Legal Pluralism

Harris, Bede

doi:10.1007/978-981-99-7121-3_6

Bede Harris²

480 Accesses

Abstract

The focus of this chapter is legal pluralism—that is the existence of more than one legal system within a state. Recognition of Indigenous law is a key aspect of self-determination, yet Australian governments have resisted claims that Indigenous law should be recognised as a source of law, despite the fact that multiple legal systems already exist in Australia as a consequence of federalism. The chapter examines various inquiries that have been held into the status of Indigenous law, noting the difference between recognition of relationships under Indigenous law as the functional equivalent of relationships under received law and true legal pluralism in terms of which Indigenous law would have authority by its own force. The chapter examines how legal pluralism operates in the United States, where tribal sovereignty survived colonisation, and in South Africa where it did not but where Indigenous law continued to be recognised during the colonial period and onwards. The chapter also discusses conflict of law rules that would need to be developed to govern cases where there were competing claims in relation to which legal system should apply. The chapter concludes by addressing the interaction between Indigenous law and human rights, arguing that since Indigenous claims to self-determination, which include the recognition of Indigenous law, are based on entitlements contained in international human rights documents, it follows that Indigenous law should be recognised subject to its consistency with the other rights protected by those documents.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Chapter: USD 29.95; Price excludes VAT (USA)

eBook: USD 139.00; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Hardcover Book: USD 179.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

