‘Everywhere, all around us are the Dreaming Tracks and Sacred Sites’ (2023) by Garrwa and Marra man Jack Green

EDO's RAP Launch 

After almost three years of reflection and preparation, EDO is pleased to share the organisation’s inaugural Reconciliation Action Plan (RAP).  

Endorsed by Reconciliation Australia, our Innovate RAP 2024-26 offers us a structured, nationally recognised framework to formalise our commitment to reconciliation.   

Reconciliation is an ongoing journey that requires vigilance, self-reflection, and accountability. EDO is committed to building more respectful and meaningful relationships with First Nations communities, engaging staff more deeply in reconciliation, and embedding our RAP commitments into our core business.

AIATSIS Summit 2025

EDO’s First Nations Director and the Deputy Director of the Country and Cultural Heritage Practice, went to the AIATSIS Summit on beautiful Larrakia Country in June. It was an amazing week full of incredibly important presentations that spanned from national cultural heritage reforms and changes to the Future Acts Regime, to how Aboriginal organisations are preserving and sharing their languages and culture.  Highlights included sessions on the upcoming reforms to Federal cultural heritage laws (see below for more information) and on truth telling processes in Victoria and California. We also heard about the Klamath River Restoration project which has restored the natural flow of the Klamath River in California and Oregon as a result of strong advocacy of First Nations. You can read more about this project here. 

We met a lot of wonderful organisations and people at AIATSIS and look forward to continuing to strengthen relationships with them.  

Update on the Federal Cultural Heritage Reforms

The Federal Government has committed to developing stronger cultural heritage protection laws as a result of the Juukan Gorge disaster. Since 2020, reforms to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act 1984 (Cth) (ATSIHP Act) have been developed in partnership with the First Nations Heritage Protection Alliance.  You can read more about this process here. 

Work on the reforms is progressing, with legislation expected to be introduced to Parliament in November this year.  Under the current proposed model for the reforms there would be a change as to who can bring an application to protect cultural heritage. Under the current ATSIHP Act, applications for protection can be made “by or on behalf of an Aboriginal or a group of Aboriginals”.  It is proposed that applications for protection under the reformed Act would instead be able to be brought by “Traditional Owner Representative Institutions" (TORIs). These would include Prescribed Body Corporates, Land Councils and bodies such as the Noongar Regional Corporations.  There will also be a new Federal Heritage Council which would:

1. help to identify the TORI for the relevant area
2. provide advice to Government about the application, and
3. have power to make interim declarations to protect cultural heritage.  

Northern Territory Aboriginal Sacred Sites Legislation Amendment Bill 2025

On 4 April 2025, the EDO made a submission to the Northern Territory’s Legislative Scrutiny Committee fast tracked Inquiry into the Northern Territory Aboriginal Sacred Sites Legislation Amendment Bill 2025. 

The Bill included amendments to the NT Sacred Sites Act to enable Certificates issued by the NT Aboriginal Areas Protection Authority (AAPA) which set conditions on work near sacred sites to be transferable: if a developer with a certificate sells a property, then the certificate goes to the new buyer, even if the development changes. 

EDO submitted that the Bill should be withdrawn, and appropriate consultation should occur at the direction of First Nations communities to ensure that the proposed changes are not progressed without their free, prior and informed consent. In the alternative, the Committee should exercise its powers to facilitate a more effective and meaningful inquiry process. You can read our submission here.

The Bill subsequently became law despite strong opposition from NT First Nations communities.  

QLD Olympics Bill

EDO also provided both guidance to Queensland First Nations clients and its own   submission to the Queensland Parliamentary Committee on the Planning (Social Impact and Community Benefit) and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025.  This Bill introduces an alternate cultural heritage regime with respect to areas which will house Olympics related venues, villages and infrastructure.  

We voiced strong concern about these changes which would undermine the rights of First Nations People to protect their cultural heritage.  We recommended that: to ensure that the reforms are progressed with the free, prior and informed consent of First Nations people, the parts of the Bill which impact the rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples should be withdrawn, and appropriate consultation should occur with and as guided by affected First Nations communities. 

You can read our submission here.
 

WA Government's review about Native Title & cultural heritage processes 

The WA Government, in partnership with the National Native Title Tribunal, is reviewing Native Title and Aboriginal cultural heritage processes in WA’s mining and exploration sector with a focus on “outcomes for both Traditional Owners and industry”. The review will take place between June and September 2025.  It will focus on mining and exploration processes under current laws and “will identify options to improve the efficiency, effectiveness and equity of WA's Native Title and Aboriginal cultural heritage processes". 

It will involve on-Country meetings, targeted roundtables and workshops, facilitated by National Native Title Tribunal member Glen Kelly. The review will not consider any changes to the law. 

ALRC Review of the Future Acts Regime 

The Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) is reviewing the future acts regime in the Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) (NTA). 

The ALRC has published this Discussion Paper which outlines some options for reform.  A summary of the reform options is here. These include ideas about strengthening the application of the future acts regime to: 

• water management frameworks: which are used to manage the grant and administration of water rights and can be found in, for example, water resource plans and water sharing plans (Question 17(b)); and  
• cultural heritage: The ALRC asks whether the NTA should be amended to provide for requirements and processes to manage the impacts of future acts on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultural heritage, and if so, how? (Question 28) 

Written submissions to the ALRC close on 10 July 2025. If you have any questions about making a submission, you can get in touch with the ALRC at [email protected]. If you would prefer not to make a formal submission but would still like to share your thoughts, that is fine too. 

The EDO does not provide advice about native title, but please contact us if you would like information about the current cultural heritage laws and water management frameworks that impact on your community which may assist in informing a submission to the ALRC.
 

Guide to Lodging Applications with the ACT Heritage Council for Development and Works 

On 5 May 2025, ACT Heritage released the Guide to Lodging Applications with the ACT Heritage Council for Development & Works. The guide is for anyone seeking advice or an approval from the Heritage Council, including heritage-property owners, managers, and agents; private developers; or an ACT Government agency. 

Any applicant needing additional pre-lodgement support can contact ACT Heritage at [email protected] or by phone on 13 22 81. 

Canadian Court decision about FPIC 

On 19 February 2025, the Federal Court of Canada handed down an important decision about the meaning of free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) under the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). 

The case of Kebaowek First Nation v Canadian Nuclear Laboratories, 2025 FC 319 concerned the approval given by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission for disposal of nuclear waste on First Nations land in Ontario. 

The approval was successfully challenged by Kebaowek First Nations. One of their arguments was that inadequate consultation had taken place and that it required their FPIC under the UNDRIP. 

The Court found that FPIC was essential for the protection of Indigenous peoples' human rights in the face of major development projects and stated that, at least in some cases, securing it may be a requirement. In this case, the Court found that “the UNDRIP concept of FPIC requires more than just consultation. While it is not a veto, it requires 'an enhanced and more robust process to ensure that consultation processes were tailored to consider Kebaowek’s Indigenous laws, knowledge, and practices, and that the process was directed towards finding mutual agreement'."

While there are differences between Australia and Canada about the role of UNDRIP in our courts and legal system,  this is still a very important legal development as one of the first decisions in Canada that talks about the role and content of FPIC.
 

If you are aware of upcoming events related to Country, culture, water, environment, or law that you would like to share, please let us know at: [email protected]