Ranger Mine surrounded by Kakadu Nationl Park World Heritage Area. Photo: Dominic O’Brien.
the rule of law in a first world economy, a pro-mining government can nonetheless defeat the intent
of beneficial legislation by bringing unconscionable pressure on both industry and on the statutory
agencies such as the Northern Land Council to deliver an economic outcome. This was an example
of consent that was neither free nor informed at the local level. The complaint in relation to the
Northern Land Council is that the bureaucracy usurped the resources, capacity and representation
of the Traditional Owners. The Mirarr were excluded from being a party in their own right to the
1982 agreement. The 2005 agreement with ERA was entered into by the Mirarr directly. Neither
the government nor the Northern Land Council was closely involved although both were required to
tacitly approve of the agreement.
Ranger case:
At the time the 1976 Aboriginal Land Rights Act was passed, the Ranger Project Area was excluded
from the consent/veto provisions that otherwise applied under the Act in relation to mining. The
Ranger project proceeded without due regard to the wishes of the Mirarr Traditional Owners. Both
the Ranger and Jabiluka leases are surrounded by, but excluded from, the Kakadu National Park.
Under the original arrangements dictated by the legislation, more than half of the financial benefits
from the project were directed to the Northern Land Council and to other Aboriginal community
programs. In 2013, the Mirarr and ERA finalised negotiations on an agreement in relation to the
existing operation at the Ranger mine to review and update the financial arrangements. Due to the
nature of the 1976 Aboriginal Land Rights Act, both the Mirarr and their representative organisation
GAC were excluded from being included as parties to the revised agreements and all benefits
continue to flow to the Northern Land Council. An additional Memorandum of Understanding was
required to supplement these agreements to allow for an expression of consent by the Mirarr to the
continuation of the current operations for the balance of the current Authority to 2021. The MOU
does not have the force of an agreement under the legislation but demonstrates the commitment
that both the Traditional Owners and the company have to achieving real FPIC in circumstances
56
Making Free, Prior and Informed Consent a Reality