Eighth session of Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues ends with challenge to talk of action
Winnipeg gains support to host the first World Indigenous Games in 2012 ...
NOTES FROM PERMANENT FORUM ON INDIGENOUS ISSUES CONCLUDES EIGHTH SESSION WITH ADOPTION OF KEY TEXT DESIGNED TO TRANSFORM HISTORIC DECLARATION INTO ‘LIVING LAW’
‘We Have Talked of Suffering, We Have Talked of Hope. Now, Let’s Talk Of Action,” Urged Forum Member, Echoing Sentiment of Speakers in Session
In a bid to transform the historic 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples into “living law”, the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii) closed its eighth session (http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/en/session_eighth.html) today by adopting a text that invited States to adopt or endorse the document, substantively inform the Forum about its implementation and effectiveness locally and nationally, and recommended that they do the same in core reports to human rights treaty bodies and the Human Rights Council’s universal periodic review.
By that text (document E/C.19/2009/L.3), one of four orally amended and adopted today by consensus, the Forum recommended that the Declaration -- a new foundation for the rights of indigenous peoples and a legal basis for all related activities –- be integrated into the policies, projects and strategies of United Nations agencies, funds and programmes, and the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights.
Further, the Forum called on States to consult with indigenous peoples and fully respond to their needs and rights when crafting relevant legislation, as well as to adopt or endorse the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and International Labour Organization (ILO) Convention No. 169.
Key to those efforts was the Forum’s adoption of its first general comment, aimed at giving effect to the Declaration’s article 42, which stipulates that the United Nations must promote respect for and full application of the Declaration and its incorporation into national law, court systems and administrative decisions of the various countries.
By a text on economic and social development, indigenous women and the Second International Decade of the World’s Indigenous Peoples (document E/C.19/2009/L.2/Rev.1), the Forum urged the World Bank to expand its operational budget to ensure adequate management of its $30 billion increase in infrastructure spending for developing nations. Transnational corporations must adopt minimum standards as a requirement of due diligence, particularly in creating a human rights policy, while States should ensure that corporations comply with standards laid out in the Declaration and ILO Convention No. 169.
Also by that text, the Forum recommended that the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) organize an international expert workshop on the theme of “Indigenous peoples and health, with special emphasis on sexual and reproductive health”, and submit a report to the Forum’s ninth session. It urged the Inter-Agency Support Group on Indigenous Peoples’ Issues to hold an international technical expert seminar on well-being indicators to be used in monitoring indigenous peoples’ situation.
The Forum further recommended that States, United Nations agencies and indigenous peoples’ organizations actively engage in the mid-term evaluation of the Decade and submit reports on its national implementation. It also welcomed that principles and rules contained in the Declaration had been integrated into Bolivia’s new Constitution, which had been ratified in a referendum on 25 January.
In a text that emerged from its half-day discussion on the Arctic region (document E/C.19/2009/L.5), the Forum urged all Arctic States to implement the Declaration, and the Nordic States, in particular, to ratify the Nordic Saami Convention, which would set an example for other peoples whose traditional territories were divided by international borders.
Also by that text, the Forum called on the Arctic Council to provide its indigenous permanent participants with resources to allow for their involvement in all relevant activities. It recommended that the Arctic Council formally engage with the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) to follow-up the international expert meeting on Arctic climate change, held in Monaco from 3 to 6 March.
Among other recommendations, the Forum appointed three of its members to undertake a study on the impact of climate change adaptation and mitigation measures on reindeer herding, and another on indigenous fishing rights in the seas. It called on UNEP to conduct a fast-track assessment of the short-term drivers of climate change, with a view to starting talks for a global agreement on reducing black carbon emissions.
By a text on its future work (document E/C.19/2009/L.7), the Forum recommended that the World Health Organization (WHO) study the health effects on indigenous peoples caused by radioactive poisoning, uranium mining, dumping of radioactive waste and nuclear testing on traditional lands, and further, to submit a report to the ninth session. Similarly, it appointed a Forum member to study the Doctrine of Discovery, a legal concept which served as the basis for human rights violations against indigenous peoples, and to submit a report in 2010.
Also according to that text, the Forum supported a plan to hold the first World Indigenous Nations Games in Winnipeg, Canada, in 2012, and decided to hold a half-day session on the theme of “Addressing racism against indigenous peoples” during Forum’s tenth session in 2011.
Echoing the sentiments expressed by many speakers throughout the Forum’s two-week session, Hassan Id Balkassm, Forum member from Morocco, said: “We have talked of suffering and we have talked of hope. Now, let’s talk of action.” Despite progress in many countries to recognize indigenous peoples’ identity and culture, much remained ink on paper, and implementation of their values was lacking. International commitments by Governments implied there would be real action and he hoped that would happen.
In closing remarks, Chairperson Victoria Tauli-Corpuz, Forum member from the Philippines, said each agenda item during the eighth session had provided important insights and an opportunity for participants to hear and learn from one another. At the national, regional, local and community levels, challenges remained. “We must be strongly committed,” she stressed. “We need to work towards developing close cooperation with United Nations agencies and Governments to realize our self-determined rights.”
She said that, during the session, delegates had heard that, while most States had adopted human rights standards, there was considerable incoherence at legal and international levels. States had a duty to provide more effective protection against corporate-related harm. Speakers had underscored the absolute necessity to affirm the rights of indigenous women, noting that there was increased expectation that women and girls performed well in society and, at the same time, preserved indigenous identity. That could only be done in partnership. Forum experts had also reported on their mission to Paraguay and Bolivia, where they had met with victims of forced labour and servitude, among others.
