A legislative change that will allow a multi-storey hotel to be built over a sacred site on Darwin’s waterfront without triggering a new heritage assessment is “appalling” and an act of “legal vandalism”, critics say.
Amendments to the Northern Territory’s Aboriginal Sacred Sites Act, which Larrakia elders say eroded protections for cultural heritage, passed parliament earlier this year. They allow for additions to be made to an authority certificate – which sets conditions for work on or near sacred sites – after it’s been issued.
In the first use of the act, the 2004 authority certificate for the Stokes Hill sacred site has been amended to add hotel developers to it, despite originally being granted for low-level development.
Elders, land councils and others are now calling for the federal government to intervene.
Rachel Perkins, a film-maker and activist, says the Larrakia people “would have never agreed” to the planned 11-storey building, which interferes with the sacred site.
She likens it to a neighbour getting permission to put on a veranda, “and 21 years later they come back and say ‘we consulted you about the veranda but we’re putting a three-storey building there’”.
“It doesn’t pass the pub test,” she says.
In 2003, the then Northern Territory chief minister Clare Martin announced a $600m plan to transform “a declining industrial area into a bustling foreshore” – including an area next to the Stokes Hill sacred site.
Sign up: AU Breaking News email
The next year, after consulting with the Larrakia, the Aboriginal Areas Protection Authority (AAPA) issued an authority certificate which sets out the conditions for redevelopment. It did not include any plan for a hotel, let alone a 47-metre, 11-storey one.
That announcement came in 2024, when the then Labor NT government said a hotel would be built on the waterfront.
Then, in 2025, the new Country Liberal party government passed legislation to amend the Sacred Sites Act to allow additions to previously issued certificates without triggering a new assessment by the AAPA. The state government claims the changes increase protection for sacred sites.
AAPA says it was not consulted on the changes to the act, while the Darwin Waterfront Corporation was.
Perkins stepped down from the AAPA board, which was forced to process the application without further consultation, last week. She says as a government appointee to the board it would be hypocritical for her to stay while she is “deeply opposed” to the process AAPA is now forced to follow.
Larrakia elder Bill Risk says the large green tree frog and the mopoke night bird or owl are the two beings associated with the sacred site.
“They are associated with warning signals, watching out, keeping Larrakia people safe from harm, and warning us of impending danger or people who are approaching,” he says.
“This development will actually impede the ability for the site to look after the Larrakia people.”
AAPA was compelled to process the application “without further consultation”, it said. Chair Bobby Nunggumajbarr said the board had “very serious concerns about the use of a 20-year-old certificate” for the project and that a tower was not part of the original consultation.
The government says the project will have economic benefits for the city, but Perkins says its focus on the economic benefits comes at the expense of protecting sacred sites.
“They just will not address the fact of this act of bastardry,” she says.
“Aboriginal people want economic development. We’re the most impoverished people in the territory. Everyone wants development and economic prosperity, but not at any cost.”
Risk says Larrakia people are not opposed to development, they just want to be included and consulted.
As a senior custodian of the site, he was involved in discussions in 2024 with the developer, CEL Darwin, which is part of CEL Australia, which in turn runs the Momentus Hotel group.
He says he explained the importance of the site, and the need to have a smaller building.
“They decided not to go ahead with the development,” he says.
“That’s when the government stepped in and changed the legislation … it was a direct overruling of our authority.”
CEL Darwin has since changed its name to SH Darwin.
Risk, AAPA and the land councils have all called on the federal government to step in.
Chansey Paech, a Labor member of the state’s legislative assembly, says the amendments to the sacred site act amount to “legislative vandalism”, telling the NT parliament in May it “exists solely to clear the pathway for the waterfront hotel – nothing more, nothing less”.
The lands, planning and environment minister, Josh Burgoyne, says conversely that the legislative changes strengthened protections for sacred sites and will “ensure respect for culture alongside sustainable economic development”. Allowing updates to certificates reduces duplication and guarantees that any conditions protecting sacred sites applies equally to new parties, as well as proving a legally binding alternative to court proceedings, he says.
The Larrakia Development Corporation and the Larrakia Cultural Centre Working Group were extensively consulted with in 2024 before the hotel development was announced, he says. They were not consulted after the legislation was changed.
On behalf of the traditional owners, the Larrakia Nation Aboriginal Corporation says AAPA was made to process applications “without meaningful consultation with custodians”. The LNAC’s chief executive officer, Michael Rotumah, says the decision “demonstrates how the voices of Larrakia custodians are being systematically sidelined in matters affecting their sacred sites”.
“Legislative and ministerial interference has eroded AAPA’s independence, reducing its statutory authority to a hollow process,” he says.
The Central Land Council chair, Warren Williams, says the new sacred sites act failed at the first test, “just as we predicted”, and made AAPA an “instrument of the CLP”.
“My heart goes out to the traditional owners,” he says. “We will stand with them in their fight for their right to protect their sacred site.”
He wrote to Burgoyne to remind him he had promised the certificates could only be transferred or have parties added “as long as the proposed work and use of the land are the same”.
The Northern Land Council (NLC) has also called for federal intervention and condemned the decision, saying it posed a risk to “the protection and preservation of sacred sites right across the NT”.
The NLC’s chair, Matthew Ryan, says the lack of respect for the Larrakia traditional owners was “appalling”. The land councils and AAPA have called on the federal government to intervene.
Guardian Australia has contacted CEL Australia and the federal government for comment.
The best public interest journalism relies on first-hand accounts from people in the know.
If you have something to share on this subject, you can contact us confidentially using the following methods.
Secure Messaging in the Guardian app
The Guardian app has a tool to send tips about stories. Messages are end to end encrypted and concealed within the routine activity that every Guardian mobile app performs. This prevents an observer from knowing that you are communicating with us at all, let alone what is being said.
If you don't already have the Guardian app, download it (iOS/Android) and go to the menu. Select ‘Secure Messaging’.
SecureDrop, instant messengers, email, telephone and post
If you can safely use the Tor network without being observed or monitored, you can send messages and documents to the Guardian via our SecureDrop platform.
Finally, our guide at theguardian.com/tips lists several ways to contact us securely, and discusses the pros and cons of each.
