logo
Court battle to protect ancient rock art heats up

Court battle to protect ancient rock art heats up

Perth Now12 hours ago
The time it has taken for the federal environment minister to consider an application to protect Indigenous rock art has "grossly exceeded" what is reasonable, a court has been told.
Mardathoonera woman Raelene Cooper submitted an application under Section 10 of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act in February 2022, in a bid to protect her Country in Western Australia's Pilbara region.
The area, known as the Burrup Peninsula, or Murujuga, contains some of the world's oldest and largest petroglyphs.
Ms Cooper has long opposed Woodside's North West Shelf extension, and other industrial developments in the area, fearing for the future of this unique collection of rock art.
In May, Ms Cooper launched action in the Federal Court to compel Environment Minister Murray Watt to consider her Section 10 application.
The action came a week before Mr Watt granted interim approval of the North West Shelf extension until 2070, which was met with opposition from environmental groups and Traditional Owners.
On Wednesday, lawyers for Ms Cooper told the Federal Court in Sydney there has still not been a decision made on Ms Cooper's application, more than three years after it was first lodged.
"It is plain, almost beyond argument that three-and-half years grossly exceeds a reasonable for the making of that decision," they said.
Ms Cooper's lawyers said a report prepared for then-federal Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek was met with a period of "outwardly facing inactivity".
While the report found there was no conclusive evidence that industrial emissions were harming the ancient petroglyphs at Murujuga, it did make a number of recommendations to protect Indigenous heritage in the area.
One of the recommendations was fertiliser developer Perdaman should drop plans for a causeway across the site of its urea plant in the area.
Ms Cooper's lawyers said while the environment minister had this report, the Western Australian government had given the green light for the construction of this causeway and construction was underway.
"At a bare minimum ... it was unreasonable not to have made a decision for so long that the very thing that was presenting a threat, identified quite clearly by the reporter, was able to occur and largely be completed," they said.
13YARN 13 92 76
Lifeline 13 11 14
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

‘Socialist mentality': Vic government's decision to give Indigenous names for new schools
‘Socialist mentality': Vic government's decision to give Indigenous names for new schools

Sky News AU

time4 hours ago

  • Sky News AU

‘Socialist mentality': Vic government's decision to give Indigenous names for new schools

Sky News host Rowan Dean says the Victorian government's decision to give new schools Indigenous names is 'childish' and shows an 'undergraduate socialist mentality'. 'I think Monty Python is … secretly running Victoria,' Mr Dean told Sky News host Andrew Bolt. 'It's childish again, it shows that undergraduate socialist mentality … and it's stupid and I'm sure it's a monumental waste of taxpayers' money.'

Allan government ‘pandering to the minority' with latest Indigenous naming policy
Allan government ‘pandering to the minority' with latest Indigenous naming policy

Sky News AU

time7 hours ago

  • Sky News AU

Allan government ‘pandering to the minority' with latest Indigenous naming policy

Sky News host Steve Price has slammed the Victorian government for "pandering to a minority' by deciding to name new schools after Indigenous words rather than suburbs. The Labor state government in Victoria has declared that First Nations language names will be used for all new state schools and campuses from this year onwards. 'Why are we surprised, given Victoria is deep into a secret treaty negotiation with Indigenous groups, costing millions of dollars that we are not even allowed to know about,' Mr Price said.

Lehrmann called 'national joke' on return to lion's den
Lehrmann called 'national joke' on return to lion's den

