The Mabo decision 20 years ago raised the political profile of Indigenous affairs, helping to put reconciliation on the national political agenda, according Charles Sturt University (CSU) academic Dr Dominic O’Sullivan.

 

But Dr O’Sullivan, a senior lecturer with CSU’s School of Humanities and Social Sciences believes public policy still falls short in giving Indigenous people genuinely equal citizenship rights in Australian.

 

“The High Court’s decision to set aside terra nullius raised the profile of Indigenous affairs in a more substantive way than anything since the Constitutional Referendum in 1967,” Dr O’Sullivan said.

 

“Certainly land rights was the major outcome, but because the Mabo decision occurred around the same time as the Stolen Generations report, it also made a contribution towards putting reconciliation onto the political agenda.

 

“While reconciliation is not as significant now as it was in the 1990s, it has changed the nature of Indigenous policy debate,” he said.

 

The High Court’s decision also led the Keating Government to introduce the 1993 Native Title Act, despite fierce opposition from the States and the federal opposition.

 

“I think it was a significant act of political leadership on Keating’s behalf to pursue the native title legislation,” Dr O’Sullivan said. “There was certainly resistance within the government and, without that Prime Ministerial level support, there may well have been a more hostile response to the decision.”

 

But reflecting on the 20 years since the historic judgement, Dr O’Sullivan notes that Indigenous equality remains elusive.

 

“I think the fact that the notion of terra nullius was set aside is legally, politically and morally very important and it does challenge government and society to re-think the place of Indigenous people in society.

 

“It changes the whole framework for the way society thinks about Indigenous citizenship and the claims that Indigenous peoples can reasonably make on the state.

 

“Practically, I don’t think Australia has accepted the moral implications of terra nullius and its setting aside,” Dr O’Sullivan said. “I think public policy still sees Indigenous people as enjoying only a qualified citizenship which is quite different to the way that indigenous citizenship is understood in other countries with similar colonial histories such as Canada and New Zealand.”