Regarding the Arctic, she said the half-day discussion on that region had focused on environmental issues of serious concern, including the fact that heavy metals were being spread in the air and water streams. During the Forum’s following in-depth dialogues, several United Nations agencies had discussed their approaches to incorporating the Declaration into their policies and programmes. Concerns had been expressed that indigenous peoples might be seen as only the subjects of studies, rather than as partners -- active agents -– in their own development.
The financial crisis had also figured prominently, she noted, with one United Nations expert explaining that the number of global working poor would increase by 200 million. Government social spending was at risk and there was growing unrest in the face of expanding poverty. Indigenous peoples would face an uphill battle in gaining access to natural resources, particularly water.
The Forum adopted, as orally amended, the draft report of its current session (E/C.19/2009/L.10), which contained three draft decisions, including a decision (E/C.19/2009/L.8) in which it recommended that the Economic and Social Council decide to authorize a three-day international expert group meeting on the theme “Indigenous peoples: development with culture and identity; articles 3 and 32 of the United Nations Declaration on the Right of Indigenous Peoples”, and to report on that meeting’s results to the Forum’s ninth session. By another decision (E/C.19/2009/L.9), the Economic and Social Council would decide to hold the Forum’s ninth session at Headquarters in New York from 19 to 30 April 2010). By the third decision (E/C.19/2009/L.4), the Forum adopted that session’s provisional agenda.
During the meeting, Rapporteur Mick Dodson, Forum member from Australia, introduced the Forum’s report and recommendations.
During the closing ceremony, Chief Francois Bellefleur, First Innu Nation of Natashquan, said the Innu, who lived along the north coast of Quebec, had decided long ago to abandon confrontation and resolutely adopt a voice of equal partnership with the Quebecois. He pointed to a joint hydroelectric project between the Innu and the Quebec government, saying it was a solid opportunity to carve out a better future for his people’s children and reaffirm their pride in belonging to a great nation. Armand McKenzie, also of the First Innu Nation, then sang an indigenous prayer.
Robert White Mountain, Midnight Strong Heart Society, also sang an indigenous prayer, while Nima Lama Yolmo and other members of the Nepal Federation of Indigenous Nationalities and indigenous members of Nepal’s Constituent Assembly sang their national anthem, which was written in 2006.
A 16-member subsidiary body of the Economic and Social Council, the Forum is mandated to provide expert advice on indigenous issues to the Council and the United Nations system, raise awareness about and promote integration and coordination of indigenous issues in the Organization’s activities, and prepare and disseminate information about those issues.
- - -
INDIGENOUS GROUPS CALL FOR HALT BY FOREIGN COMPANIES OF LAND USE FOR OIL, MINING, WITHOUT THEIR PRIOR KNOWLEDGE, CONSENT, AS PERMANENT FORUM CONTINUES
As Stewards of Environment, ‘Indigenous People Cannot Be Sacrificed
On the Altar of Climate Change’, Forum Hears as It Turns to Arctic Region
The Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues continued its discussion of human rights today amid calls for Governments tostrictly carry out their obligations under international human rights accords, notably in the Amazon where protests by native inhabitants recently erupted after moves to open the region to oil and mining by foreign companies without their consultation.
In spirited morning debate, indigenous delegates from various parts of Latin and Central America pressed Governments -- including the United States and Canada -- to adopt provisions of the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, named by one speaker as the first real challenge to the “colonial doctrines of discovery”. Others urged them to heed their obligations under the International Labour Organization (ILO) Convention No. 169, which safeguards indigenous rights in natural resource use and explicitly outlines State behaviour for relocating native peoples when considered necessary as an exceptional measure.
The delegate from the Organización Nacional Indígena de Colombia said no such consultations had been held before military bases had been set up on their territories. Some 70,000 indigenous peoples had been displaced and 75 per cent of children were suffering from malnutrition. Forced displacement and murder statistics surpassed those of last year.
A parliamentarian from Colombia representing the Movimiento de Autoridades Indígenas de Colombia y el Parlamento Indígena de América, added that several laws and strategies in Colombia -– including the Forestry Law -- negated indigenous peoples’ right to free, prior and informed consent, and other rights outlined in both the Constitution and ILO Convention No. 169.
In response, Governments acknowledged the need for improvements and highlighted positive developments. The Director for Indigenous Issues, Ministry of the Interior of Colombia, said the legislature’s actions were constantly overseen. All legislation was reviewed by the constitutional court to ensure that rulings were in line with the Constitution. While recognizing multiculturalism, he said Colombia, through its security policy, controlled national territory, including lands inhabited by indigenous peoples, who themselves were being attacked by terrorists and drug traffickers.
The representative of Peru said that, just yesterday, the Government had set up a multisectoral commission between the State and the inter-ethnic association of the Peruvian forest to deal with indigenous problems in the Amazon. Such bureaux for dialogue boosted long-term development, particularly vis-à-vis mining in areas inhabited by indigenous peoples.
When the Forum next turned its attention to issues in the Arctic -- chosen for the Forum’s annual half-day discussion on a world region -- Patricia Cochran, President of the Inuit Circumpolar Council, reinforced her area’s connection to native peoples around the world, saying: “Arctic peoples have experiences to share with all indigenous peoples.”
She said industry, shipping countries and tourism operators were eyeing its seas and other natural resources. Heavy metals, mercury and others were in the air, water and food chain. Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPS) were being transported to the Arctic and becoming trapped in the cold. In addition, States were causing problems: the European Union import ban on seal skin products impacted the Inuit, who survived on those exports.
Despite that, she reminded the Forum that Inuit were a pragmatic people. Her people would work with States to achieve an international agreement on black carbon and on mercury, and she called for the Forum’s support in those efforts. They would work to ensure that industries sought the consent of indigenous people prior to undertaking activities that affected them, and reach out to former colonizers. “We are optimistic and we will overcome”, she concluded.
