7 7.1 Submissions From individual women (a) Culture and conflict Many of the individual women’s submissions highlighted concerns that the native title system was facilitating the wrong people to speak for country. This led women to feel that native title was undermining traditional culture and creating significant intra-community conflict. Specifically, the leadership of some PBCs, NTRBs and Service Providers was questioned along with the ability of individuals and groups to hold PBCs, NTRBs and Service Providers to account. Women felt that some individuals in positions of power tasked with speaking for and making decisions on behalf of the group, lack the cultural authority to do so. Some women specifically felt that the native title system enabled people to benefit from membership of a PBC when they should not be able to, according to tradition. Concerns ranged from the processes associated with proving connection to Country through to the way PBCs are constituted in the post‑determination period. How can we be reassured that the Native title process is correct if a foreign process is implied onto a cultural process in connection reports … Juanita Johnson … some people are making decisions about country that they have no cultural authority for. This disempowers and disrespects our law bosses and cultural authorities … In my experience the PBCs are not made up of … those who have a right to speak for country. Native Title undoes thousands of years of culture that protected and managed country. Maria Several women submitted that the process of proving connection provided a forum for women’s knowledge to be sidelined and for conflicts of interest to play out to the advantage of a more powerful group or individual. Some women felt that anthropological reports prioritising historical written evidence originally compiled by non-Indigenous men were being favoured over information put forward by First Nations women. One submission specifically discussed ‘biased connection reports funded by NTRBs’ which seemed to have been designed to ensure that certain mob benefitted from native title more than others. These submissions directly raised the conflicts of interest inherent in the native title system. There has been misinformation put forward to the Court and accepted by the Court as evidence; and the information that I myself and others have put forward has been rejected. Coral King In my experience native title claimant groups are fraudulently empowered by deceitful Native Title Rep Bodies who undertake sparse connection reports to justify their own biased reason in putting forward ‘yes mob’ who have no connection for the sole purpose to continue to receive future funding. Juanita Johnson Australian Human Rights Commission 49