The Julius Stone -Elihu Lauterpacht sovereignty vacuum justification for Israel's sovereignty over Jerusalem can also explain why the First Nations' sovereignty never ceded" war cry is empty, without basis

Australia No Longer Recognizes Jerusalem as Israel’s Capital

by Ganesh Sahathevan 

Professor Julius Stone , the former  Challis Professor of Jurisprudence and International Law at the University of Sydney, writing in 2008 said: 

Acquisition of Sovereignty
This analysis, based on the sovereignty vacuum, affords a common legal frame for the legal positions of both West and East Jerusalem after both the 1948-49 and the 1967 wars. In 1967, Israel’s entry into Jerusalem was by way lawful self-defence, confirmed in the Security Council and General Assembly by the defeat of Soviet and Arab-sponsored resolutions demanding her withdrawal…
(Professor Sir Elihu ) Lauterpacht has offered a cogent legal analysis leading to the conclusion that sovereignty over Jerusalem has already vested in Israel. His view is that when the partition proposals were immediately rejected and aborted by Arab armed aggression, those proposals could not, both because of their inherent nature and because of the terms in which they were framed, operate as an effective legal re-disposition of the sovereign title.

 

While the Stone -Lauterpacht thesis of the  sovereignty vacuum was formulated with regards Israel and Palestine, it may have application to the settlement of Australia by British subjects, and later migrants from all other parts of the world. First Nations leaders do not disagree that chaos followed British settlement They often repeat this version of  history and the  consequences of settlement that can be found of the National Museum Australia website: 

 

In April 1789, 15 months after the First Fleet arrived to establish a penal colony in New South Wales, a major smallpox epidemic broke out.

The outbreak did not affect the British colonists, most of whom had been exposed to the disease during their infancy.

As a result, smallpox was not detected until members of the First Nations communities living between Sydney Cove and the Heads were found, according to Newton Fowell, ‘laying Dead on the Beaches and in the Caverns of Rocks’. They were, ‘generally found with the remains of a Small Fire on each Side of them and some Water left within their Reach’.

Without previous exposure to the smallpox virus, First Nations peoples had no resistance, and up to 70 per cent were killed by the disease.

 

Then there is the claim and evidence of massacres, which are likely to have destroyed any system of governance in the affected communities:

The narrative of Australia’s early colonial history continues to be contested with further evidence released today of the violent frontier massacres of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

The new data reveals the attacks during the spread of pastoral settlement in Australia did not wane as the decades passed, instead they intensified, on an immense scale – creating lasting trauma for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

The research project, currently in its eighth year and led by University of Newcastle historian Emeritus Professor Lyndall Ryan, now estimates more than 10,000 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander lives were lost in more than 400 massacres, up from a previous estimate of 8,400 in 302 massacres. By contrast it is estimated that 168 non-Aboriginal people were killed in 13 frontier massacres.

Several genocidal massacres took place in far west Queensland. The five Selwyn Ranges massacres of February 1879 were undertaken by a police magistrate, a detachment of native police and a group of stockmen in reprisal for the killing of settler Bernard Molvo and three stockmen at Wonomo Waterhole. More than 100 Aboriginal men, women and children were killed.

The most recent genocidal massacre took place in the Northern Territory in 1928, when several hundred Warlpiri, Anmatyere and Kaytetye people were killed in reprisal for killing a dingo trapper.

 

The formation of the Commonwealth Of Australia in 1901 imposed on the entire continent a new legal regime, and in time migrants arrived from Europe and Asia drawn to that  system of laws. If sovereignty had not already been destroyed by  white settlers, it has certainly been destroyed  now  by the descendants of white settlers and migrants. 

 

END