Whose country? Colonialism and the rule of law in Sweet Country and Charlie’s Country

This chapter critiques liberal conceptions of the rule of law by analyzing two recent Australian films, Warwick Thornton’s Sweet Country (2018) and Rolf de Heer and David Gulpilil’s Charlie’s Country (2013). The chapter begins by outlining the two main conceptions of the rule of law, the formal and the substantive, and suggesting that Australia privileges the formal conception. The films are then analyzed to reveal how rule of law formalism obscures and perpetuates continuing injustices towards Indigenous Australians. In general terms, the films show two distinct problems with Australia’s commitment to rule of law formalism. First, such a commitment tends to obscure and abrogate the ultimate responsibility of the legal system to produce just results for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Second, the negative obligations of formalist legal approaches fail to consider the relevance and legitimacy of culturally diverse practices and thus operate discriminatorily against Indigenous people.