The Advertiser

time8 hours ago

  • The Advertiser

Lehrmann called 'national joke' on return to lion's den

Bruce Lehrmann has challenged damning findings from a landmark defamation case, arguing not all rape is violent as his tattered reputation takes another beating. The former federal political staffer is appealing his loss to Network Ten and journalist Lisa Wilkinson, whom he sued over an interview they conducted with his former colleague Brittany Higgins on The Project in 2021. In his ruling on the defamation case in April 2024, Federal Court Justice Michael Lee found Ms Higgins' claims she had been raped by Lehrmann in parliament house in 2019 were proven on the balance of probabilities. In his headline-grabbing decision, the judge quipped: "Having escaped the lions' den, Mr Lehrmann made the mistake of going back for his hat" in reference to his doomed defamation bid. Lehrmann's lawyer Zali Burrows told the appeal court on Wednesday Justice Lee's ruling, on the heels of an abandoned criminal trial, meant Lehrmann has become probably "the most damaged man in Australia". Media attention, aggravated by commentary from Channel Ten and Wilkinson, led to a flood of hateful social media comments aimed at Lehrmann, she said. "He's pretty much become a national joke," Ms Burrows told the court. She argued Lehrmann, 30, was denied procedural fairness because the facts found by Justice Lee were "starkly different" from the case run by Ten. The ex-Liberal staffer had been "taken by surprise" the judge had adopted a "softer" sequence of events that had not been put to Lehrmann in cross-examination, Ms Burrows said. She claimed Lehrmann had been accused of committing a violent rape but Justice Lee had found it was a "non-violent rape", prompting Justice Craig Colvin to say he wasn't sure he understood that concept. Ten's barrister Matt Collins KC contended the judge had found Ms Higgins' rape was violent, and indeed: "All rape is violent". Lehrmann argued the judge was not satisfied about a number of the violent elements argued by Ten, including he had held open Ms Higgins' legs. "The sting of the (defamatory) imputation resides in the act of intercourse without consent, not in any detail of it," Dr Collins said. He rejected Lehrmann's suggestions he should be awarded damages of more than $20,000 if successful on appeal. Lehrmann raped Ms Higgins when he knew she was seriously intoxicated, continued raping her when she became aware, and left her in a state of undress, Dr Collins said. "That is not a man with any reputation in respect of sexual morality that would warrant compensation," he said. He took issue with Justice Lee's finding Lehrmann had been reckless as to whether Ms Higgins was consenting and urged the appeal court to instead find he knew she did not consent. Ms Wilkinson's lawyer agreed Lehrmann's "level of indifference" could not be inadvertent and instead amounted to a definition of "intentional rape" as understood by an ordinary person. "A young man who knows that a woman is very drunk knows that she cannot consent," Sue Chrysanthou SC said. "This is not a legal question, this is a question that is considered on the standards of the community." Lehrmann not only knew Ms Higgins was very intoxicated but encouraged her to drink, she said. Both lawyers argued Lehrmann had been confronted with the main facts of the case as found by Justice Lee: that sex took place, Ms Higgins did not consent and Lehrmann had been reckless as to her consent. Lehrmann maintains he did not sexually assault Ms Higgins and a 2022 criminal case against him was abandoned without any findings against him. Earlier in the day, Ms Burrows apologised Lehrmann was not represented by a silk, telling the panel of judges he "really wanted" Guy Reynolds SC but "couldn't afford" to engage him. The defamation case and related appeal are among a host of court actions spawned by Ms Higgins' allegation of sexual assault. The Western Australian Supreme Court will next Wednesday rule on former Liberal senator Linda Reynolds' high-profile defamation case against Ms Higgins, her former employee. 1800 RESPECT (1800 737 732) National Sexual Abuse and Redress Support Service 1800 211 028 Bruce Lehrmann has challenged damning findings from a landmark defamation case, arguing not all rape is violent as his tattered reputation takes another beating. The former federal political staffer is appealing his loss to Network Ten and journalist Lisa Wilkinson, whom he sued over an interview they conducted with his former colleague Brittany Higgins on The Project in 2021. In his ruling on the defamation case in April 2024, Federal Court Justice Michael Lee found Ms Higgins' claims she had been raped by Lehrmann in parliament house in 2019 were proven on the balance of probabilities. In his headline-grabbing decision, the judge quipped: "Having escaped the lions' den, Mr Lehrmann made the mistake of going back for his hat" in reference to his doomed defamation bid. Lehrmann's lawyer Zali Burrows told the appeal court on Wednesday Justice Lee's ruling, on the heels of an abandoned criminal trial, meant Lehrmann has become probably "the most damaged man in Australia". Media attention, aggravated by commentary from Channel Ten and Wilkinson, led to a flood of hateful social media comments aimed at Lehrmann, she said. "He's pretty much become a national joke," Ms Burrows told the court. She argued Lehrmann, 30, was denied procedural fairness because the facts found by Justice Lee were "starkly