Kakadu dispute hinges on ‘Crown immunity over sacred sites’, court hears

The prosecution of Parks Australia over a walking track in Kakadu might have to wait until the High Court decides ‘whether Crown immunity applies for the Commonwealth to do what they please with sacred sites’, a court has heard.

• Nation’s Attorneys-General to be put on notice as Kakadu walking track dispute could end up in High Court

THE prosecution of Parks Australia over a walking track in Kakadu might have to wait until the High Court decides “whether Crown immunity applies for the Commonwealth to do what they please with sacred sites”, a court has heard.

The stoush over whether Parks Australia built the track too close to the sacred men’s site against the wishes of traditional owners returned to the Darwin Local Court on Friday.

Prosecutor Ray Murphy told the court it was alleged the TOs told Parks staff not to build the track “anywhere near” the site only accessible to initiated men under traditional law but they went ahead regardless.

MORE NT COURT NEWS

Buggy crash prisoner’s care was ‘insufficient’, Coroner rules

Thousands expected to join NT Stolen Generations class action

Mother relives moment she heard drug-driver cause crash that killed ‘the light of my life’

“The representatives of the custodians have taken the defendant and its agents to the area where the path was constructed, they’ve told them where the path can go,” he said.

“The defendant, notwithstanding knowing that the custodians didn’t want the path to go anywhere near where that site was, have nonetheless expended millions of dollars of taxpayers money and constructed the path next to that significant feature of the sacred site.”

But Parks Australia’s lawyer Todd Herskope said the case could not go ahead before each of Australia’s state, territory and Commonwealth Attorneys-General had had a “reasonable time” to consider intervening in the dispute.

“We’ve only received one response from the Victorian Solicitor-General’s office, we’re still waiting for responses from the other Attorneys-General,” he said.

“It’s quite a complex constitutional issue.”

Judge Greg Macdonald adjourned the hearing until June 4.

“This court is not going to finally determine criminal liability or charges in the face of their being some consideration of those other issues in the High Court but we need to get on with it,” he said.

Follow @jas_walls