AustLII Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback

Indigenous Law Bulletin

Indigenous Law Bulletin
You are here:  AustLII >> Databases >> Indigenous Law Bulletin >> 1999 >> [1999] IndigLawB 7

Database Search | Name Search | Recent Articles | Noteup | LawCite | Help

Fagan, Matthew --- "UNESCO Special Mission to Kakadu National Park" [1999] IndigLawB 7; (1999) 4(17) Indigenous Law Bulletin 16


UNESCO Special Mission to Kakadu National Park

by Matthew Fagan

The Mirrar people have continued to defy the odds in their fight to stop the Jabiluka uranium mine being built on their country within Kakadu National Park.

After receiving a setback on the domestic front when the High Court denied senior traditional owner Yvonne Margarula special leave to appeal her challenge to the Jabiluka Mineral Lease,[1] the Mirrar have achieved dramatic success on the international front by utilising the Convention for the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage 1972 (‘the World Heritage Convention’).

The process began when the Mirrar successfully lobbied the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation (‘UNESCO’) World Heritage Committee in June 199 8 to send a Special Mission to investigate the threats posed to the Kakadu World Heritage Area by the proposed Jabiluka uranium mine.

The UNESCO Mission conducted their investigation in Kakadu, Darwin and Canberra in the last week of October. During their visit, the Mission met with government, industry, conservation and Aboriginal groups.

The Mirrar presented a 20,000 word submission to the UNESCO Mission team outlining the cultural destruction caused by the Ranger Uranium Mine and the threat of a complete loss of cultural identity posed by the proposed Jabiluka project. The Mirrar were allocated four hours to show the Mission their cultural sites on the Jabiluka Mineral Lease and their living conditions within Kakadu National Park.

In their submission, the Mirrar argued that the actual and potential threats to their living tradition and culture posed by further mining on their land required that Kakadu be inscribed on the List of World Heritage In Danger pursuant to Article 11, Paragraph 4 of the World Heritage Convention and Chapter III of the Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention.

The Mirrar demonstrated that their living tradition was a key factor in the decision to grant Kakadu World Heritage status in 1991 under both cultural and natural criteria of the World Heritage Convention, and that their living cultural tradition was directly threatened by activities on the Jabiluka Mineral Lease. (The Jabiluka Mineral Lease is wholly within, but excised from the Kakadu World Heritage Area.)

In late November, the seven-member UNESCO Kakadu Mission handed down its Report. The Report found that the threats identified by the Mirrar were real, and called for the Jabiluka project to be abandoned and recommended a range of corrective measures. The two Australian Government appointees to the Mission dissented from some aspects of the Report.

The 22nd Session of the World Heritage Committee held in Japan in early December adopted the Mission Report in full. However, under heavy pressure from the Australian Government, the Committee delayed their decision to include Kakadu on the List of World Heritage In Danger until the 23rd Session in June, 1999. In the interim, the Australian Government must prove via a process of international peer review that it is taking measures to mitigate all the threats identified in the Mission’s Report. If the Australian Government fails to demonstrate that these measures are sufficient, the Bureau of the World Heritage Committee is authorised to automatically include Kakadu on the List of World Heritage in Danger.

The 22nd Session of the World Heritage Committee also called on the Australian Government and mining company Energy Resources of Australia to halt construction of the Jabiluka project until the Australian response to the Mission Report is considered. To date, the Australian Government has refused to comply with this resolution.

In the meantime, the Mirrar will continue with their Federal Court challenge to the Commonwealth approval process for the Jabiluka project under the Administrative Decision (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth). The first hearing is expected to take place in mid-December, 1998.

Mathew Fagan is Legal and Policy Officer of the Gundjehmi Aboriginal Corporation.


[1] Yvonne Margarula a had been seeking special leave to appeal against a Federal Court ruling on 21 August which confirmed the Northern Territory Government’s power to issue the lease. See ILB August/September and October 1998.


AustLII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback
URL: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/IndigLawB/1999/7.html