1.
Lange v Australian Broadcasting Corporation (1997) 189 CLR 520, 526-6.
2.
Ando (2016, pp. 282–293), Pӧlӧnen (2016, p. 15).
3.
du Plessis (2020, p. 53), Mousourakis (2007, pp. 181–182).
4.
Coe v Commonwealth (1979) 53 ALJR 403, 408, Mabo v Queensland (No. 2) (1992) 175 CLR 1, 69, Coe v Commonwealth (No. 2) (1993) 118 ALR 103, 199–200, Walker v New South Wales (1994) 182 CLR 45, 47–50 and Thorpe v Commonwealth (No. 3) (1997) 71 ALJR 767.
5.
Huizenga (2018, p. 12).
6.
United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, adopted 13 September 2007, A/RES/61/295.
7.
Australian Law Reform Commission (1986).
8.
Australian Law Reform Commission (1986, Vol. 1, p. 142).
9.
Australian Law Reform Commission (1986, Vol. 1, pp. 126–141).
10.
Australian Law Reform Commission (1986, Vol. 1, pp. 142–143).
11.
Australian Law Reform Commission (1986, Vol. 1, p. 195).
12.
An example of which is provided by the approach of the court in R v Bara Bara (1992) 2 NTLR 98.
13.
Amankwah (1994).
14.
Northern Territory Law Reform Committee (2003).
15.
Northern Territory Law Reform Committee (2003, p. 38).
16.
Northern Territory Law Reform Committee (2003, pp. 11–12).
17.
Northern Territory Law Reform Committee (2003, p. 21).
18.
Northern Territory Law Reform Committee (2003, pp. 19–20).
19.
Northern Territory Law Reform Committee (2003, p. 15).
20.
Northern Territory Law Reform Committee (2003, p. 14).
21.
Northern Territory Law Reform Committee (2003, pp. 12–13).
22.
Northern Territory Law Reform Committee (2003, p. 21).
23.
Law Reform Commission of Western Australia (2006).
24.
Law Reform Commission of Western Australia (2006, p. 71).
25.
Law Reform Commission of Western Australia (2006, p. 70).
26.
Law Reform Commission of Western Australia (2006, p. 65).
27.
Law Reform Commission of Western Australia (2006, pp. 65–66).
28.
Law Reform Commission of Western Australia (2006, p. 67).
29.
Law Reform Commission of Western Australia (2006, p. 67).
30.
Law Reform Commission of Western Australia (2006, pp. 65–66).
31.
Law Reform Commission of Western Australia (2006, p. 79).
32.
Law Reform Commission of Western Australia (2006, p. 124).
33.
Law Reform Commission of Western Australia (2006, pp. 124–125).
34.
Law Reform Commission of Western Australia (2006, p. 145).
35.
Law Reform Commission of Western Australia (2006, p. 67).
36.
Law Reform Commission of Western Australia (2006, pp. 181–183).
37.
Law Reform Commission of Western Australia (2006, p. 184).
38.
Law Reform Commission of Western Australia (2006, p. 189).
39.
Law Reform Commission of Western Australia (2006, pp. 221–222).
40.
Law Reform Commission of Western Australia (2006, p. 228).
41.
Law Reform Commission of Western Australia (2006, p. 229).
42.
Law Reform Commission of Western Australia (2006 p. 230).
43.
Law Reform Commission of Western Australia (2006, p. 233).
44.
Law Reform Commission of Western Australia (2006, p. 272).
45.
Law Reform Commission of Western Australia (2006, pp. 273–275).
46.
Law Reform Commission of Western Australia (2006 pp. 319–322).
47.
See Coe v Commonwealth (1979) 24 ALR 118, Coe v Commonwealth (No 2) (1993) 118 ALR 193, Walker v New South Wales (1994) 182 CLR 45 and Yorta Yorta Aboriginal Community v Victoria (2002) 214 CLR 422.
48.
(1992) 175 CLR 1.
49.
(1992) 175 CLR 1, 52, 58–63, 70 (Brennan J).
50.
[2020] HCA 3.
51.
[2020] HCA 3, [297] (Gordon J).
52.
[2020] HCA 3, [277] (Nettle J), [357] (Gordon J).