In ensuing debate, several delegations praised the Arctic Council -- an intergovernmental forum of Arctic Governments and indigenous peoples -- as a model for international cooperation issues important for the region.
The President of the Saami Council pointed out, while the Arctic Council’s role was strengthening, its workload was increasing and the capacity of indigenous peoples to participate was at a standstill. To maintain it as a model for joint decision-making, States had to provide more resources. States and extractive industries must respect that oil, gas and mining resources were situated on, and/or could only be accessed from, indigenous peoples’ territories. That called for agreements to be made with all parties before any resources were tapped. “Indigenous people cannot be sacrificed on the altar of climate change.”
Also making statements on the Arctic region were: Louis Tapardjuk, Minister of Culture, Language, Elders and Youth, Minister of Education, Minister of Languages and Minister of Aboriginal Affairs, Nunavut, Canada; and Innuuteq Holm Olsen, Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs, Home Rule Government of Greenland, and Chairman of the Artic Council, speaking on behalf of Denmark, Greenland and the Faroe Islands.
Forum members from Bolivia, United States, Spain, Morocco and the Russian Federation also made statements.
James Anaya, the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous peoples, also made a statement today.
Also speaking were State members represented by observers from Australia, France, Congo, Norway, Bolivia, Mexico, Guatemala, United States, Russian Federation, Canada, Finland and Denmark.
The representative of Chile spoke in exercise of the right of reply.
The Permanent Observer for the Holy See also spoke, as did a representative of the European Commission.
A representative of the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples also spoke, as did a representative of the Office of Legal Affairs and the Law of the Sea of the United Nations Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea.
A representative of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) also made a statement.
Representatives of the following caucuses, umbrella organizations and indigenous groups also delivered statements: Caucus Francofon, Parlamento de Indígena de América, Alianza Mundial de los Pueblos Indígenas y Tribales de los Bosques Tropicales, Confederación Nacional de Organizaciones Campecinas y Negras del Ecuador, Fondo Indígena, Feine, Winnemem Wintu Tribe, Latin America Caucus, North America Caucus, Nomad Touareg Caucus, Centro de Cultura Pueblo Nación Mapuche Pelonxaru, Voluntary Fund for Indigenous Populations, Indigenous Youth Caucus, Indigenous Peoples of the Pacific Caucus, African Caucus, Assembly of First Nations of Quebec and Labrador, Indigenous Youth Caucus, Inuit Circumpolar Council, Coordinadora de Organizaciones Indígenas-Campesinas de Bolivia, National Council of Ayllus and Markas of Qullasuyu, and the Pacific Caucus. \
The Forum will reconvene at 10 a.m. on Friday, 22 May, to continue its session.
Background
The Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues met today to continue its discussion of human rights and implementation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and to begin discussion on the Arctic region. (For additional information on the current session, see Press Release HR/4979.)
Statements
HANDAINE MOHAMED, Caucus Francofon, said the situation of indigenous people in the French-speaking world continued to worsen, with serious insufficiencies in the teaching of their language. While recognizing efforts made by Morocco, he said in Algeria, there was “cultural genocide” against the Amazigh people. The non-application by both countries of the Declaration showed their attitude. In Libya and Tunisia, indigenous peoples did not have the right to sing in their languages. In the Sahel, there was no access to education or health care. In Central Africa, other peoples were discriminated against, while in Polynesia, the Franco-Polynesian treaty had not been recognized. French justice should provide the necessary means for the Earth not be held hostage by 80 per cent of the population. France voted in favour of the Declaration and was starting to make efforts vis-à-vis the environment, but indigenous peoples saw the exploitation of the environment. In closing, he urged Canada to adopt the Declaration, and other States to both recognize indigenous languages and support their use.
TOMASA YAURI, Parlamento de Ind ígena de Am érica, saying that she was a senator of Bolivia, expressed hope to see a more balanced parliamentary representation of women in her country. In many countries, it was important to increase the representation of women in parliaments. Indigenous women needed a higher profile. She was concerned at human rights violations in Bolivia, particularly of indigenous women, and encouraged indigenous women to work towards a common goal –- of coexisting under the name of “indigenous peoples”, rather than trying to humiliate one group or another. Bolivia was working hard in those efforts. As an indigenous woman and senate member, she was the first indigenous minister in the history of Bolivia and hoped to see more women in such positions.
GONZALO GUTIEREZ ( Peru) said that, in line with human rights instruments and International Labour Organization Convention No. 169, Peru continued to promote the rights of indigenous peoples. His Government was committed to developing strategies for ethnic plurality. Proof of that was Peru’s lead in drafting the Declaration for 11 years. The country today was working towards an integrated Peruvian nation that respected heritage and cultural diversity. Yesterday, the Government had set up a multisectoral commission between the State and the inter-ethnic association of the Peruvian forest to deal with indigenous problems in the Amazon. Such bureaux for dialogue boosted long-term development, particularly vis-à-vis mining in areas inhabited by indigenous peoples. Peru also had rules that guaranteed information and consultation with indigenous peoples for hydrocarbon activities, and a legal framework to protect the rights of those living in voluntary isolation. Finally, there was a supreme decree that acknowledged the need to work together on sectoral policies of Andean, African and Afro-Peruvian peoples, while an equal-opportunities law promoted indigenous peoples’ inclusion in decision-making.
