UNDRIP Report - English FINAL - International Forum on Globalization

More documents

Recommendations

Info

to elaborate a Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. At the first day of the First Session of this Working Group, indigenous peoples were told that since this was an intergovernmental process and that they would not have a voice. “I was at this first meeting, and we walked out, because we found it unacceptable to just listen to their negotiating without our being able to contribute our views. We told the Chairperson, the Ambassador of Peru, that since what is being negotiated are our rights, we demand that we have an equal voice with the UN member states of the Commission on Human Rights. If this is not granted we will walk out of the whole process and the CHR will look ridiculous as they kept out the rights holders from a process which is negotiating their rights.” said Tauli-Corpuz. “The Chair called for a recess, consulted with the member states where they agreed to change the rules of participation and allow us to have an equal voice with them.” That was a major change in the UN which has been spurred by indigenous peoples' activism. Two sessions (2006 and 2007) led to a text which was generally agreed upon. The last session agreed that the final version will be made by the Chair considering all the proposed changes. This will then be circulated to the caucus and member states for final changes, finalized by the Chair. This was submitted to the Human Rights Council,” said Tauli- Corpuz. “In 2006, one of the first acts of the Human Rights Council was to adopt the Chairman’s Text which was subsequently transmitted to the UN General Assembly” Then it was brought before the General Assembly where the African countries protested against stating that since they never took part in the earlier negotiations they would like more time to discuss it. The African Working Group on Indigenous Communities and Populations, a body under the African Commission on Human Rights and Peoples Rights played a crucial role in addressing the concerns of the African Group of Countries. Together with the African Indigenous Peoples' Caucus, the Global Caucus and I, in my capacity as Chair of the <strong>Forum</strong>, met with some African negotiators and also with the co-sponsors for the adoption of the Declaration to weaken the resistance of the African Group until we finally got them on our side,” said Tauli-Corpuz. There were changes to the Declaration to accommodate the African concerns, as seen in the final text’s twenty-four pre-ambular paragraphs, and forty-six operational paragraphs. The last article, Article 46 was one of the compromise articles. It states that the territorial integrity of states will not be violated by the Declaration, but that states must respect <strong>International</strong> Human Rights Law. On September 13, 2007 the United Nations Declaration of Indigenous Peoples Rights was passed by the General Assembly. Not only is the Declaration itself important, but “the process of coming up with the Declaration itself has really strengthened indigenous peoples worldwide. If it weren’t for the Declaration, we wouldn’t have had the chance to come together and unite amongst ourselves,” said Tauli-Corpuz. “No one believed this could get adopted because it is very strong, and refers to collective rights, such as the right to selfdetermination, collective rights to lands, territories and resources, cultural rights, among others. The Declaration has already supported land rights claims by indigenous peoples in Belize, Bolivia, and Suriname. “Increasingly…the Declaration is becoming a part of customary law because countries are using it as part of their constitutions and judicial decisions,” Tauli-Corpuz said. “That’s how it becomes customary law internationally.” Tauli-Corpuz also cites the UN Permanent <strong>Forum</strong> on Indigenous Issues as an achievement for indigenous peoples. The Permanent <strong>Forum</strong> is currently responsible for implementation issues related to the Declaration and will act as a treaty body. In addition, the Permanent <strong>Forum</strong> will look into the issues of indigenous peoples and climate change, their adaptation efforts, and impacts of mitigation measures, as well as a map for indigenous peoples on the UNFCCC’s road to Copenhagen and beyond. The Permanent <strong>Forum</strong> will also have an international expert workshop on extractive industries, which will be held in March of 2009. All these efforts will build toward <strong>UNDRIP</strong>’s implementation. 7
Discussion Trevor Stevenson of the Amazon Alliance stated that the experience in the Amazon reinforces the lessons learned in the successful campaign for <strong>UNDRIP</strong> because “building the unity, the organization, and the effectiveness of the indigenous movement is the core of being able to move forward.” He said corporations and governments use divisive tactics to counteract the strengths that indigenous movements are building, and the Declaration could be used as a way to combat those attacks. “We’ve seen many efforts to divide the indigenous movement’s leadership, to determine who the leaders are, and what the leaders do,” said Stevenson. He warned that both friends with good intentions as well as big conservation organizations and corporations sometimes pay indigenous leaders to act as their representatives within the indigenous movement. He also encouraged organizations to reject the divisive tactics of those opposing indigenous rights by using the Declaration’s Articles 32 and 34. Article 32 declares, “States shall consult and cooperate in good faith with indigenous peoples’ concerns through their own representative institutions in order to obtain their free, prior, and informed consent.” Article 34 