1967 жылғы Австралия референдумы: Ұлттық мәселелер мен аборигендердің құқықтары

the second part of the 1967 referendum, regarding certain matters on Indigenous Australians
1967 constitutional referendum on the legal status of Indigenous Australians

The second question of the 1967 Australian referendum of 27 May 1967, called by the Holt government, related to Indigenous Australians. Voters were asked whether to give the Commonwealth Parliament the power to make special laws for Indigenous Australians in states, and whether Indigenous Australians should be included in official population counts for constitutional purposes. The term "the Aboriginal Race" was used in the question. Technically the referendum question was a vote on the Constitution Alteration (Aboriginals) 1967 that would amend section 51(xxvi) and repeal section 127. The amendments to the Constitution were overwhelmingly endorsed, winning 90.77% of votes cast and having majority support in all six states. The amendment became law on 10 August 1967. Section 127 excluded "aboriginal natives" from being counted when reckoning the numbers of the people of the commonwealth or a state. and Gurindji Strike highlighted the negative treatment of Indigenous workers in the Northern Territory. From here, the overall plight of Aboriginal Australians became a fundamental political issue. On 7 April 1965, the Menzies Cabinet decided that it would seek to repeal section 127 of the Constitution at the same time as it sought to amend the nexus provision, but made no firm plans or timetable for such action. In August 1965, attorney general Billy Snedden proposed to Cabinet that abolition of section 127 was inappropriate unless section 51(xxvi) was simultaneously amended to remove the words "other than the aboriginal race in any state". He was rebuffed, but gained agreement when he made a similar submission to the Holt Cabinet in 1966. In the meantime, his Liberal colleague Billy Wentworth had introduced a private member's bill proposing inter alia to amend section 51(xxvi). In 1967 the Australian Parliament was unanimous in voting for the alteration bill. The Australian Board of Missions, the Australasian Association for the Advancement of Science, the Australian Aborigines League, the Australian Council of Churches, the Federal Council for the Advancement of Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders (FCAATSI) and spokespeople such as Ruby Hammond, Bill Onus and Faith Bandler were some of the many groups and individuals who effectively utilised the media and their influential platforms to generate the momentum needed to achieve a landslide Yes vote.

It is frequently stated that the 1967 referendum gave Aboriginal people Australian citizenship and that it gave them the right to vote in federal elections; however this is not the case. From 1944 Aboriginal people in Western Australia could apply to become citizens of the state, which gave them various rights, including the right to vote. This citizenship was conditional on adopting "the manner and habits of civilised life" This situation continued until 1971. The Commonwealth Electoral Act 1962 gave all Aboriginal people the option of enrolling to vote in federal elections. It was not until the Commonwealth Electoral Amendment Act 1983 that voting became compulsory for Aboriginal people, as it was for other Australians. Aboriginal people (and all other people) living in the Northern Territory were not allowed to vote in the referendum, which remained the case for both the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory until the Constitutional amendment to section 128 after a referendum in 1977. The section did not prevent the Bureau of Statistics from counting or collecting other information about Indigenous Australians. From 1911 to 1966 the Bureau had collected information about Indigenous Australians, however this was published separately to the general population. As such, while the inclusion in the general population was important symbolically, the change did not directly improve the information available to government.

+ Result State Electoral roll Ballots issued For Against Informal Vote % Vote % New South Wales 2,315,828 2,166,507 1,949,036 182,010 8.54 35,461 Victoria 1,734,476 1,630,594 1,525,026 85,611 5.32 19,957 Queensland 904,808 848,728 748,612 90,587 10.79 9,529 South Australia 590,275 560,844 473,440 75,383 13.74 12,021 Western Australia 437,609 405,666 319,823 75,282 19.05 10,561 Tasmania 199,589 189,245 167,176 18,134 9.79 3,935 Total for Commonwealth 6,182,585 5,801,584 5,183,113 527,007 9.23 91,464 Results Obtained majority in all six states and an overall majority of 4,656,106 votes. Carried
At this time territorians, while able and required to vote in elections, were not permitted to vote in referendums. That was not established until 1977.