BERNIE YATES, Deputy Secretary, Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs, speaking as an observer on behalf of the Government of Australia, the Australian Human Rights Commission and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander organizations, said in the past 18 months there had been a resetting of relationships in Australia. That had begun with a national apology to Australia’s Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. On 3 April, the Australian Minister for Indigenous Affairs supported the Declaration, marking an important step in building trust and moving forward. That statement reversed the Australian Government’s previous position, reflecting a change of values and a renewed willingness to build relationships at home and internationally. Since 2006, the Australian Human Rights Commission had led the “Close the Gap” coalition, calling on Governments to implement a human rights-based approach to addressing aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health inequality.
In an unprecedented step, local, state and national Governments had created targets to close the gap between aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and other Australians in life expectancy, child mortality, early childhood education, literacy and numeracy, and high-school completion, and employment with specified time frames, he said. Governments had announced some 6 billion Australian dollars in new funding for indigenous-specific initiatives to support those commitments. The Government had committed to support the creation of a national indigenous representative body to engage with indigenous people at the highest level on issues of importance to them. Consultations, coordinated and chaired by the Australian Human Rights Commission and at arm’s length from the Government, were under way, and an independent committee formed by the Commission would propose a model to the Government in July. The aim was to have a new body operating by year’s end. The Government had committed to introducing legislation in October so that the 1975 Racial Discrimination Act would apply to the emergency response in affected indigenous communities in the northern territory and that current provisions, excluding the operation of the Act, were removed.
ANAYS ARIAS, Alianza Mundial de los Pueblos Ind ígenas y Tribales de los Bosques Tropicales, said women still suffered from discrimination. They had an important role to play and an important contribution to make to culture and development. Still, indigenous women continued to suffer from violence and pain. The key points put forward by indigenous women must be taken into account by the Forum. Governments were aware of the pain and discrimination suffered by indigenous women, but they were not taking steps to address them. Women had the same intellectual capacity as men.
LUIS ANDRANGO, Confederaci ón Nacional de Organizaciones Campecinas y Negras del Ecuador, said indigenous people worldwide had experienced similar situations of abuse and discrimination. The Forum should include indigenous peoples’ voices and views, particularly in discussions on how to address climate change. Indigenous people had much to contribute to that discussion in terms of sustainable consumption and production patterns.
EMMANNUEL LEBRUN-DAMIENS, First Secretary, Human Rights and Humanitarian Issues, France, said the country had supported the Declaration when it was adopted by the General Assembly in 2007, and it had supported creation of the Expert Mechanism of the Human Rights Council. Last year, France responded to the Special Rapporteur’s request for information on the Kanak people in New Caledonia. For a long time, France had incorporated the practices, uses and customs of traditional populations overseas. Human rights were constitutionally guaranteed by the French State. France had an active policy of promoting regional languages and it had provided full-fledged support for those languages in the grade school curricula. Parity in bilingual teaching had been established.
VALENTINE MAVOUNGOU, observer for the Congo, said his Government was committed to the cardinal principles in the defence of human rights. The Constitution included the spirit of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, and the Government spared no effort in promoting and protecting them. He recalled that, at the first session of the Human Rights Council in June 2006, the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples had been challenged by many States, but the Congo was among the few to call for unconditional adoption of the text -– and thereby end the denial of rights to part of any country’s population. Since 2004, the Congo had been working on an indigenous rights bill which was before the Council of Ministers for adoption by the Parliament. It was the first of its kind in Africa. “Let it be followed by others”, he said. Indigenous peoples had rights like any other community. The time for them to bend before other citizens, or give up their rights, was long gone. Indeed, the Declaration had marked the death knell of such behaviour, and he called on the Forum to be more thoroughly involved in pushing efforts forward.
LUIS EVELIS ANDRADE, Fondo Ind ígena, recalling the Forum’s recommendations, said his organization held a workshop to make indigenous issues more visible. Participants acknowledged efforts made to identify indigenous peoples in databases and censuses. With that, he stressed the importance of the next round of regional censuses and disseminating the results for the formulation of public policies. He urged States, through their national statistical institutes, to guarantee the full participation of indigenous peoples on equal footing in the development and coordination of policy. He also urged the United Nations and other cooperation organizations to enhance specialized agencies’ ability to provide financial support to indigenous peoples, which would help foster their participation in 2010 regional censuses.
WILLIAM CHELA, Feine, saying he spoke on behalf of evangelical and other religious schools, including in Ecuador and Bolivia, alluded to constant grievances of evangelical churches. Those churches recognized the right to life, not only for people, but for the Earth, because “we are never separated from our profound spiritual inspiration”. He recommended that the Forum support the Declaration’s implementation “right up to the very last peoples in the world”. It should also recommend, to States and United Nations agencies, that they recognize indigenous churches. They should also recognize Mother Earth as a legal entity and urge that the right to life be extended to it. He also supported women’s organizations on human rights issues.
RAIMO VALLE, Ministry of Labour and Social Inclusion of Norway, speaking on Sami policy, said that in May 2008 the Government submitted to the Norwegian Parliament a white paper that focused on how all levels of public administration implemented the Sami perspective in policy-making. Agencies working within different areas were obliged to “systematic planning” regarding Sami rights, and to report on actual implementation. At the regional level, there were voluntary agreements on cooperation between the Sami Parliament and the country councils. The duty to consult the Sami Parliament was important in the discussion of implementation of Sami rights. In 2008, the Government and the Sami Parliament held several consultations on the Nature Diversity Act and both were satisfied with the result: the Sami Parliament gained acceptance for many of its claims. After those talks, two Sami newspapers were created, one in the Sami language.
He said it had not been possible to reach agreement on a new mineral act. Talks that took place between 2007 and 2008 among the Government, the Sami Parliament and the Sami Reindeer Herders’ Association had been concluded. However, a proposition that reflected the Sami Parliament’s view was submitted to the Norwegian Parliament earlier this spring.
