The Northern Land Council has denounced the NT government's proposed amendments to the Territory's Sacred Sites Act, saying the changes prioritise business interests over the protection of the Territory's most important cultural heritage assets.
Northern Land Council Chair Matthew Ryan said on Friday "it is very clear this Bill is a rush job that undermines the integrity of the Sacred Sites Act in favour of proponents".
"The Sacred Sites Act isn't about putting profits before our people; it is to protect our cultural heritage as we are obliged to do as custodians," he said.
"Traditional Owners deserve the courtesy of being consulted about matters of critical importance and they are angry about being ignored.
"Securing rights to land and protecting sacred sites and cultural heritage have been hard won rights and this dismissive behaviour from the NT Government is nothing short of an attack on our people."
The Land Council said the government has progressed this Bill to amend the Act without any consultation, "proving it has no respect for our Traditional Owners and no understanding of the centrality of sacred sites to Aboriginal culture and lore".
The NLC said the Act does need to be updated, and that this is why the Council and other stakeholders last year contributed to a proposal that would have "genuinely strengthened it for the benefit of all Territorians… However, these suggested amendments were largely ignored".
"While the Bill has been referred to the Legislative Scrutiny Committee, in yet another show of brazen disregard for Territory transparency, submissions have to be in by next Friday," the NLC said in an official statement.
Earlier this week, the Central Land Council said the changes are "ill-considered" and would "threaten Traditional Owners' rights and interests - without consulting them".
Chair Warren Williams said the CLC had been "disrespected" and "treated like children" by the NT Lands, Planning and Environment Minister Joshua Burgoyne.
"We asked for information, he gave us platitudes," Mr Williams said.
"He asked us to simply accept that the government's intentions behind the changes are good. He wouldn't give us any details about the changes or how they would work. All he had was empty talk. No wonder we are all very alarmed."
The Territory's independent Aboriginal Areas Protection Authority, which is responsible for overseeing the safeguarding of sacred sites, also raised concerns about the lack of consultation and extremely short time frame for feedback on the amendments.
Authority chair Bobby Nunggumajbarr told AAP the board supported streamlining existing processes but instead of consulting with Aboriginal people, the government had proposed the "hastily drafted" transfer power.
"We could be discussing a one-stop shop where all Aboriginal heritage and sacred sites are protected under a single process and a single act," he said.
"We could be simplifying the authority's cost structure. We could ensure the offences and the penalties are in line with other heritage and environmental legislation.
"The Sacred Sites Act is an extremely important piece of legislation that should not be changed simply to suit one development or another."
Authority board member Barbara Shaw also raised concerns about the seven-day time frame for feedback on the amendments.
"That's not good enough for Aboriginal people out on Country who's got English as a third or fourth language, who does not have any connectivity whatsoever in remote communities," she told AAP.
"There's arrogance in that, knowing we don't have that communication. One week to put in a submission then a month to present to the scrutiny committee, that's not good enough for our people, and that's why we need more time for consultation instead of this rush job."
Mr Burgoyne says the changes are designed make the process more "accessible, efficient, and protective of sacred sites".
