Gundjehmi Aboriginal Corporation Media Briefing Paper #2 October 1996
Ranger and Jabiluka: A history of duress
The unrelenting pressure on Aboriginal people in the region.
Aboriginal people in the Kakadu region have, historically, maintained opposition to the mining of uranium.
During the 1970's opposition to the development of the Narbalek and Ranger uranium mines was vehemently expressed by traditional owners. The Ranger Project Area was classified as exempt from the provisions of the Aboriginal Land Rights Act relating to veto, subsequent to the strong opposition of the Aboriginal community.
It was reported to traditional owners and members of the Northern Land Council by the then Chairperson Galarrwuy Yunupingu that:
'If we don't sign the agreement, Mr Fraser has told me [Yunupingu] he has power to block the Aboriginal Land Rights Act, and that he will stop the funds to outstations.'
'If the Land Council makes a mistake on this question the whole of Australia will know and many people will support those who want to see Aboriginals without land, without any right to make their own decisions, and without a Land Coucil to represent them.'
In spit of legal action initiated by traditional owners the agreement was signed and ratified.
Aboriginal opposition to the Jabiluka project was well known for a number of years before negotations commenced. It was reported to be 'more deep-seated than that to Ranger.'
Land Rights News had commented on the views of two of the senior traditional owners of the area in early 1978:
They did not want the Pancontinental mine at Jabiluka. Toby Gangali and Bill Najidji said they did not want the Pamcontinental mine.
Negotiations regarding the Jabiluka agreement commenced regarding issues which may impact on the Aboriginal community IF the development were to proceed. Before the consultations / negotiations were completed in the absence of instructions from traditional owners to approve or othwerwise, the Government announced the project had received conditional approval under the Government's uranium policy. This enabled the companies to enter into the marketplace to negotiate export contracts.
Undoubtly the Government's decision placed considerable pressure on the Aboriginal land owners to give their consent to the project. It certainly gave the clearest indication that whatever the views of the traditional owners the mine weould proceed. The opposition of the day described it as follows:
'...irrespective of any opposition that they [traditional owners] might have to mning, a government that prefers to achieve its mining objectives by a legal chrade that could project the view that Aboriginal approval to mining is an approval that is freely given.'
We understand the duress that was applied to traditional owners during the negotiation of the Ranger and Jabiluka agreements. We believe that both agreements were signed under duress by traditional owners.
Our community is currently living out the consequences of the government and industry strategy of agression to secure approvals. We are again witnessing this strategy being implemented -clear abuses of leglislative processes by the company while government refuses to ensure that the rights of Aboriginal people are protected.
Energy Resources Australias have demonstrated that they view themselves as superior to Government and beyond the confines of legislation.