53.
See 19A(1)(b) of the Interpretation Act 1978 (NT) and s 6(4) of the Administration and Probate Act 1969 (NT).
54.
Section 4(1) of the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth).
55.
See s 4(1) of the Adoption Act 2000 (NSW), s 3(1) of the Adoption of Children Act 1994 (NT), s 3(1); s 4(3) of the Adoption Act 1988 (SA), s 11(1) of the Adoption Act 1984 (Vic) and s 4(2)(c) of the Adoption Act 1994 (WA).
56.
See Reg 9(1) of the Aboriginal Affairs Planning Authority Act Regulations 1972 (WA) and ss 71B(2) and 71E(2)(b) of the Administration and Probate Act 1969 (NT).
57.
Westlaw Laws of Australia (2021, [1.2.200]).
58.
Maxwell (2015/16).
59.
Section 16A(2A) of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth).
60.
Section 91 of the Northern Territory National Emergency Response Act 2007 (Cth).
61.
Harris (2004).
62.
Canby (2014, pp. 13–14).
63.
Art. II, § 2, cl. 2.
64.
Art. I, § 8, cl. 3.
65.
1 Stat. 137 (1790).
66.
For a critical analysis of the position in the United States see Ford (2010).
67.
21 US 543 (1823).
68.
30 US 1 (1831).
69.
30 US 1 (1831) 16.
70.
30 US 1 (1831) 17.
71.
For a general discussion of tribal sovereignty see Newton (2012, pp. 206–222).
72.
31 US 515 (1832).
73.
Worcester v Georgia 31 US 515 (1832).
74.
United States v Wheeler 435 US 313 (1978), Merrion v Jicarilla Apache Tribe 455 US 130 (1982).
75.
Worcester v Georgia 31 US 515 (1832), The Kansas Indians 72 US 737 (1867), Ex Parte Crow Dog 109 US 556 (1883), Williams v. Lee 358 US 217 (1959), Warren Trading Post Co v Arizona Tax Commission 380 US 685 (1965), McClanahan v Arizona Tax Commission 411 US 164 (1973), United States v. Mazurie 419 U.S. 544 (1975).
76.
Cotton Petroleum Corp. v New Mexico 490 US 163 (1989).
77.
Hendry and Tatum (2018, p. 93).
78.
Newton (2012, pp. 271–272).
79.
Cooter and Fikentscher (2008).
80.
Cooter and Fikentscher (2008, p. 61).
81.
Cooter and Fikentscher (1998).
82.
Newton (2012, pp. 272–275).
83.
Tobin (2014, pp. 82–83).
84.
Cooter and Fikentscher (2008, pp. 60–63).
85.
Ennis and Mayhew (2013–14, pp. 463–468).
86.
Newton (2012, pp. 260–261, 265–267).
87.
Newton (2012, pp. 268–269).
88.
Carter (2000, pp. 11–12), Hendry and Tatum (2018, pp. 105–107).
89.
Smith (2018).
90.
Strasser (2010, pp. 211–218).
91.
Strasser (2010, pp. 208–209).
92.
United States v Wheeler 435 US 313 (1978), Oliphant v. Suquamish Indian Tribe 435 US 191 (1978).
93.
25 U.S.C. §1301.
94.
United States v McBratney 104 US 621 (1881).
95.
United States v Kagama 118 US 375 (1886), Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock 187 US 553 (1903), United States v Sandoval 231 US 28 (1913).
96.
18 U.S.C. §1152.
97.
18 U.S.C. §1153.
98.
25 U.S.C. §1302.
99.
For a summary of tribal, state and federal criminal jurisdiction see Wetherington (1989, pp. 1060–1064).
100.
18 U.S.C. § 1162.
101.
Ennis and Mayhew (2013–14, pp. 430–431).
102.
For a summary of criminal jurisdiction in Indian territory see Tribal Law and Policy Institute (2021).
103.
25 U.S.C. §1302.
104.
28 U.S.C. §1360(a).
105.
450 U.S. 544 (1981).
106.
Webster et al. (2015).
107.
Plains Commerce Bank v Long Family Land & Cattle Co 554 US 316 (2008).
108.
Strate v A-1 Contractors 520 US 438 (1997).
109.
Atkinson Trading Co v Shirley 532 US 645 (2001).
110.
Williams v Lee 358 US 217 (1959).
111.
Talton v Maynes 163 US 376 (1896).
112.
Canby (2014, p. 407).
113.
25 U.S.C. §1302 and 1303.