different" from the case run by Ten. The ex-Liberal staffer had been "taken by surprise" the judge had adopted a "softer" sequence of events that had not been put to Lehrmann in cross-examination, Ms Burrows said. She claimed Lehrmann had been accused of committing a violent rape but Justice Lee had found it was a "non-violent rape", prompting Justice Craig Colvin to say he wasn't sure he understood that concept. Ten's barrister Matt Collins KC contended the judge had found Ms Higgins' rape was violent, and indeed: "All rape is violent". Lehrmann argued the judge was not satisfied about a number of the violent elements argued by Ten, including he had held open Ms Higgins' legs. "The sting of the (defamatory) imputation resides in the act of intercourse without consent, not in any detail of it," Dr Collins said. He rejected Lehrmann's suggestions he should be awarded damages of more than $20,000 if successful on appeal. Lehrmann raped Ms Higgins when he knew she was seriously intoxicated, continued raping her when she became aware, and left her in a state of undress, Dr Collins said. "That is not a man with any reputation in respect of sexual morality that would warrant compensation," he said. He took issue with Justice Lee's finding Lehrmann had been reckless as to whether Ms Higgins was consenting and urged the appeal court to instead find he knew she did not consent. Ms Wilkinson's lawyer agreed Lehrmann's "level of indifference" could not be inadvertent and instead amounted to a definition of "intentional rape" as understood by an ordinary person. "A young man who knows that a woman is very drunk knows that she cannot consent," Sue Chrysanthou SC said. "This is not a legal question, this is a question that is considered on the standards of the community." Lehrmann not only knew Ms Higgins was very intoxicated but encouraged her to drink, she said. Both lawyers argued Lehrmann had been confronted with the main facts of the case as found by Justice Lee: that sex took place, Ms Higgins did not consent and Lehrmann had been reckless as to her consent. Lehrmann maintains he did not sexually assault Ms Higgins and a 2022 criminal case against him was abandoned without any findings against him. Earlier in the day, Ms Burrows apologised Lehrmann was not represented by a silk, telling the panel of judges he "really wanted" Guy Reynolds SC but "couldn't afford" to engage him. The defamation case and related appeal are among a host of court actions spawned by Ms Higgins' allegation of sexual assault. The Western Australian Supreme Court will next Wednesday rule on former Liberal senator Linda Reynolds' high-profile defamation case against Ms Higgins, her former employee. 1800 RESPECT (1800 737 732) National Sexual Abuse and Redress Support Service 1800 211 028 Bruce Lehrmann has challenged damning findings from a landmark defamation case, arguing not all rape is violent as his tattered reputation takes another beating. The former federal political staffer is appealing his loss to Network Ten and journalist Lisa Wilkinson, whom he sued over an interview they conducted with his former colleague Brittany Higgins on The Project in 2021. In his ruling on the defamation case in April 2024, Federal Court Justice Michael Lee found Ms Higgins' claims she had been raped by Lehrmann in parliament house in 2019 were proven on the balance of probabilities. In his headline-grabbing decision, the judge quipped: "Having escaped the lions' den, Mr Lehrmann made the mistake of going back for his hat" in reference to his doomed defamation bid. Lehrmann's lawyer Zali Burrows told the appeal court on Wednesday Justice Lee's ruling, on the heels of an abandoned criminal trial, meant Lehrmann has become probably "the most damaged man in Australia". Media attention, aggravated by commentary from Channel Ten and Wilkinson, led to a flood of hateful social media comments aimed at Lehrmann, she said. "He's pretty much become a national joke," Ms Burrows told the court. She argued Lehrmann, 30, was denied procedural fairness because the facts found by Justice Lee were "starkly different" from the case run by Ten. The ex-Liberal staffer had been "taken by surprise" the judge had adopted a "softer" sequence of events that had not been put to Lehrmann in cross-examination, Ms Burrows said. She claimed Lehrmann had been accused of committing a violent rape but Justice Lee had found it was a "non-violent rape", prompting Justice Craig Colvin to say he wasn't sure he understood that concept. Ten's barrister Matt Collins KC contended the judge had found Ms Higgins' rape was violent, and indeed: "All rape is violent". Lehrmann argued the judge was not satisfied about a number of the violent elements argued by Ten, including he had held open Ms Higgins' legs. "The sting of the (defamatory) imputation resides in the act of intercourse without consent, not in any detail of it," Dr Collins said. He rejected Lehrmann's suggestions he should be awarded damages of more than $20,000 if successful on appeal. Lehrmann raped Ms Higgins when he knew she was seriously intoxicated, continued raping her when she became aware, and left her in a state of undress, Dr Collins said. "That is not a man with any reputation in respect of sexual morality that would warrant compensation," he said. He took issue with Justice Lee's finding Lehrmann had been reckless as to whether Ms Higgins was consenting and urged the appeal court to instead find he knew she did not consent. Ms Wilkinson's lawyer agreed Lehrmann's "level of indifference" could not be inadvertent and instead amounted to a definition of "intentional rape" as understood by an ordinary person. "A young man who knows that a woman is very drunk knows that she cannot consent," Sue Chrysanthou SC said. "This is not a legal question, this is a question that is considered on the standards of the community." Lehrmann not only knew Ms Higgins was very intoxicated but encouraged her to drink, she said. Both lawyers argued Lehrmann had been confronted with the main facts of the case as found by Justice Lee: that sex took place, Ms Higgins did not consent and Lehrmann had been reckless as to her consent. Lehrmann maintains he did not sexually assault Ms Higgins and a 2022 criminal case against him was abandoned without any findings against him. Earlier in the day, Ms Burrows apologised Lehrmann was not represented by a silk, telling the panel of judges he "really wanted" Guy Reynolds SC but "couldn't afford" to engage him. The defamation case and related appeal are among a host of court actions spawned by Ms Higgins' allegation of sexual assault. The Western Australian Supreme Court will next Wednesday rule on former Liberal senator Linda Reynolds' high-profile defamation case against Ms Higgins, her former employee. 1800 RESPECT (1800 737 732) National Sexual Abuse and Redress Support Service 1800 211 028 Bruce Lehrmann has challenged damning findings from a landmark defamation case, arguing not all rape is violent as his tattered reputation takes another beating. The former federal political staffer is appealing his loss to Network Ten and journalist Lisa Wilkinson, whom he sued over an interview they conducted with his former colleague Brittany Higgins on The Project in 2021. In his ruling on the defamation case in April 2024, Federal Court Justice Michael Lee found Ms Higgins' claims she had been raped by Lehrmann in parliament house in 2019 were proven on the balance of probabilities. In his headline-grabbing decision, the judge quipped: "Having escaped the lions' den, Mr Lehrmann made the mistake of going back for his hat" in reference to his doomed defamation bid. Lehrmann's lawyer Zali Burrows told the appeal court on Wednesday Justice Lee's ruling, on the heels of an abandoned criminal trial, meant Lehrmann has become probably "the most damaged man in Australia". Media attention, aggravated by commentary from Channel Ten and Wilkinson, led to a flood of hateful social media comments aimed at Lehrmann, she said. "He's pretty much become a national joke," Ms Burrows told the court. She argued Lehrmann, 30, was denied procedural fairness because the facts found by Justice Lee were "starkly different" from the case run by Ten. The ex-Liberal staffer had been "taken by surprise" the judge had adopted a "softer" sequence of events that had not been put to Lehrmann in cross-examination, Ms Burrows said. She claimed Lehrmann had been accused of committing a violent rape but Justice Lee had found it was a "non-violent rape", prompting Justice Craig Colvin to say he wasn't sure he understood that concept. Ten's barrister Matt Collins KC contended the judge had found Ms Higgins' rape was violent, and indeed: "All rape is violent". Lehrmann argued the judge was not satisfied about a number of the violent elements argued by Ten, including he had held open Ms Higgins' legs. "The sting of the (defamatory) imputation resides in the act of intercourse without consent, not in any detail of it," Dr Collins said. He rejected Lehrmann's suggestions he should be awarded damages of more than $20,000 if successful on appeal. Lehrmann raped Ms Higgins when he knew she was seriously intoxicated, continued raping her when she became aware, and left her in a state of undress, Dr Collins said. "That is not a man with any reputation in respect of sexual morality that would warrant compensation," he said. He took issue with Justice Lee's finding Lehrmann had been reckless as to whether Ms Higgins was consenting and urged the appeal court to instead find he knew she did not consent. Ms Wilkinson's lawyer agreed Lehrmann's "level of indifference" could not be inadvertent and instead amounted to a definition of "intentional rape" as understood by an ordinary person. "A young man who knows that a woman is very drunk knows that she cannot consent," Sue Chrysanthou SC said. "This is not a legal question, this is a question that is considered on the standards of the community." Lehrmann not only knew Ms Higgins was very intoxicated but encouraged her to drink, she said. Both lawyers argued Lehrmann had been confronted with the main facts of the case as found by Justice Lee: that sex took place, Ms Higgins did not consent and Lehrmann had been reckless as to her consent. Lehrmann maintains he did not sexually assault Ms Higgins and a 2022 criminal case against him was abandoned without any findings against him. Earlier in the day, Ms Burrows apologised Lehrmann was not represented by a silk, telling the panel of judges he "really wanted" Guy Reynolds SC but "couldn't afford" to engage him. The defamation case and related appeal are among a host of court actions spawned by Ms Higgins' allegation of sexual assault. The Western Australian Supreme Court will next Wednesday rule on former Liberal senator Linda Reynolds' high-profile defamation case against Ms Higgins, her former employee. 1800 RESPECT (1800 737 732) National Sexual Abuse and Redress Support Service 1800 211 028

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store