states that “indigenous peoples have the right to promote, develop and maintain their institutional structures.” These articles also promote capacity building within indigenous organizations. Victoria Tauli-Corpuz responded by stating that, “the process of drafting and negotiating the Declaration led to the development of trust between the different members of the caucus. There have been conflicts and tensions but these were resolved along the way because there was a common goal which had to be achieved with the cooperation of everybody. During this whole process we were able to discern who are those who represent indigenous peoples internationally. In the Philippines, they have agreed that regardless of individual politics, the basis of their unity is the Declaration. She warned against name calling of indigenous people as puppets of organizations and interests, and identified it potentially as a divisive practice. In addition, she supported the respect of indigenous people within their many roles as representatives, but also noted “maybe what we are trying to do now is just to get better in terms of trying to reel in our own indigenous representatives.” Marcos Orellana of the Center for <strong>International</strong> Environmental Law (CIEL) shared his observations on the “legal studies” of the Declaration. “It is often said that it is nonbinding and states are not required to comply with it. I don’t think this is particularly accurate or helpful,” said Orellana. To combat this, Orellana stated, “The Declaration can be referred to as customary as a first approach.” He found that the distinction between the old Declaration, or particular revisions of the old Declaration, was very important. “Secondly, this is not the first instrument recognized as conferring rights on the indigenous peoples’ struggles,” stated Orellana. “The recognition of those rights at other human rights conventions or in other international instruments can inform as a matter of interpretation on the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.” Thirdly, he referred to the principle of nonregression as an ally in implementation: “that States cannot fail to recognize and implement rights already recognized in the pretext of their other instruments that recognized them less, or in a lesser fashion.” He cited that the ILO rejected Article 169 because it violated the constitution and the principle of nonregression. Tom Goldtooth agreed that many different articles can be captured at the national level for “strengthening those aspects of treaty rights, or our customary rights, in the United States and Canada.” He echoed Stevenson’s warning that industry may work with governments to co-opt indigenous communities, which is tied to the historical issues of colonization and internalized oppression. Goldtooth noted, “Many of us who are from the community and working to build a healthy sustainable community know it’s not easy work for leaders to balance these kind of things. It is hard work.” He encouraged open and active dialogue between indigenous communities and NGOs to avoid the political pitfalls and to create clear collaborations. “It is all about relationship,” said Goldtooth. Victor Menotti of the IFG asked for someone in the group to elaborate on the different institutional spaces or political processes where we could utilize 8
Page 1 and 2: [Strategy Session] IMPLEMENTING THE
Page 3 and 4: [ S U M M A R Y R E P O R T ] I M P
Page 5 and 6: INT ROD UCT IO N Victor Menotti of
Page 7 and 8: determine the Alliance’s prioriti
Page 9: spiritual practices that are not bu
Page 13 and 14: utilize members of the indigenous S
Page 15 and 16: their rights had been violated when
Page 17 and 18: their climate change impact, and ar
Page 19 and 20: change conference in Bali, Indonesi
Page 21 and 22: concerns and explaining why they we
Page 23 and 24: wondered. She also pointed out that
Page 25 and 26: plantations, due to the increase in
Page 27 and 28: indigenous peoples take up to prote
Page 29 and 30: many times that they can shut down
Page 31 and 32: implementation of the different pro
Page 33 and 34: implementation of UNDRIP</s
Page 35 and 36: and indigenous issues.” He told t
Page 37 and 38: Indigenous peoples also took part i
Page 39 and 40: Secondly, Ole Simel made the point
Page 41 and 42: evaluating CDM, then projects would
Page 43 and 44: measure, would never be able to do
Page 45 and 46: Jintiach finished by saying that al
Page 47 and 48: industry, and about twenty percent
Page 49 and 50: discussion came up in Accra, and th
Page 51 and 52: end he was challenged on whether No
Page 53 and 54: to be very attentive to the argumen
Page 55 and 56: about it. “Even if you are a nati
Page 57 and 58: could [potentially] generate $50 bi
Page 59 and 60: Discussion Athena Ballesteros of th
Page 61 and 62:
change and by which they are mitiga
Page 63 and 64:
In response to Tom Goldtooth’s st
Page 65 and 66:
although the IFIP can be a champion
Page 67 and 68:
their lands and natural resources.
Page 69 and 70:
lawyers who work pro-bono in ”dev
Page 71 and 72:
that if it takes a network for this
Page 73 and 74:
indigenous delegation and articulat
Page 75 and 76:
Aaron Goldzimer of the Environmenta
Page 77 and 78:
what they were doing was trying to
Page 79 and 80:
participants to coordinate with oth
Page 81 and 82:
LIST OF PA RTICI PA N TS Brazil Ms.
Page 83 and 84:
United States Mr. David Gordon Paci
Page 85 and 86:
UNI TED NA TI ON S DE CL AR A TI ON
Page 87 and 88:
Recognizing that the situation of i
Page 89 and 90:
histories and aspirations which sha
Page 91 and 92:
2. Unless otherwise freely agreed u
Page 93 and 94:
Article 42! The United Nations, its
show all

UNDRIP Report - English FINAL - International Forum on Globalization

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?