114.
Berry (1993, pp. 7–8).
115.
Valencia-Weber et al. (2012, pp. 42, 44).
116.
Riley (2019, pp. 206–207).
117.
436 US 49 (1978).
118.
Santa Clara Pueblo v Martinez 436 US 49 (1978).
119.
Santa Clara Pueblo v Martinez 436 US 49 (1978), 62-3.
120.
Santa Clara Pueblo v Martinez 436 US 49 (1978), 72.
121.
Frickey (2005, p. 448).
122.
Newton (2012, p. 980).
123.
Fletcher (2012, pp. 148, 152–153).
124.
Carpenter (2012, pp. 159–193).
125.
Fletcher (2012, pp. 133–153).
126.
Maillard (2012, pp. 87–100).
127.
Rusco (1988/1989, pp. 275–290, Newton, 2012, pp. 962–964).
128.
Tweedy (2012, pp. 62–63).
129.
Newton (2012, p. 961).
130.
Rusco (1988/1989, p. 294).
131.
Johnson (1984).
132.
Hansen (2020, pp. 54–55).
133.
Rosin (2000, pp. 512–522).
134.
Rosin (2000, pp. 524–529).
135.
See the survey of case law in Rosin (2000, pp. 530–578).
136.
Christofferson (1991), Ramirez (2007, pp. 29–31), Newton (2012, p. 962).
137.
417 US 535 (1974).
138.
Grutter v Bollinger 539 US 306 (2003).
139.
Morton v Mancari 417 US 535 (1974), 552–3.
140.
Newton (2012, pp. 948–955). See for example the American Indian Religious Freedom Act 42 USC § 1996 and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb.
141.
Faris (2015, p. 173).
142.
du Bois (ed) (2007, pp. 67–76).
143.
Grant (2006, p. 13).
144.
Grant (2006, p. 13).
145.
Ülgen (2002, p. 137).
146.
Osman (2019a, p. 99).
147.
Bennett (2004, p. 36).
148.
Grant (2006, p. 13).
149.
Bennett (2004, pp. 141–252).
150.
This is the term used in the Act.
151.
However, as discussed later in the text, s 1 of the Law of Evidence Amendment Act 45 of 1988 has made Indigenous law potentially applicable between people of any ethnicity.
152.
Hollerman (1974, pp. 16–18).
153.
Bennett (1992, pp. 70–77).
154.
Bennett (2004, p. 139).
155.
Bennett (2004, p. 141).
156.
Section 12 (4) of the Native Administration Act 37 of 1927.
157.
1961 (2) SA 751 (A).
158.
Section 54A(1) of the Magistrates Courts Act 32 of 1944.
159.
Kerr (1989, pp. 168–170), Nwauche (2015, p. 581).
160.
Section 211(3) Republic of South Africa Constitution of 1996.
161.
du Bois (ed) (2007, p. 130).
162.
Kerr (1990, p. 3).
163.
Mawambene (2017, p. 40).
164.
1948(1) SA 388 (A).
165.
1948(1) SA 388 (A), 397 Schreiner JA.
166.
Olivier (1995, pp. 202–203).
167.
Ex parte Minister of Native Affairs: In re Yako v Beyi 1948(1) SA 388 (A), 398 Schreiner JA.
168.
Ex parte Minister of Native Affairs: In re Yako v Beyi 1948(1) SA 388 (A), 399 Schreiner JA.
169.
Bennett (1985, p. 69).
170.
Sanders (1990, p. 58).
171.
Bennett (1985, pp. 106–108).
172.
Bennett (1985, pp. 106–108). See the decision in Mbonjiwa v Scellam 1957 NAC 41 (S). Note, however, that the court is still exercising its discretion—it has been made clear that the parties do not by their agreement oust the discretion of the court (Moima NO v Matladi 1937 NAC (N & T) 40; Lebona v Ramokone 19467 NAC (C & O); Ciya v Malanda 1949 NAC 154 (S)).
173.
Ciya v Malanda 1949 NAC 154 (S).
174.
Bennett (1985, p. 108).
175.
Bennett (1985, pp. 74–75, 109–110).
176.
Hutchinson and Sibanda (2017, pp. 381, 391–392, 396–397).
177.
Harris (2006, pp. 4–5).
178.
Rautenbach (2018, p. 47).
179.
Bennett (1992, p. 134).
180.
Constitution of the Republic of South Africa Act 108 of 1996.
181.
Bennett (2004, pp. 78, 88).
182.
Nhlapo (2017, p. 6).
183.
Mthembu v Letsela 1997 (2) SA 936 (T), Alexkor Ltd v Richtersveld Community 2003 (12) BCLR 1301 (CC), Gumede v The President of the Republic of South Africa 2009 (3) SA 152 (CC).
