Latest news with #UnclePabaiPabai
SBS Australia
3 days ago
- Entertainment
- SBS Australia
NITV Radio Full - 18/07/2025
In the NITV Radio program today the latest in the news, sport and weather as well as stories from across the country and in community. Traditional Owners Uncle Pabai Pabai and Uncle Paul Kabai in 2021, argued the government held a duty of care to the Indigenous peoples and alleged that its failure to adequately reduce emissions has contributed to harm of their island communities. The Federal Court's ruling has dismissed a landmark case. NITV Radios Veronica Leonard speaks with Brisbane Festivals Artistic Director Louise Bezzina. Louise shares here experience curating and delivering transformative, First Nations programming for Brisbane Festival 2025. That and more on NITV Radio.
SBS Australia
3 days ago
- Politics
- SBS Australia
A landmark Climate Crisis Case Brought by Torres Straight Traditional Owners Dismissed by Federal Court
The case, first brought by Traditional Owners Uncle Pabai Pabai and Uncle Paul Kabai in 2021, argued the government held a duty of care to the islanders and alleged its failure to adequately reduce greenhouse gas emissions brought harm to their communities. Justice Michael Wigney delivered the Federal Court's ruling that Australia has no such duty in this case, saying "The applicants have not succeeded in making their primary case in negligence. The Commonwealth did not and does not owe Torres Strait Islanders the duty of care alleged by the applicants in support of their primary case. The decisions involved in the setting and communication of Australia's greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets, pursuant to its international obligations or otherwise, are highly political in nature and almost self-evidently involve matters of high or core government policy. They are accordingly not properly subjected to common law duty of care of the sort alleged by the applicants." After the disappointing outcome for the Indigenous leaders, Ms Reinecke says the fight is far from over for Torres Strait Islanders, who will continue to advocate for the protection of their communities. "The communities and the elders that I'm working with are so clear and determined they know what they're up against and they believe that they will keep fighting with what comes next." Uncle Pabai Pabai says he is heartbroken but love for his community will keep him fighting on. "I thought that the decision would be in our favour, I'm in shock. This pain isn't just for me, it's for all people Indigenous and non-Indigenous who have been affected by climate change"
Irish Times
6 days ago
- Politics
- Irish Times
Indigenous leaders in ‘deepest pain imaginable' as Australian court dismisses climate case
Two Torres Strait community leaders say they are shocked and devastated after the federal court dismissed a landmark case that argued the Australian government breached its duty of care to protect the Torres Strait Islands from climate change . The lead plaintiffs, Uncle Pabai Pabai and Uncle Paul Kabai from the islands of Boigu and Saibai, sought orders requiring the government to take steps to prevent climate harm to their communities, including by cutting greenhouse gas emissions at the pace climate scientists say is necessary. In delivering the decision, Justice Michael Wigney noted: 'There could be little if any doubt that the Torres Strait Islands and their inhabitants face a bleak future if urgent action is not taken.' In a statement on Tuesday afternoon, Uncle Paul said: 'I thought that the decision would be in our favour, and I'm in shock. This pain isn't just for me, it's for all people Indigenous and non-Indigenous who have been affected by climate change. What do any of us say to our families now?' READ MORE He added later: 'Mr [Anthony] Albanese [Australia's prime minister] and his expensive government lawyers will stand up and walk away ... They go home and sleep soundly in their expensive beds. We go back to our islands and the deepest pain imaginable.' The class action, filed in 2021, argued the government had a legal duty of care towards Torres Strait Islander peoples and that it had breached this duty by failing to prevent or deal with damage in the Torres Strait linked to global heating. Wigney's summary said the applicants' case had failed 'not so much because there was no merit in their factual allegations' but because the common law of negligence 'was not a suitable legal vehicle'. He said the reality was that current law 'provides no real or effective legal avenue through which individuals and communities like those in the Torres Strait Islands' can claim damages or other relief for harm they suffer as a result of government policies related to climate change. Wigney said that would remain the case unless the law changed. 'Until then, the only real avenue available ... involves public advocacy and protest and, ultimately, recourse via the ballot box,' he said. 'My heart is broken for my family and my community,' Uncle Pabai said after the judgment. 