Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Title: Mabo Case in Australia: Conflicting Approaches?
Authors: Awawda, Osayd
Keywords: Mabo Case; Australia; Natice Title; Terra Nullis
Issue Date: 2021
Publisher: IUP Publications
Citation: Awawda, Osayd, Mabo Case in Australia: Conflicting Approaches?, IUP Journal of International Relations; Vol. 13, Iss. 2, (2021).
Abstract: After the expansion of the British empire in the 18th century and the establishment of new colonies overseas, the indigenous individuals and their rights constituted a hot topic for the judges and the Common law legal system specialists. The core of this topic was the dilemma of what status indigenous laws and their pre-existing rights should have. Indeed, the indigenous rights became very critical when the indigenous people went to the courts of the Common law itself to seek the help they wanted. In 1992, the Mabo case in the Australian High Court was a tremendous event regarding the indigenous rights issue, and there were two main judicial approaches to rule in that case. Brennan J was the father of the first approach, and Dawson J was the father of the other. The author, in this paper, argues that Brennan J's approach is flexible and consistent with the global context, and pays the required attention to the humanitarian aspect of the law. Additionally, Dawson J's approach is rigid and dehumanizing and restrictively vests the legitimacy only in the Common law principles themselves.
Appears in Collections:Journals

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
1.pdf kBAdobe PDFView/Open

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.