FREDDY MAMANI MACHACA, observer for Bolivia, said his country had gone through a dramatic change to recognize indigenous peoples’ rights, beginning with the passage of a new Constitution on 26 January, which had led to economic, social, political and cultural reforms in support of indigenous peoples’ rights and the Declaration. Since taking office three years ago, President Evo Morales had instituted significant advances, among them, nationalization of natural resources, better education and health care, the creation of three indigenous universities, and literacy programmes supported by the Governments of Cuba and Venezuela. In December 2008, Bolivia had become the third country in Latin America to be recognized by the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) as having wiped out illiteracy. It had also instituted mass-scale agricultural reform, redistributing communal lands to indigenous people who lacked sufficient land.
He said that the Declaration could amend a series of historical errors that discriminated against indigenous culture, science, medicine and practices, including the prohibition of the sale and use of the coca leaf. The coca leaf, in its natural state, did not damage a person’s health; it was not cocaine. Indigenous people did not believe in drug trafficking. In fact, they were fighting it. He recommended that the United Nations remove the coca leaf from article 49 of the 1961 United Nations Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs. Bolivia had recognized 22 April as Mother Earth Day. The last century had been the century for human rights. The current one must be the century for the rights of Mother Earth.
CALEEN SISK-FRANCO, Winnemem Wintu Tribe, speaking on behalf of several groups, noted that indigenous peoples sat on prime land and natural resources historically desired by Governments and corporations for profit and expansionist agendas. As a result, they had been forcefully relocated, removed or pushed into a diaspora across the hemispheres, creating global migration and displacement of indigenous peoples. The situation was affecting indigenous peoples on every continent. A panel of indigenous women leaders had identified common conditions resulting from that colonial legacy, and produced a collective statement on that subject at a side event held on 18 May during the meeting of the Permanent Forum.
She said that the statement urged the Forum to create a task force on “unrepresented” and “unrecognized” indigenous peoples, and to designate a rapporteur to undertake a study of the conditions under which they lived, including but not limited to migrant peoples and their families born outside their traditional territories. The statement would further draw attention to the United States Government’s continuing efforts to suppress the rights of the Winnemem Wintu Tribe in California, who were defending their historical territories and watersheds. It would draw attention to the case of Flor Crisostomo, referred to in the La Red Xicana Indigena statement on urban and migrant indigenous issues in 2007. Ms. Crisostomo was currently in sanctuary in Chicago, Illinois, having resisted deportation.
The text would draw special attention to the condition of Alifuru women and youth, incarcerated by the Indonesian Government and prosecuted for treason for presenting their traditional dances publicly. It would also draw attention to the La Cuenca Amazonia and encourage the Forum to urge the United Nations and the Bolivian Government to promote the preservation of their right to self-determination and territory. Finally, it would highlight the excessive militarization caused by the construction of the United States-Mexico wall, which was restricting access to traditional foods, ceremonial sites and was contaminating water and riverbanks on the Lipan-Apache territory, which straddled the United States and Mexican border.
ERNESTO RAMIRO ESTACI0, a parliamentarian from Colombia representing Movimiento de Autoridades Ind ígenas de Colombia y el Parlamento Ind ígena de Am érica, said indigenous communities were not only fighting for their rights, but also for the conservation of their cultures, restoration of their territories and land, and guarantees for their children’s future. Events and action, including armed attacks that were threatening the very existence of many indigenous communities’ cultures, land, territories and customs, had been denounced by the Constitutional Court, indigenous organizations and other groups. He pointed to several laws and national strategies, such as the Forestry Law, the Statute of Rural Development and the 2006-2010 National Development Plan, that negated the rights of indigenous people to free, prior and informed consent and other rights stated in the Colombian Constitution and ILO Convention No. 169. He urged all indigenous organizations to support the call to the Colombian Government to endorse the Declaration and incorporate it into domestic law.
GABRIELA GARDUZA ESTRADA, observer for Mexico, said that, since the Declaration’s adoption by the General Assembly, her Government had disseminated information on it -- including its substantive articles -- through an indigenous system and the United Nations Information Centre network. On 15 December 2008, as part of the Second International Decade, the National Commission for Development of Indigenous Peoples and the National Institute for Indigenous Languages, alongside the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, had held a press conference to present the Declaration’s translation in two indigenous languages. Those translations had been delivered to the Forum’s secretariat to be published electronically. Mexico hoped to translate them into the 20 most widely used indigenous languages. She suggested continuing meetings of expert groups through regional meetings. In that way, the Forum could compile best practices in a basic implementation handbook that would help guide its work.
PEDRO POSADA, Director for Indigenous Issues, Ministry of the Interior of Colombia, said his country was a “unitary republic” with three branches of power. The legislature’s actions were constantly overseen. All legislative acts and bills must be reviewed by the constitutional court to ensure that rulings were in line with the Constitution. Recognizing the principles of multiculturalism, he said democratic security was an issue of priority, which had come to the fore following a massacre of indigenous peoples belonging to one group. Colombia pledged to control and defend the rights of the Colombian people, as there were terrorists and drug traffickers on its territory. Colombian people had chosen a security policy put forward by the President to control the national territory, including the indigenous peoples, who were being attacked by those groups. Human rights progress had been made, but it was a challenge that needed to be tackled.