'I'll keep fighting and will sit down with my lawyers and look at how we can appeal.' Brett Spiegel, principal lawyer at Phi Finney McDonald, the firm representing Uncle Pabai, Uncle Paul and their communities, said the legal team 'will review the judgment ... and consider all options for appeal'. Hearings in the case were held in 2023 in Melbourne and on Country in the Torres Strait to allow the court to tour the islands and view the impacts of climate change. On Saibai Island, homes were already being inundated by king tides, the cemetery had been affected by erosion and sea walls had been built. The legal challenge is supported by the Urgenda Foundation and Grata Fund, a public interest organisation that helps individuals access the courts. It was modelled on the Urgenda climate case against the Dutch government – the first case in the world in which citizens established their government had a legal duty to prevent dangerous climate change. [ Sally Hayden: Climate change is human made, but not all humans have played same role in it Opens in new window ] In the judgment summary, released on Tuesday, Wigney said 'the applicants succeeded in establishing many of the factual allegations that underpinned their primary case'. In particular, the court found that when the federal government set climate targets in 2015, 2020 and 2021 – when a coalition was in power – it 'failed to engage with or give any real or genuine consideration to what the best available science indicated was required' for Australia to play its part to meet the goals of the Paris climate agreement. The court found 'when the Commonwealth, under a new government, reset Australia's emissions reduction target in 2022, it did have some regard to the best available science'. Wigney found that the Torres Strait Islands 'have been, and continue to be, ravaged by climate change and its impacts'. He agreed the evidence indicated this damage had become more frequent in recent times, 'including the flooding and inundation of townships, extreme sea level and weather events, severe erosion, the salination of wetlands and previously arable land, the degradation of fragile ecosystems, including the bleaching of coral reefs, and the loss of sea life'. Despite this, Wigney found the applicants had not succeeded in making their primary case related to negligence. He found the government did not owe Torres Strait Islanders a duty of care because, in respect to the law of negligence, courts had established that matters involving 'high or core government policy' were to be decided through political processes. Isabelle Reinecke, the founder and executive director of Grata Fund, said 'the court was not yet ready to take the step we all need it to and hold the Australian government accountable for it's role in creating the climate crisis'. But she said it had made strong findings that the 'Australian government knows that Torres Strait communities are being ravaged by climate change'. In a joint statement, the climate change minister, Chris Bowen, and the minister for Indigenous Australians, Malarndirri McCarthy, said: 'Unlike the former Liberal government, we understand that the Torres Strait Islands are vulnerable to climate change, and many are already feeling the impacts.' Bowen and McCarthy said the government 'remains committed to both acting to continue to cut emissions, and adapting to climate impacts we cannot avoid'. 'We are finalising Australia's first national climate risk assessment and national adaptation plan to help all communities understand climate risk and build a more resilient country for all Australians,' they said. - Guardian
ABC News
6 days ago
- Politics
- ABC News
Court finds no duty of care owed to Torres Strait Islanders over climate change
The Federal Court has found the Commonwealth does not owe a duty of care to Torres Strait Islander peoples to protect them from the impacts of climate change or fund adaptation measures. Judge Michael Wigney ruled Australia's greenhouse gas emissions targets are matters of "core government policy" which should be decided by the parliament, not the courts. "My heart is broken for my families and my community," Guda Maluyligal traditional owner Uncle Pabai Pabai said after the decision was handed down. The judge also rejected the Torres Strait Islanders' claims that their cultural loss should be compensated under negligence law. Uncle Paul Kabai and Uncle Pabai Pabai — from the islands of Saibai and Boigu — brought the case and travelled almost 900 kilometres from their ancestral homes to the Federal Court in Cairns to hear the outcome. Despite the finding, the judge also said the Uncles had proven many of the factual elements of their case, including that Australia's emissions targets between 2015 and 2021 were not consistent with the best available science to hold global temperatures to 1.5 degrees. He found the Commonwealth "did not engage with or give real or genuine consideration to the best available science" when setting those targets. The judge said the Torres Strait Islander peoples' case did not fail because there was no merit in their allegations, but rather because negligence law does not allow compensation for matters of government policy. Supporters wearing colourful dresses gathered in a separate room in the courthouse to watch the judgement, singing