The benefits of the referendum began to flow to Aboriginal people in 1972. On 26 January 1972, Aboriginal peoples erected the Aboriginal Tent Embassy on the lawns of the Federal Parliament building in Canberra to express their frustration at the lack of progress on land rights and racial discrimination issues. This became a major confrontation that raised Aboriginal affairs high on the political agenda in the federal election later that year. One week after gaining office, the Whitlam government (1972–1975) established a Royal Commission into land rights for Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory under Justice Woodward. Its principal recommendations, delivered in May 1974, were: that Aboriginal people should have inalienable title to reserve lands; that regional land councils should be established; to establish a fund to purchase land with which Aboriginal people had a traditional connection, or that would provide economic or other benefits; prospecting and mineral exploration on Aboriginal land should only occur with their consent (or that of the Federal Government if the national interest required it); entry onto Aboriginal land should require a permit issued by the regional land council. The recommendations were framed in terms to enable application outside the Northern Territory. The Federal Government agreed to implement the principal recommendations and in 1975 the House of Representatives passed the Aboriginal Councils and Associations Bill and the Aboriginal Land (Northern Territory) Bill, but the Senate had not considered them by the time parliament was dissolved in 1975. The following year, the Fraser government (1975–1983) amended the Aboriginal Land (Northern Territory) Bill by introducing the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Bill. The new bill made a number of significant changes such as limitation on the operations and boundaries of land councils; giving Northern Territory law effect on Aboriginal land, thereby enabling land rights to be eroded; removing the power of land councils to issue permits to non Aboriginal people; and allowing public roads to be built on Aboriginal land without consent. This bill was passed as the Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1976. It is significant however that this legislation was implemented at all, given the political allegiances of the Fraser government, and shows the level of community support for social justice for Aboriginal people at the time.

The Whitlam government used its constitutional powers to overrule racially discriminatory state legislation. On reserves in Queensland, Aboriginal people were forbidden to gamble, use foul language, undertake traditional cultural practices, indulge in adultery, or drink alcohol. They were also required to work without payment. In the Aboriginal Courts in Queensland the same official acted as judge as well as the prosecuting counsel. Defendants almost invariably pleaded guilty as pleas of not guilty were more than likely to lead to a longer sentence. The Whitlam government, using the race power, enacted the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders (Queensland Discriminatory Laws) Act 1975 to override the state laws and eliminate racial discrimination against Aboriginal people. In the Tasmanian Dam Case, the High Court held that even though this law applied to all people and not only to Aboriginal people, it still constituted a special law. In the 1992 Mabo judgment, the High Court of Australia established the existence of Native Title in Australian Common Law. Using the race power, the Keating Government enacted the Native Title Act 1993 and successfully defended a High Court challenge from the Queensland Government.

In granting the Commonwealth a broad power to legislate in regards to Indigenous Australians, responsibilities for areas traditionally the purview of the states (such as housing, education and healthcare) was shared between both branches of government. As a result, both levels have sought to blame the other for the continuing disadvantage of Indigenous Australians, while seeking to place the cost and responsibility to manage these issues on the other. to allow the bridge to proceed. The Ngarrindjeri challenged the new legislation in the High Court on the basis that it was discriminatory to declare that the Heritage Protection Act applied to sites everywhere but Hindmarsh Island, and that such discrimination – essentially on the basis of race – had been disallowed since the Commonwealth was granted the power to make laws with respect to the "Aboriginal race" as a result of the 1967 Referendum. The High Court decided, by a majority, that the amended s.51(xxvi) of the Constitution still did not restrict the Commonwealth parliament to making laws solely for the benefit of any particular race, but still empowered the parliament to make laws that were to the detriment of any race. This decision effectively meant that those people who had believed that they were casting a vote against negative discrimination towards Indigenous people in 1967 had, in fact, allowed the Commonwealth to participate in the discrimination against Indigenous people which had been practised by the States.