Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorFinnane, Marken_US
dc.contributor.editorShaunnagh Dorsett and Ian Hunteren_US
dc.date.accessioned2017-04-24T08:17:32Z
dc.date.available2017-04-24T08:17:32Z
dc.date.issued2010en_US
dc.date.modified2011-05-26T06:58:05Z
dc.identifier.isbn9780230104556en_US
dc.identifier.doihttp://www.palgrave.com/en_AU
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/37156
dc.description.abstractIn the case of The King v Jack Congo Murrell (1836) the NSW Supreme Court determined that the 'aboriginal natives of this colony are amenable to the laws of the Colony for offences committed within it against the persons of each other'. While this settled the question of jurisdiction the amenability of Indigenous people in the Australian colonies to criminal law remained a problem of policing choices, as well as prosecutorial and judicial discretion. 150 years after Murrell law reformers in a succeeding state, the Australian Commonwealth, revitalised debate over the recognition of a body of 'customary law'. In subsequent decades the scope and claims of 'customary law' have remained contentious, for some holding out the promise of a role in reconstitution of Indigenous communities, for others being only a reminder of the need for a completion of a transition to a state of civilisation. This paper will examine the construction of customary law as a body of knowledge (or more properly a set of presumptions) that constitutes changing policy in the government of Aboriginal lives, in legal, policing and bureaucratic domains. Drawing on historical evidence from the adjacent jurisdictions of Queensland and the Northern Territory it considers the extent to which policing and legal processes continued to distinguish Aboriginal subjects as less than amenable to criminal law. It thus examines the implications for the lives of Indigenous people of the continuing ambiguities of their status at law in spite of their standing as British and later Australian subjects.en_US
dc.description.peerreviewedYesen_US
dc.description.publicationstatusYesen_AU
dc.format.extent593703 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.languageEnglishen_US
dc.language.isoen_AU
dc.publisherPalgrave Macmillanen_US
dc.publisher.placeUnited Statesen_US
dc.publisher.urihttp://www.palgravemacmillan.com.au/palgrave/newonix/isbn/9780230104556?open&template=domPalgrave&ed=site/paled21.nsfen_AU
dc.relation.ispartofbooktitleLaw and Politics in British Colonial Thought: Transpositions of Empireen_US
dc.relation.ispartofchapter8en_US
dc.relation.ispartofstudentpublicationNen_AU
dc.relation.ispartofpagefrom149en_US
dc.relation.ispartofpageto168en_US
dc.relation.ispartofeditionFirsten_US
dc.rights.retentionYen_AU
dc.subject.fieldofresearchAustralian History (excl. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander History)en_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchLaw and Societyen_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchAboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Historyen_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode210303en_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode180119en_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode210301en_US
dc.titleThe limits of jurisdiction: law, governance and Indigenous peoples in colonized Australiaen_US
dc.typeBook chapteren_US
dc.type.descriptionB1 - Book Chapters (HERDC)en_US
dc.type.codeB - Book Chaptersen_US
gro.facultyArts, Education & Law Group, School of Humanities, Languages and Social Sciencesen_US
gro.rights.copyrightCopyright 2010 Palgrave Macmillan.This extract is taken from the author's original manuscript and has not been edited. The definitive version of this piece may be found in Law and Politics in British Colonial Thought edited by Shaunnagh Dorsett and Ian Hunter which can be accessed from www.palgrave.comen_AU
gro.date.issued2010
gro.hasfulltextFull Text


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Book chapters
    Contains book chapters authored by Griffith authors.

Show simple item record