184.
1997 (2) SA 936 (T).
185.
Rautenbach (2018, p. 26), Osman (2019a, pp. 100–102), Bennett (2009).
186.
Shilubana and Others v. Nwamitwa 2009 (2) SA 66 (CC), Mabena v Letsoalo 1998 (2) SA 1068 (T).
187.
Sigcau v Sigcau 1944 AD 67. Rautenbach (2018, pp. 48–53).
188.
2013 (4) SA 415 (CC).
189.
1998 (2) SA 1068 (T).
190.
Nhlapo (2017, p. 3).
191.
Albertyn (1994), Grant (2006, pp. 7–9).
192.
Certification of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa 1996 (4) SA 744 (CC).
193.
Grant (2006, pp. 4–10), Faris (2015, p. 176).
194.
2000 (1) SA 574 (Tk).
195.
1998 (3) SA 262 (Tk), 273 B-E.
196.
2005 (1) SA 580 (CC).
197.
2005 (1) SA 580 (CC), [78], [89].
198.
2005 (1) SA 580 (CC), [91]–[95].
199.
2005 (1) SA 580 (CC), [80]–[85], [96].
200.
2013(4) SA 415 (CC).
201.
Mayelane v Ngwenyama 2013(4) SA 415 (CC), [71]–[75].
202.
Nhlapo (2017, pp. 20–23).
203.
Recognition of Customary Marriages Act 120 of 1998. See Mwambene and Kruuse (2015, p. 238).
204.
Reform of Customary Law of Succession and Regulation of Related Matters Act 11 of 2009. See Osman (2019b, p. 5).
205.
Traditional Leadership and Governance Framework Act 41 of 2003, s 2.
206.
Traditional Leadership and Governance Framework Act 41 of 2003, s 3.
207.
Traditional Leadership and Governance Framework Act 41 of 2003, ss 8–12.
208.
Traditional Leadership and Governance Framework Act 41 of 2003, ss 4 and 5.
209.
Traditional Leadership and Governance Framework Act 41 of 2003, s 3.
210.
Traditional Leadership and Governance Framework Act 41 of 2003, s 2A.
211.
Traditional Leadership and Governance Framework Act 41 of 2003, s 16.
212.
Traditional Leadership and Governance Framework Act 41 of 2003, s 17(2)(b)(ii).
213.
Traditional Leadership and Governance Framework Act 41 of 2003, s 17(3).
214.
For an insightful summary of the law operating within the Yolngu people see Gaymarani (2011).
215.
Law Reform Commission of Western Australia (2006, p. 8).
216.
Brennan (1995, pp. 140–148).
217.
436 US 49 (1978).
218.
Valencia-Weber et al. (2012, p. 39).
219.
417 US 535 (1974).
220.
2000 (1) SA 574 (Tk).
221.
2005 (1) SA 580 (CC).
222.
2013(4) SA 415 (CC).
223.
Tobin (2014, pp. 52–54).
224.
436 US 49 (1978).
225.
436 US 49 (1978).
226.
417 US 535 (1974).
227.
2000 (1) SA 574 (Tk).
228.
2005 (1) SA 580 (CC).
229.
2013(4) SA 415 (CC).
230.
Australian Law Reform Commission (1986, pp. 54–55).
231.
Northern Territory Law Reform Committee (2003, pp. 23–27).
232.
Law Reform Commission of Western Australia (2006, p. 69).
233.
Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women, opened for signature 18 December 1979, 1249 UNTS 13, entered into force 3 December 1981. Northern Territory Law Reform Committee (2003, p. 272).
234.
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, opened for signature 16 December 1966, 999 UNTS 171, entered into force 23 March 1976.
235.
International Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, opened for signature 10 December 1984, 1465 UNTS 85, entered into force 26 June 1987. Law Reform Commission of Western Australia (2006, pp. 28, 140).
236.
Harris (2020, pp. 105–107).
237.
BBC News (2007).
238.
(2015) 257 CLR 178.
239.
The test is eloquently explained in Cheung (2019).
240.
2004 (12) BCLR 1268 (CC).
241.
2004 (12) BCLR 1268 (CC) [23].
242.
Kommers (2019, pp. 554–555).
243.
de Vries (2013).
244.
(2003) C-112/00.

