'Aboriginal Sovereignty is a challenging and provocative study of the political, legal and constitutional relations between indigenous Australians and mainstream society. It presents a bold new interpretation of Aboriginal political development. It challenges us to consider that the Mabo decision is not the boundary at which the recognition of indigenous rights must cease.'
'Aboriginal Sovereignty confronts the question of whether Aboriginal society exercised a form of sovereignty before 1788, whether the 'tribes' were actually small 'nations'. It considers legal interpretations of what happened when the Briton arrived and pits these interpretations against the record. It looks at the political and legal ramifications of customary law and then considers current political and constitutional discussion, in Australia and overseas.' (Source: Publisher's website)
'Reynolds' writing continues to be an important contribution to legal as well as historical research in Australia. In Aboriginal Sovereignty, Reynolds again draws out unexamined aspects of our legal history to provide an important perspective on current debates. Before the recognition of native title in Australian law, 'sovereignty' was a key point around which Indigenous peoples in this country could rally to express their desire to determine the basis of their relationship with the non-Indigenous state. In domestic debate, native title has, understandably, become the central focus, along with the reconciliation movement. In the international sphere, self-determination for Indigenous peoples has remained pre-eminent as the Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples slowly makes its way through the mechanisms of the United Nations. Where then do the marginalised calls for sovereignty fit in to these processes.' (Introduction)
'Reynolds' writing continues to be an important contribution to legal as well as historical research in Australia. In Aboriginal Sovereignty, Reynolds again draws out unexamined aspects of our legal history to provide an important perspective on current debates. Before the recognition of native title in Australian law, 'sovereignty' was a key point around which Indigenous peoples in this country could rally to express their desire to determine the basis of their relationship with the non-Indigenous state. In domestic debate, native title has, understandably, become the central focus, along with the reconciliation movement. In the international sphere, self-determination for Indigenous peoples has remained pre-eminent as the Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples slowly makes its way through the mechanisms of the United Nations. Where then do the marginalised calls for sovereignty fit in to these processes.' (Introduction)
