King Charles III, on his first official visit to Australia since ascending to the British throne, found himself the target of a vocal protest by an Indigenous Australian senator who accused the monarch of genocide. The incident unfolded as Charles delivered a speech at Australia’s Parliament House in Canberra, marking a pivotal moment in his reign and reigniting longstanding tensions between the British monarchy and Australia’s First Nations people.
Lidia Thorpe, a prominent Aboriginal senator from Victoria, interrupted the proceedings, directly confronting King Charles III, claiming that the monarchy had committed acts of genocide against Indigenous Australians.
“This is not your land, you are not my king!” Thorpe exclaimed as she approached the stage, visibly emotional and impassioned. “You committed genocide against our people. Give us our land back. Give us what you stole from us—our bones, our skulls, our babies, our people. You are a genocidalist.”
For roughly a minute, Thorpe’s accusations rang out in the hallowed chambers of Parliament House, bringing the formal event to an abrupt halt. King Charles, along with other high-profile attendees, including Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, remained seated and chose not to respond to the disruption. The senator was soon escorted away by security, and the event resumed, but the protest had left an indelible mark on the proceedings.
The confrontation by Senator Thorpe is part of a broader discourse in Australia concerning the nation’s colonial past, its relationship with the British Crown, and the ongoing struggles of Indigenous peoples. While Australia gained independence from Britain in 1901, it remains a constitutional monarchy with the British monarch, now King Charles III, as its head of state. In practical terms, however, the monarch’s role is largely symbolic, with no direct involvement in Australia’s governance.
Thorpe, an outspoken advocate for Indigenous rights, has long called for the abolition of the monarchy in Australia. She has also campaigned for the establishment of a treaty between Australia and its First Nations peoples, which would address historical grievances and provide a framework for sovereignty and self-determination for Indigenous Australians.
In a statement released after the protest, Thorpe reiterated her stance: “The Crown invaded this country, has not sought a treaty with First Peoples, and committed a genocide of our people,” she said. “King Charles is not the legitimate sovereign of these lands.” Thorpe has consistently argued that Indigenous Australians never ceded their sovereignty to British colonizers, and the lack of a treaty remains a point of contention.
The issue of Indigenous rights and recognition has long been a polarizing subject in Australia. The country remains one of the few Commonwealth nations that has not signed a formal treaty with its Indigenous peoples, and there are ongoing debates about how to address the historical injustices faced by Aboriginal Australians, including land dispossession, cultural erasure, and the impacts of policies like the forced removal of Indigenous children, also known as the Stolen Generations.
King Charles’ visit to Australia was meant to symbolize continuity and the strengthening of ties between the British Crown and Australia following the death of his mother, Queen Elizabeth II, in 2022. It is also the first visit by a reigning British monarch to the country since 2011.
However, the visit has not been without its controversies. In the lead-up to his arrival, discussions surrounding Australia’s relationship with the monarchy resurfaced, with many Australians questioning the relevance of the monarchy in modern Australian society.
In 1999, Australia narrowly rejected a referendum that would have seen the country become a republic, severing its ties to the British Crown. Although the republican movement has since ebbed and flowed, King Charles’ ascension has renewed debates about whether Australia should remain a constitutional monarchy or embrace a republican model with an Australian head of state.
Polls show that public opinion on the matter is divided. Some Australians feel a deep sense of connection to the monarchy, viewing it as a cherished institution that represents tradition, stability, and continuity. Others, however, see the monarchy as an outdated and irrelevant institution, with no place in a modern, multicultural Australia.
In a statement earlier this month, Buckingham Palace officials, writing on behalf of King Charles, emphasized that the question of whether Australia remains a monarchy is “a matter for the Australian public to decide.” The statement appeared to acknowledge the ongoing discussions about Australia’s future constitutional arrangements but stopped short of taking a position on the issue.
Lidia Thorpe’s protest, and her broader call for a treaty with Indigenous Australians, aligns with a growing movement that seeks to address the legacy of colonization and the historical treatment of Aboriginal peoples. Many Indigenous activists argue that the continued presence of the monarchy, and the lack of a treaty, perpetuates the marginalization of First Nations peoples and fails to address the systemic injustices they have faced.
For Thorpe and others in the Indigenous rights movement, the push for an Australian republic is intrinsically linked to the demand for recognition and reparations for the crimes committed against Indigenous Australians. The accusation of genocide stems from the brutal history of colonization, which saw the dispossession of Indigenous lands, the destruction of cultures, and the near-extermination of some Aboriginal groups due to violence, disease, and government policies.
The idea of a treaty, often referred to as a “Makarrata” in some Indigenous languages, has been a longstanding demand of Aboriginal leaders. A treaty would recognize the sovereignty of Indigenous Australians and provide a legal framework for addressing issues like land rights, political representation, and compensation for historical injustices. Countries like New Zealand and Canada have signed treaties with their Indigenous populations, and many advocates argue that Australia should follow suit.
Thorpe’s protest also highlights the ongoing struggle for Indigenous representation in Australian politics. While there have been significant advancements, including the creation of the Indigenous voice to parliament, many activists believe that these efforts do not go far enough in addressing the structural inequalities faced by Indigenous Australians.
As King Charles III continues his visit to Australia, the republican debate is likely to intensify. While support for the monarchy remains relatively strong, particularly among older Australians, younger generations are more inclined to support a republic. This generational divide suggests that the future of Australia’s constitutional arrangements may ultimately be shaped by changing demographics and evolving attitudes toward national identity.
For Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, who has expressed republican sympathies in the past, the question of Australia’s relationship with the monarchy is a delicate one. While he has acknowledged the need for a national conversation about becoming a republic, he has also emphasized the importance of respect and civility in that discussion.
Albanese’s government has introduced several reforms aimed at improving the lives of Indigenous Australians, including the establishment of the National Indigenous Australians Agency and the push for a referendum on the Indigenous Voice to Parliament, which would enshrine a formal mechanism for Indigenous input into government decisions. However, the issue of a treaty remains unresolved, and it is unclear whether the government will pursue this path in the near future.