References

Albertyn C (1994) Women and the transition to democracy in South Africa. Acta Juridica, pp 57–60
Google Scholar
Amankwah HA (1994) Post-mabo: the prospect of the recognition of a regime of customary (Indigenous) Law in Australia. Univ Queensland Law Rev 18:15–37
Google Scholar
Ando C (2016) Legal pluralism in practice. In: du Plessis P, Ando C, Tuori K (eds) The Oxford handbook of Roman law and society. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Google Scholar
Australian Law Reform Commission (1986) The Recognition of Aboriginal Customary Laws, Report No. 31. Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra. https://www.alrc.gov.au/publication/recognition-of-aboriginal-customary-laws-alrc-report-31/. Accessed 5 Nov 2021
BBC News (2007) Indigenous rights outlined by UN. BBC News, 13 Sept 2007. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/6993776.stm. Accessed 13 Dec 2021
Bennett T (1985) The application of customary law in Southern Africa. Juta & Co, Cape Town
Google Scholar
Bennett T (1992) A sourcebook of African customary law for Southern Africa. Butterworths, Durban
Google Scholar
Bennett T (2004) Customary law in South Africa. Juta & Co, Landsdowne
Google Scholar
Bennett T (2009) Re-introducing African customary law to the South African legal system. Am J Comp Law 57:1–31
Google Scholar
Berry R (1993) Civil liberties constraints on tribal sovereignty after the Indian civil rights act 1968. J Law Policy 1:1–20
Google Scholar
Brennan F (1995) One land, one nation: Mabo—towards 2000. University of Queensland Press, St Lucia
Google Scholar
Canby W (2014) American Indian law in a nutshell, 6th edn. West Publishing, St Paul
Google Scholar
Carpenter K (2012) Individual religious freedoms in American Indian tribal constitutional law. In: Carpenter K, Fletcher M, Riley (eds) The Indian civil rights at forty. University of California, Los Angeles
Google Scholar
Carter N (2000) American Indian tribal governments, law, and courts. Legal Ref Serv Q 18:7–24
Google Scholar
Cheung A (2019) Conflict of fundamental rights and the double proportionality test. Hong Kong Law J 4:835–850
Google Scholar
Christofferson C (1991) Tribal courts' failure to protect native American women: a re-evaluation of the Indian Civil Rights Act. Yale Law J 101:169–185
Google Scholar
Cooter R, Fikentscher W (1998) Indian common law: the role of custom in American Indian tribal courts (Part II of II). Am J Comp Law 46:509–580
Google Scholar
Cooter R, Fikentscher W (2008) American Indian law codes: pragmatic law and tribal identity. Am J Comp Law 56:29–74
Google Scholar
de Vries S (2013) Balancing fundamental rights with economic freedoms according to the European court of justice. Utrecht Law Rev 6:169–92
Google Scholar
du Bois F (ed) (2007) Wille’s principles of South African law, 9th edn. Juta & Co, Claremont
Google Scholar
du Plessis (2020) Borkowski’s textbook on Roman law, 6th edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Google Scholar
Ennis S, Mayhew C (2013–14) Federal criminal law and tribal criminal justice in the self-determination era. Am Indian Law Rev 38:421–476
Google Scholar
Faris J (2015) African customary law and common law in South Africa: reconciling contending legal systems. Int J Afr Renaissance Stud Multi Inter Transdisc 10:171–189
Google Scholar
Fletcher M (2012) Resisting congress: free speech and tribal law. In: Carpenter K, Fletcher M, Riley (eds) (2012) The Indian Civil Rights Act at Forty. University of California, Los Angeles
Google Scholar
Ford A (2010) The myth of tribal sovereignty: an analysis of native American tribal status in the United States. Int Commun Law Rev 12:397–411
Google Scholar
Frickey P (2005) (Native) American exceptionalism in federal public law. Harvard Law Rev 119:431–490
Google Scholar
Gaymarani G (2011) An introduction to the Ngarra law of Arnhem Land (2011) 1 Northern Territory Law Journal 283–304.
Google Scholar
Grant E (2006) Human rights, cultural diversity and customary law in South Africa. J African Law 50:2–23
Google Scholar
Hansen (2020) Uncivil rights: the abuse of tribal sovereignty and the termination of American Indian tribal citizenship. IAFOR J Cult Stud 5:49–63
Google Scholar
Harris M (2004) From Australian courts to Aboriginal courts in Australia bridging the gap? Curr Issues Crim Just 16:26–41
Google Scholar
Harris B (2006) Legal pluralism and a Bill of Rights—the South African experience. Austr Indigenous Law Reporter 10:1–16
Google Scholar
Harris (2020) Constitutional Reform as a Remedy for Political Disenchantment in Australia—The Discussion We Need. Springer, Singapore
Google Scholar
Hendry J, Tatum M (2018) Justice for native nations: insights from legal pluralism. Arizona Law Rev 60:91–113
Google Scholar
Hollerman J (1974) Issues in African law. Mouton, The Hague
Book Google Scholar
Huizenga (2018) Articulations of Aboriginal title, Indigenous rights, and living customary law in South Africa. Soc Legal Stud 27:3–24
Google Scholar
Hutchinson A, Sibanda N (2017) A living customary law of commercial contracting in South Africa: some law-related hypotheses. South Afr J Human Rights 33:380–405
Google Scholar
Johnson R (1984) Sovereign Immunity in Indian Tribal Law (1984) 12 American Indian Law Review 153–193
Google Scholar
Kerr A (1989) Customary law in all courts. South Afr Law J 106:166–172
Google Scholar
Kerr A (1990) The customary law of immovable property and succession, 3rd edn. Grocott & Sherry, Gragamstown
Google Scholar
Kommers D (2019) German constitutionalism: a prolegomenon. German Law J 20:534–556
Google Scholar
