The Stakes are raised:
Soon after the Council for Aboriginal Reconciliation had been formed, the climate in which it was working changed dramatically with the decision by the High Court in the Mabo case, in June 1992, to recognise Native Title. The Mabo decision opened the door for recognition of 'native title' rights on unoccupied Crown land, but left undecided the situation with respect to land for which leases had been granted for pastoral or other pursuits.
Prior to this, Australian courts had operated under the principle of terra nullius, not recognising Indigenous rights to land despite the fact that the early Governors of the Colony of New South Wales had been instructed by no less than Secretary of State in the Colonial Office, Earl Grey "...I think it essential that it should be generally understood that leases granted for this purpose (grazing) give the grantees only an exclusive right of pasturage for their cattle, and of cultivating such land as they may require within the large limits thus assigned them, but that leases are not intended to deprive the natives of their former right to hunt over these Districts, or to wander over them in search of subsistence, in the manner to which they have been heretofore accustomed." (Grey to Fitzroy, 11 Feb. 1848, HRA, 1, vol. 26, p226.)
The Governments response to the High Court Mabo decision was to negotiate with representatives of Indigenous communities and traditional owners, a process for resolving the issues raised by the decision.
An agreement was reached to recognise that granting of Freehold title had extinguished Native Title, a Native Title Tribunal was established to hear and make determinations with respect to Native Title claims, and an Indigenous Land Fund was established into which the Government put funds to assist Indigenous groups to purchase land where there was no possibility of them claiming Native Title rights.
The Mabo decision had opened the door for recognition of Native Title rights on unoccupied Crown land, but left undecided the situation with respect to land for which leases had been granted for pastoral or other pursuits. In 1996, in the Wik judgement, the High Court determined that those rights still survive and have not been extinguished by the issuing of a pastoral lease.
As far as the reconciliation process was concerned, the debate around Native Title galvanised a grassroots movement of people concerned to see that the rights recognised by the High Court were not extinguished or diminished.
Several groups were formed to educate the wider community about what Native Title really meant, groups such as Women for Wik, WikEd, and Landowners for Native Title.
Existing local reconciliation groups found new energy for their educational activities within their communities, and new groups formed with the issue of Native Title as their main focus
e.g. Australians for Native Title & Reconciliation (ANTaR) and Australians for Native Title (ANT).