Intervention-era alcohol bans in remote Aboriginal communities across the Northern Territory have ended, making liquor legal in some areas for the first time in 15 years.
It means these communities can now choose if they want to restrict access to alcohol.
While some say it will empower communities to make decisions, others – including Aboriginal health groups – say the changes have been rushed, and are worried about what this means for alcohol-related harm.
With the laws expiring at midnight tonight, we take a look at the legislation, what is changing, and why.
The beginning of alcohol restrictions
Bans and restrictions on the consumption of alcohol in the NT's remote communities have existed in some capacity for decades.
Many communities had opted to become restricted areas under NT law, well before the NT emergency response or intervention enforced widespread alcohol bans and penalties in 2007.
According to author and advocate for the Uluru Statement from the Heart, Thomas Mayor, there was already a history of residents making their own efforts to keep alcohol out of their communities, including Gurindji leader and land rights hero Vincent Lingiari.
"It's undeniable that alcohol was used to keep Aboriginal people in a state [where] they were far less able to defend their country and their rights," he said.
"Elders like Vincent Lingiari had tried to keep alcohol out of the community, but the town was annexed and alcohol was able to be brought in.
The Howard government's intervention-era laws were later replaced in 2012 with Labor's Stronger Futures laws, which kept the widespread alcohol bans and increased penalties.
The federal government has not extended these Stronger Futures laws beyond July this year, which means the NT needs its own laws if it wants to regulate alcohol consumption.
A handful of remote communities already have permits to operate their own social clubs with alcohol – one of these is Barunga, which was granted a liquor licence for a social club earlier this year.
So, will alcohol become available in all communities?
Not quite.
The NT government passed legislation in May, giving affected communities the ability to choose or "opt in" if they want alcohol bans once the federal laws expire.
These communities are the places that did not already have their own bans under the Liquor Act in place – around a dozen remote communities, more than 200 homelands and more than 30 town camps.
From tomorrow, they have been given more than six months – until January 31 next year – to make their decision.
However, these interim bans will only continue for two years, while those communities discuss their long-term plans for alcohol.
Are people happy with the changes?
While there is broad agreement that communities should be given the power to decide, the NT government has been accused of rushing the process.
Aboriginal health groups concerned about alcohol-related harm said there had been "bugger all" notice about the NT's new laws.
The National Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisation wanted an "opt out" system for affected communities, rather than the "opt in" option that was chosen.
NT Police and the Country Liberal Party Opposition raised similar concerns about a lack of consultation.
In response, the NT Chief Minister and Alcohol Policy Minister Natasha Fyles said she had consulted with "many stakeholders".
The NT government also said its hand was forced by the federal government when it "walked away" from the laws.
NT Senator Malarndirri McCarthy, who is also the Indigenous Australians and Indigenous Health Assistant Minister, said the federal government's approach was "consistent with Labor's commitment to self-determination".
"The previous government knew for a very long time this legislation would end and failed to consult with communities and elders here in the Territory," Ms McCarthy said.
NT CLP Senator Jacinta Price said the NT government had unfairly tried to "pass the buck" to the federal government.
"What the Territory government could have done was maintain the Stronger Futures legislation, keep it in place, until they had carried out the consultation they should have carried out," she said.
Did the previous bans work?
Northern Territory Attorney-General Chansey Paech has previously said the restrictions led to expensive black-market sales and harmful alternatives to alcohol, such as mouthwash and sanitiser.
He has also said, regardless of their effectiveness, they were "racist".
"The inequity is what frustrates me the most; that people in towns and urban centres can still look down on Aboriginal people in the bush and say: 'I know what is best for you'," Mr Paech said in May.
Some residents have said the restrictions improved safety in their communities.
Others have spoken about the shame and powerlessness caused and demanded an apology from the federal government.
Mr Mayor said the "blanket ban" had caused harm in some places, with people travelling long distances to access alcohol, and individual communities should be deciding on their own models.
"You drive people into the towns and cities away from country onto the roads," he said.