SAMUEL CARPINTERO, Latin America Caucus, said human rights violations against indigenous peoples included the non-application of free, prior and informed consent and the way the judiciary dealt with crimes against indigenous groups. Some States had resisted the adoption of human rights instruments, including Panama, which was reluctant to ratify ILO Convention No. 169. “We need a paradigm shift that respects human dignity”, he said. With that, he urged the Forum to support the freedom of expression of delegations attending the Forum, as one participant had been expelled. He also urged the Forum to constantly monitor indigenous peoples at risk of extinction in Colombia. In addition, it should urge States to demilitarize indigenous territories and implement the Declaration. Finally, he called on the Special Rapporteur of Freedom of Expression to monitor and document problems in Latin America.
ART MANUAL, North America Caucus, said the Declaration was the first decision to challenge the “colonial doctrines of discovery”. He was greatly concerned that the United States and Canada had voted against it and continued to oppose it. His peoples posed a great human rights challenge to those Governments. Article 42 stated that United Nations bodies must promote respect for the Declaration. As such, he recommended the Forum to apply all relevant provisions in its work; establish involvement with the Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights; apply the Declaration to the Forum’s mandates, themes and activities; and create a task team to promote and report on the application of the Declaration. Key areas to be addressed in the application of article 42 included self-determination and the principle of free, prior and informed consent.
MARCO ANTONIO CURRUCHICH, Commissioner of the Presidential Commission on the Fight against Racism and Discrimination of Guatemala, described national efforts to respect indigenous rights. The Presidential Commission, through the holding of local, regional and national consultations, was a follow-up mechanism for the Declaration. It involved a range of actors. In terms of economic and social development, there was a programme to monitor the implementation of labour rights in the fields of health, security and social assistance. Through the Guatemalan Housing Fund, the Government sought to provide for poor families. The programme included a subsidy provided by the State and a loan provided by a financial body.
Regarding access to health, he said changes had been made to address the health needs of indigenous peoples, including by fostering use of traditional medicine. The General Directorate for the health system must guarantee the population care without restrictions.
SHANE CHRISTENSEN, observer for the United States, said his country wanted to collaborate with the Forum on concrete proposals that would directly and sustainably help indigenous peoples everywhere. President Barack Obama had taken several steps. On Wednesday, he had confirmed Larry Echohawk, a member of the Pawnee Tribe, as Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs, whose work would be dedicated to empowering American Indian and Alaska Native communities. Yvette Roubideaux, a member of the Rosebud Sioux Tribe, had been confirmed as Director of the Indian Health Service, the main federal health-care advocate and provider for American Indians and Alaska natives. President Obama would also appoint a high-level adviser to serve as a liaison between Native Americans and the Government on issues such as sovereignty, health care and education. He had also provided for hundreds of millions of dollars for housing, education, economic development, health and public safety programmes related to the recently enacted Recovery Act. The Government had a special relationship with the country’s 562 federally recognized tribes that spoke many different languages, which President Obama had pledged to uphold.
KURIAKOSE BHARANIKULANGARA, observer for the Holy See, reiterated his support for the Declaration and for greater cooperation and understanding of the needs of indigenous peoples. He noted the recent historic meeting of Pope Benedict XVI in the Vatican with the National Chief of the Assembly of the First Nations and representatives of the First Nations of Canada. He expressed hope that fundamental human rights of indigenous people everywhere would be completely respected. The fundamental right to exist should be guaranteed for all people and communities. He expressed deep sadness over the growing number of murders of indigenous people, especially women and girls, as well as the inhumane conditions in which they lived, their forced labour and trafficking. The right to property ownership and respect for the identity and culture of indigenous people should be promoted. Plans of extractive industries and multinational corporations should not come at the expense of the rights of indigenous peoples to their lands, territories and resources. The Holy See had published a document titled “Towards a better distribution of land: the challenge of agrarian reform”, which addressed the expropriation of indigenous peoples’ land.
SAOUDATA WALET ABOUBACRINE, Nomad Touareg Caucus, said that, within the framework of the Declaration, it was necessary to pay due attention to regional human rights standards, particularly as they related to mechanisms and resources for indigenous people in the Sahel region and other areas of Africa. Although the Governments of Mali and the Niger had approved the Declaration, they were not implementing its provisions. The Niger Government had clearly expressed that it did not recognize the existence of people considered as indigenous and that it did not have a mandate to promote their rights. Some United Nations agencies, including the UNDP, were not implementing the Declaration or ILO Convention No. 169 in Africa. Those agencies, however, were supporting programmes for indigenous peoples’ rights in certain Asian States. Implementation should be universal in all countries. She recommended that United Nations agencies organize regional indigenous forums aimed at promoting and protecting the rights of indigenous people in Africa.
GUIDO CONEJEROS MELIMAN, Centro de Cultura Pueblo Naci ón Mapuche Pelonxaru, said the Mapuche and other indigenous peoples in Chile used herbs and plants for traditional medicines. The rights of indigenous people were endangered by new liberal State policies. Privatization projects negated the rights of indigenous peoples and were an attack on Mother Nature. More than 90 per cent of the Mapuche’s ancestral territories had been usurped, affecting 70 per cent of the Mapuche population. The Chilean Government was trying to institute constitutional reform based on recognition, but it only covered the cultural identity of indigenous peoples, not their human rights or right to land. The Chilean Government still aimed to give concessions to mining companies and extractive industries. In Chile, the UNDP had managed projects on behalf of indigenous people without ever consulting them beforehand. The United Nations had an obligation to fulfil the Declaration and ILO Convention No. 169. It was unacceptable that the Organization was violating its own rules.
DALEE SAMBO DOROUGH, Chairperson, Board of Trustees, Voluntary Fund for Indigenous Populations, said the Fund’s mandate was to assist representatives of indigenous peoples’ organizations and communities to participate in the Forum and the Expert Mechanism. At its twenty-second session in March, the Board of Trustees considered 686 applications for travel grants. Due to resources, it could recommend the allocation of only 76 travel grants for participation in the current session, and 36 for attendance in the Expert Mechanism -- amounting to a total of $412,000. That meant that the Fund had only been able to support 15 per cent of the total number of requests received.