Law Reform Commission of Western Australia (2006) Aboriginal Customary Laws: The Interaction of Western Australian Law with Aboriginal Law and Culture. Law Reform Commission of Western Australia, Perth. https://www.wa.gov.au/government/publications/project-94-aboriginal-customary-laws. Accessed 12 Nov 2021
Maillard K (2012) Redwashing history: tribal anachronisms in the Seminole nation cases. In Carpenter K, Fletcher M Riley (eds) The Indian civil rights at forty. University of California, Los Angeles
Google Scholar
Maxwell J (2015/16) ‘Two systems of law side by side’: the role of Indigenous customary law in sentencing. Austr Indigenous Law Rev 19:97–112
Google Scholar
Mousourakis G (2007) A legal history of Rome. Routledge, Abingdon
Book Google Scholar
Mwambene L, Kruuse H (2015) Unfulfilled promises? The implementation of the Recognition of Customary Marriages Act in South Africa Lea. Int J Law Policy Family 29:237–259
Google Scholar
Newton (ed) (2012) Cohen’s Handbook of Federal Indian Law. LexisNexis, New Providence
Google Scholar
Nhlapo T (2017) Customary law in post-apartheid South Africa: Constitutional confrontations in culture, gender and ‘living law’. South Afr J Hum Rights 33:1–24
Google Scholar
Northern Territory Law Reform Committee (2003) Report of the Committee of Inquiry into Aboriginal Customary Law. https://justice.nt.gov.au/attorney-general-and-justice/law-reform-reviews/published-reports-outcomes-and-historical-consultations/nt-law-reform-committee-publications. Accessed 21 Nov 2021
Nwauche E (2015) Affiliation to a new customary law in post-apartheid South Africa. Pothefstroom Electron Law J 18:5695–83
Google Scholar
Olivier N (1995) Indigenous law. Butterworths, Durban
Google Scholar
Osman F (2019a) The ascertainment of living customary law: an analysis of the South African Constitutional Court’s jurisprudence. J Legal Pluralism Unofficial Law 51:98–113
Google Scholar
Osman F (2019b) The consequences of the statutory regulation of customary law: an examination of the South African customary law of succession and marriage. Potchefstroom Electron Law J 22. https://perjournal.co.za/issue/view/487. Accessed 24 Nov 2021
Pölönen J (2016) Framing ‘Law and Society’ in the Roman World. In: du Plessis P, Ando C, Tuori K (eds) (2016) The oxford handbook of Roman law and society. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Google Scholar
Ramirez R (2007) Race, tribal nation, and gender: a native feminist approach to belonging. Meridians Feminism Race Transnationalism 7:22–40
Google Scholar
Rautenbach C (ed) (2018) Introduction to legal pluralism in South Africa, 5th edn. Lexis-Nexis, Morningside
Google Scholar
Riley A (2019) (Tribal) Sovereignty and Illiberalism in Christensen G and Tatum M (eds) (2019) Reading American Indian Law. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Google Scholar
Rosin M (2000) Multiple authoritative interpreters of quasi-constitutional federal law: of tribal courts and the Indian Civil Rights Act. Fordham Law Rev 69:479–591
Google Scholar
Rusco E (1988/1989) Civil liberties guarantees under tribal law: a survey of civil rights provisions in tribal constitutions. Am Indian Law Rev 14:269–299
Google Scholar
Sanders A (1990) The role of comparative law in internal conflict of laws’ in Sanders A (ed) (1990) The Internal Conflict of Laws in South Africa. Butterworths, Durban.
Google Scholar
Smith G (2018) Native American tribal appellate courts: Underestimated and overlooked. J Appellate Pract Process 19:25–46
Google Scholar
Strasser M (2010) Tribal marriages, same-sex unions, and an interstate recognition tribal marriages, same-sex unions, and an interstate recognition conundrum. Boston College Third World Law J 30:207–237
Google Scholar
Tobin B (2014) Indigenous peoples, customary law and human rights—why living law matters. Routledge, London
Book Google Scholar
Tribal Law and Policy Institute (2021) General guide to criminal jurisdiction in Indian country http://www.tribal-institute.org/lists/jurisdiction.htm. Accessed 22 Nov 2021
Tweedy A (2012) Sex discrimination under tribal law. In: Carpenter K, Fletcher M, Riley (eds) The Indian Civil Rights Act at Forty. University of California, Los Angeles
Google Scholar
Ülgen Ö (2002) Developing the Doctrine of Aboriginal Title in South Africa: Source and Content. J Afr Law 46:131–154
Google Scholar
Valencia-Weber G, Swentzell R, Petoskey E (2012) 40 Years of the Indian civil rights act: indigenous women’s reflections. In Carpenter K, Fletcher M, Riley (eds) The Indian Civil Rights Act at Forty. University of California, Los Angeles
Google Scholar
Webster R, Adams A, Armstrong D (2015) An introduction: American Indian tribes and law in Wisconsin. Wisconsin Lawyer, 1 May 2015
Google Scholar
Westlaw (2021) Laws of Australia. Thomson Reuters, Pyrmont
Google Scholar
Wetherington (1989) Criminal jurisdiction of tribal courts over nonmember Indians: the circuit split. Duke Law J 1053–1085
Google Scholar

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

School of Business, Charles Sturt University, Albury, NSW, Australia
Bede Harris

Authors

Bede Harris
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bede Harris .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Harris, B. (2024). Legal Pluralism. In: Indigenous Peoples and Constitutional Reform in Australia . Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-7121-3_6

Download citation

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-7121-3_6
Published: 02 December 2023
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-99-7120-6
Online ISBN: 978-981-99-7121-3
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics