Response to Joy Cooper’s Speech Part 2 – Why Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Must Be Managed by Aboriginal People in New South Wales

Aboriginal Cultural Heritage in New South Wales (NSW) must be managed by Aboriginal people because it is intrinsically connected to our identity, sovereignty, and rights as the First Peoples of the land. This responsibility is not only a matter of cultural continuity but also a legal and ethical obligation informed by international human rights law, state-based legislation, and Aboriginal law and custom. The failure to ensure Aboriginal-led management perpetuates colonial structures of dispossession and marginalisation, undermining both the integrity of cultural heritage and the self-determination of Aboriginal Peoples.

Self-Determination, Sovereignty and International Obligations

The management of Aboriginal Cultural Heritage must begin from the principle of Indigenous self-determination. The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), formally endorsed by Australia in 2009, enshrines this right. Article 3 affirms that Indigenous Peoples have the right to self-determination, and Article 11 and Article 12 further protect the rights of Indigenous Peoples to practise, revitalise, and control their cultural traditions, knowledge systems, and heritage, including sacred sites and ancestral remains (United Nations, 2007). These articles require that Aboriginal People not only be consulted but be the decision-makers regarding their own cultural legacy.

In the NSW context, however, there remains a structural resistance to embedding these rights into practice. The National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 (NSW) has historically located decision-making authority within government bureaucracies, often relegating Aboriginal knowledge holders to advisory or consultative roles rather than genuine governance positions. The proposed Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Bill 2022 attempted to address these issues through the introduction of Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Advisory Committees and Local Aboriginal Knowledge Holders, but it was ultimately shelved after widespread concern from Aboriginal communities about the lack of meaningful consultation and fears that it would entrench bureaucratic control rather than dismantle it (Heritage NSW, 2022; Aboriginal Heritage Legislation, n.d.). Without enforceable mechanisms to ensure Aboriginal control, such legislative reforms risk being performative and counterproductive.

Cultural Authority and Knowledge Systems

Aboriginal Peoples are the rightful holders of cultural authority. Our knowledge is inherited through kinship, storylines, ceremony, and a spiritual relationship to Country—principles that cannot be replicated, assumed, or substituted by academic or governmental qualifications. The authority to speak for Country is grounded in Aboriginal law and sustained through community recognition, Eldership, and a lifelong connection to ancestral lands. This knowledge is sacred and cannot be detached from the people to whom it belongs.

The involvement of non-Aboriginal individuals or organisations in defining or managing Aboriginal Cultural Heritage is not only culturally inappropriate—it is a breach of the protocols and values embedded in Aboriginal law. Such interference can result in the misrepresentation of Dreaming stories, the misidentification of sacred sites, and the erasure of customary practices. This risk is compounded by the rise of fraudulent actors, such as the non-Aboriginal group claiming the name “GuriNgai,” who have asserted false authority over heritage sites and cultural narratives without any legitimate cultural or genealogical ties (GuriNgai.org, 2024). These acts of Indigenous identity appropriation cause profound cultural harm, undermine the work of legitimate Custodians, and distort public understanding of cultural ownership and authority (Moreton-Robinson, 2015).

Land Rights, Legal Structures and Local Aboriginal Control

In NSW, Aboriginal Land Councils established under the Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983 (NSW) are the lawful and democratic structures through which Aboriginal Peoples manage their lands, economic development, and cultural heritage. Local Aboriginal Land Councils (LALCs), such as the Darkinjung Local Aboriginal Land Council, operate under a legislative framework that empowers them to protect and care for Country in line with the wishes of their communities. These Councils are governed by Aboriginal people, for Aboriginal people, and are accountable to the communities they represent.

By contrast, local government bodies like Central Coast Council and Hornsby Shire Council have no statutory authority to determine Aboriginal heritage matters. Their role should be limited to enabling Aboriginal-led processes, complying with planning laws, and supporting the decisions of legitimate Aboriginal organisations—not substituting or undermining them. When councils attempt to define Aboriginal heritage significance or elevate self-appointed, non-Indigenous actors in decision-making processes, they usurp Aboriginal sovereignty and exacerbate colonial patterns of exclusion (Collaborate NSW, n.d.; NSW Government, 2024).

Cultural Harm, Appropriation and Intergenerational Consequences

Aboriginal Cultural Heritage is a living system that requires the active custodianship of Aboriginal communities. It is not a passive collection of relics to be curated by outsiders, but a dynamic and sacred tradition embedded in Country, kin, and spirit. When non-Aboriginal actors—whether individuals, consultants, developers, or organisations—interfere in these systems, the consequences can be devastating. The desecration of sacred sites, theft of artefacts, and falsification of heritage stories inflict serious and ongoing harm. These acts not only violate spiritual laws but further marginalise Aboriginal voices in their own homelands.

Fraudulent heritage claims by non-Indigenous persons, including those promoting pseudoarchaeology or conspirituality, have also become more visible in recent years. These false claims—whether based on erroneous genealogy, misappropriation of language names like “GuriNgai,” or pseudo-historical narratives—mislead the public and create obstacles for genuine Aboriginal organisations seeking to protect Country (GuriNgai.org, 2024; ANTAR, n.d.). In doing so, they perpetuate settler colonial violence by denying Aboriginal communities their rightful authority over their past, present, and future.

Conclusion

The management of Aboriginal Cultural Heritage in NSW must be led by Aboriginal people themselves, in accordance with Aboriginal law, state and federal legislation, and international human rights obligations. Any heritage framework that does not centre Aboriginal decision-making perpetuates dispossession and cultural erasure. Aboriginal Peoples are the only legitimate cultural authorities over their heritage, and they must be afforded the legal, political, and institutional space to uphold their responsibilities to Country. Government agencies, councils, and developers have a duty to defer to Aboriginal authority, not co-opt it. Upholding Aboriginal control is an ethical imperative and a necessary step toward truth-telling, reconciliation, and justice.

References

Aboriginal Heritage Legislation. (n.d.). Collaborate NSW. https://collaboratensw.org/heritage-and-planning/aboriginal-heritage-legislation/

ANTAR. (n.d.). Cultural heritage in the states and territories: NSW. https://antar.org.au/issues/cultural-heritage/cultural-heritage-in-the-states-and-territories/nsw/

GuriNgai.org. (2023). https://guringai.org

Heritage NSW. (2022). Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Bill 2022 consultation summary. NSW Government. https://www.heritage.nsw.gov.au

Moreton-Robinson, A. (2015). The white possessive: Property, power, and Indigenous sovereignty. University of Minnesota Press.

NSW Government. (2024). Aboriginal cultural heritage. https://www.nsw.gov.au/living-nsw/aboriginal-outcomes/aboriginal-cultural-heritage

NSW Aboriginal Land Council. (2019). Planning Fact Sheet 3: Planning laws and Aboriginal culture and heritage. https://alc.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Planning-Fact-Sheet-3-Planning-laws-and-Aboriginal-culture-and-heritage.pdf

United Nations. (2007). United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. https://www.un.org/development/desa/indigenouspeoples/declaration-on-the-rights-of-indigenous-peoples.html

One response to “Response to Joy Cooper’s Speech Part 2 – Why Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Must Be Managed by Aboriginal People in New South Wales”

  1. Helen Crowley Avatar
    Helen Crowley

    These

    Like

Leave a comment