However, she said, since its inception, the Fund had been a voice for indigenous peoples. It had supported more than 1,200 grantees, many of whom directly engaged in the preparation of the Declaration. Further, the Fund provided individuals with opportunities to raise concerns internationally, network with Governments and other indigenous groups, and dialogue with United Nations bodies. Such activities had led to an increase in indigenous leadership capacity, and, in some cases, to solutions through direct dialogue with Government delegations.
The Board stressed the importance of providing direct assistance to indigenous peoples, which would allow them to participate in the Forum’s sessions, she said. Indeed, adoption of the Declaration had marked the start of a new era in which indigenous peoples should be provided with increased means to make their voices heard. She thanked the numerous States that had contributed to the Fund and appealed to all Governments, organizations and private donors to consider participating, especially in light of the unfortunate trend towards an increasing number of applications and decreasing donations.
GENE HENRY, Indigenous Youth Caucus, said that indigenous peoples continued to become refugees due to colonization, death threats imposed by their Governments, and the search for employment, for which they suffered inhumane conditions. To counter forced displacement, he called on the Forum to urge countries which had not yet done so to endorse the Declaration and related conventions of the International Labour Organization (ILO), and to implement their relevant provisions. In particular, he called for the ratification of the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families.
He said that cultural genocide was stripping indigenous peoples of their heritage, and he called for the recognition of the right to learn cultural beliefs and customs, free from persecution. He also called on Governments to recognize the right to health and self-determination, and to stop militarization and other violations in indigenous areas. In addition, he urged the end of the sterilization of indigenous women. Saying that Mother Earth was being raped to feed consumerism, neo-slavery and servitude, he called on the Forum to recognize that the carbon market was a false solution to climate change and would only help perpetuate the “commodification” and destruction of the natural world. He called for more emphasis on the right of indigenous peoples to the Earth. Finally, he called on States, United Nations agencies and non-governmental organizations to support the full participation of indigenous youth in all decision-making processes affecting indigenous peoples.
CATHERINE DAVIS, Indigenous Peoples of the Pacific Caucus, observed that there remained only three Member States opposed to the Declaration. Among them were the United States and New Zealand, while Australia had recently made moves to endorse it. She then described the situation facing five groups of indigenous peoples in the Pacific -- the Maori, Hawaii, Tahiti, Alifuru and Papua, and Torres Straits -- and made several requests of the Permanent Forum on issues relating to those groups. In New Zealand, she said the Permanent Forum should invite the Government to implement a recommendation recently made by a local commission to give the Maori people three of the 23 seats on the Auckland “Super-City” Council (Auckland was home to the largest urban Maori population in the world). The New Zealand Government was currently ignoring that recommendation.
In Hawaii, she noted that the University of Hawaii had approved the teaching of Hawaiian language and culture, in line with the Declaration, and was providing $5 million in scholarships to poor native Hawaiians. She asked the Permanent Forum to call on all universities around the world to establish indigenous language and culture study centres, provide permanent teaching positions for indigenous peoples and free tuition for all indigenous people. On a separate subject, she noted that the Governor of Hawaii was attempting to appeal a Supreme Court decision to uphold native Hawaiian legal claims to trust lands controlled by the State, which she asked the Permanent Forum to study.
In French Polynesia, she asked for a visit by the Special Rapporteur, because Polynesian law had been declared inferior to French law. The Permanent Forum should provide funding for a seminar to educate indigenous peoples on their rights. In Alifuru and Papua, she asked the Forum to support a call by the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention and Amnesty International for the immediate release of prisoners who had been detained for performing dances to show the “national aspirations of our cultural heritage”.
She also asked the Forum to acknowledge the commitment of the New Zealand Government to review its stance on the Declaration, and to remind that Government that the document contained minimum standards of indigenous rights protections and was compatible with the historical Treaty of Waitangi. The Forum should also undertake an international consultative process with indigenous peoples to consider ways to engage effectively with them. The Human Rights Council should undertake a study to explain how the principle of self-determination in article 3 could be implemented in accordance with the principle of national sovereignty contained in article 46. The Forum should engage with the UNDP, which should also contribute to that discussion.
LEGBORSI SARO PYAGBARA, African Caucus, recognized the achievement behind the Declaration’s adoption. Indeed, it was a landmark in the evolution of human dignity. Drawing attention to the African Charter on Human Rights, he said the African Commission had adopted a report, which noted, among other important issues, that indigenous women in Africa were being discriminated against. They had the right to protect their human rights and dignity. It was important that the Forum and the Human Rights Council cooperate with the African Commission to follow up on the Declaration’s implementation. Positive developments included Burundi’s recognition of indigenous peoples in its Constitution. Progress also had been made on indigenous languages in Morocco and Cameroon, among other nations. He recommended that United Nations agencies organize training programmes for human rights commissions. There should also be training for parliamentarians on indigenous peoples in Africa. He also called on the Forum and the Council to send a Special Rapporteur to the Niger, the Niger Delta and the Congo to report on the human rights situations in those areas.
ANA MANUELA OCHOA, Organizaci ón Nacional Ind ígena de Colombia, said her peoples’ rights had not been restored by Colombia. No consultations had been held before military bases had been set up on their territories. Some 70,000 indigenous peoples had been displaced. About 75 per cent of children were suffering from malnutrition. Forced displacement and murder statistics surpassed those of last year. Such realities had forced the constitutional court to declare that indigenous peoples ran the risk of extinction, and safeguards must be put in place for them. In Colombia, more than 130 indigenous women had been killed, and there were repeated cases of sexual abuse. She urged Colombia to investigate the grave human rights situation, report to the Forum on that investigation and draw up a policy on free, prior and informed consent.