songs from their homeland, and waving Torres Strait Islander flags. Judge Wigney acknowledged the Torres Strait Islands "have in recent years been ravaged by the impacts of human-induced climate change … rising sea levels, storm surges and other extreme water level events". "The Torres Strait Islands and their inhabitants are, however, undoubtedly far more vulnerable to the impacts of climate change than other communities in Australia," he said. "There could be little, if any, doubt that the Torres Strait Islands and their traditional inhabitants will face a bleak future if urgent action is not taken to address climate change and its impacts." This is the first time an Australian court has ruled on whether the Commonwealth has a legal duty of care to protect their citizens from the impacts of climate change, and whether cultural loss from climate change should be compensated. The landmark litigation has been financed through the NGO the Grata Fund, and modelled on a successful case from the Netherlands. As part of the case the Federal Court visited the islands of Boigu and Saibai, about 6 kilometres from the shores of Papua New Guinea, and Badu. Evidence of coastal erosion, destruction of ancestral graves and soil salinity that prevents crops from growing was presented to the court. It also heard of extreme weather events, including storms that cause intense flooding and inundate the islands, which lie at just 1.6 metres above sea level. The court heard sea levels in the Torres Strait were rising at double the rate of the rest of the world and that inaction on climate change may cause irreversible impacts for First Nations people in the Torres Strait. The plantiffs' legal team argued the Guda Maluyligal people risked losing their culture if rising sea levels, caused by climate change, forced them to leave their homes. The court heard breaching the 1.5 degrees global emissions limit would cause irreversible damage to small and low-lying islands, including those in the Torres Strait. Judge Wigney said today's findings "should not be construed as somehow sanctioning or justifying being the unquestionably modest and unambitious greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets that were set by the Commonwealth in 2015, 2020 and 2021". "Unless something is done to arrest global warming and the resulting escalating impacts of climate change, there is a very real risk that the applicant's worst fears will be realised and they will lose their islands, their culture and their way of life, and will become, as it were, climate refugees," he said. This is not the first time Torres Strait Islanders have taken the federal government to court over their long connection to Country. The decade-long Mabo case led by Meriam man Eddie Koiki Mabo dispelled the legal notion of terra nullius — land belonging to no-one and recognised the land of his people. It also led to the development of the Native Title Act.
The Guardian
6 days ago
- Politics
- The Guardian
Federal court dismisses landmark Torres Strait climate case but warns of ‘bleak future' without urgent action
The federal court has dismissed a landmark case brought by two Torres Strait community leaders that argued the Australian federal government breached its duty of care to protect the Torres Strait Islands from climate change. In delivering the decision, however, Justice Michael Wigney noted: 'There could be little if any doubt that the Torres Strait Islands face a bleak future if urgent action is not taken.' The class action, filed in 2021, argued the government had a legal duty of care towards Torres Strait Islander peoples and that it had breached this duty by failing to prevent or deal with damage in the Torres Strait linked to global heating. The lead plaintiffs, Torres Strait community leaders Uncle Pabai Pabai and Uncle Paul Kabai from the islands of Boigu and Saibai, sought orders requiring the government to take steps to prevent climate harm to their communities, including by cutting greenhouse gas emissions at the pace climate scientists say is necessary. Get Guardian Australia environment editor Adam Morton's Clear Air column as an email Hearings in the case were held in 2023 in Melbourne and on-country in the Torres Strait to allow the court to tour the islands and view the existing impacts of climate change. On Saibai Island, homes were already being inundated by king tides, the cemetery had been affected by erosion and sea walls had been built. The legal challenge was modelled on the Urgenda climate case against the Dutch government, in which the Urgenda Foundation and 886 people took the Dutch government to court for not doing enough to prevent the climate crisis. That case was the first in the world in which citizens established their government had a legal duty to prevent dangerous climate change and resulted in the court ordering the Dutch government to take immediate steps to cut greenhouse gas emissions. Uncle Pabai, Uncle Paul and their communities were represented by law firm Phi Finney McDonald and their case is supported by the Urgenda Foundation and Grata Fund, a public interest organisation that helps individuals access the courts. More details soon …
