous Studies 20.
Rubenstein, Kim, ‘Power, Control and Citizenship: The Uluru Statement from the Heart as Active Citizenship’ (2018) 30(1) Bond Law Review 1.
Schultz, Rosalie et al., ‘Quantification of Interplaying Relationships Between Wellbeing Priorities of Aboriginal People in Remote Australia’ (2019) 10(3) International Indigenous Policy Journal 1.
Synot, Eddie, ‘The Universal Declaration of Human Rights at 70: Indigenous Rights and the Uluru Statement from the Heart’ (2019) 73(4) Australian Journal of International Affairs 320.
Uluru Statement from the Heart – Secondary Education Tool V5 CURRENT (Blackfella Films, 2018).
Wakamatsu, Ansel ‘Can Historians Tell the Truth? The Uluru Statement from the Heart and the Quest for a New History’ (2018) 5(1) NEW: Emerging Scholars in Australian Indigenous Studies 1.