GHISLAIN PICARD, Chief, Assembly of First Nations of Quebec and Labrador, described the situation of aboriginal peoples living in Canada, saying that 500 years of colonialism had seen a variety of tactics used to extinguish the indigenous peoples of that region. Tens of millions of dollars had been taken away from economic development programmes for indigenous peoples in the areas of housing, education and health. The economic stimulus package was providing an opportunity to establish standards to raise indigenous communities out of poverty, but the Government of Canada had chosen to carry out initiatives that provided a small percentage of the needed basic infrastructure. The Canadian Government had not assumed its fiduciary obligations in numerous matters, including its fiduciary responsibility to protect the lands and rights of indigenous peoples. The justice system continued to display a lack of concern for the more than 500 aboriginal women who disappeared or were murdered.
He transmitted requests from the Assembly of First Nations to the Permanent Forum to urge appropriate United Nations bodies to study the effects of long-term chronic under-funding of First Nations in Canada. The Assembly had also asked for a visit by the Special Rapporteur to Quebec, to examine the living conditions of indigenous peoples and the relationship between the First Nations leadership and the Governments of Quebec and Canada. United Nations bodies were asked to network with First Nations in Canada and non-governmental organizations to develop strategies to educate the Canadian public and all Governments on the Declaration.
CARLOS MAMANI CONDORI, Forum member from Bolivia, said that, although indigenous people had gained rights and achieved real progress, it was a matter of concern that in Peru their rights were being gravely violated. The Peruvian Government was preventing indigenous people in the Peruvian Amazon to defend themselves against the actions of oil companies and extractive industries. The Government had created a series of legal loopholes to allow multinational corporations to obtain free, prior and informed consent without adhering to the provisions of ILO Convention No. 169, which had led to the establishment of mining operations in indigenous peoples’ territories, which poisoned those people. How could one understand a situation in which Peru’s leadership had recognized adoption of the Declaration, but, at the same time, had failed to comply with the ILO Convention? It was clearly established that the Peruvian Government was not complying with the Convention, even though it had a legal ombudsman.
TONYA GONNELLA FRICHNER, Forum member from the United States, said indigenous people had been excluded from the human rights agenda for decades. Nothing had changed for indigenous peoples, as indicated in speech after speech during the Forum’s session. Indigenous people were still fighting for their human rights.
BARTOLOME CLAVERO SALVADOR, Forum member from Spain, said Peru’s Government had failed to comply with ILO Convention No. 169, as well as the consultation mechanisms. It has also dismantled the series of already-established consultations. He asked the Peruvian Government to inform the Forum about when it would respond to the ILO’s Committee of Experts. He was dismayed that Peru’s representative had not referred in his statement to the grave situation that had begun on 10 May in Peru when the Government had militarized the Peruvian Amazon and suspended the personal freedoms of indigenous people living there. The Government had done that without consulting the indigenous communities. The dialogue mechanism was not operational, nor was there any follow-up to the agreement reached on Wednesday. When was the state of emergency going to be lifted, and when would personal freedom for indigenous people in the Amazon be restored?
HASSAN ID BALKASSM, Forum member from Morocco, said most speeches noted that no visible progress had been made in the past year, despite efforts to implement the Declaration and Forum recommendations. France’s representative had indicated that the French Constitution recognized the rights of populations that lived in overseas areas belonging to France and that individual rights were above all rights. Indigenous people, however, had a system of collective ownership, in which an individual had rights within a group. In not recognizing collective rights, the Government of France was denying indigenous individuals the right to ownership. Bearing that in mind, how did the Constitution of France comply with the rights of indigenous peoples?
He also noted that the Republic of Congo’s representative had discussed great efforts on a draft law concerning indigenous peoples. Had that Government consulted any indigenous peoples’ representatives on adoption of that legislation? Had it submitted the final draft text of that legislation to indigenous communities?
Concerning the Bolivian Government’s slogan of “Partnership for Justice”, he asked how that was being carried out in terms of resource allocation.
Right of Reply
The representative of Chile, speaking in exercise of the right of reply, rejected the accusation of “genocide” towards indigenous peoples. Chile, under no pretext, supported acts that violated human rights for any citizen. As a country that had seen past violation of human rights and the rule of law, it was vital to uphold principles in the main treaties and instruments to which it was party. As he had said previously, all acts of violence would be investigated by the courts, and the Government would ensure the proper administration of justice. The social covenant recognized the Government’s commitment to implement public policies vis-à-vis indigenous peoples. In that context, the Government was implementing a system of consultations tailored to international standards. Moreover, Chile was in the final stages of enhancing its code of conduct, bringing it in line with ILO Convention No. 169, for which it had to consult with indigenous communities.
Taking the floor next, JOSE CARLOS MORALES ( Costa Rica) of the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, said issues related to land, territory and resources were among the crucial topics to be before the Expert Mechanism at its next session. It was recommended that, by 15 July, his Office receive a written text setting forth the various situations of indigenous peoples.
The Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous peoples, JAMES ANAYA, responding to a query from yesterday, said that any group, regardless of its relationship with a victim of an alleged violation, could submit information to him. As he had explained, he had created a brochure on how to do that, and he encouraged indigenous groups to use the communications procedure attached to his mandate. That could lead to a communication by him to a Government, or perhaps an information exchange, that would resolve or address a situation. As to how to find his reports, he said “that’s something I’m working on”, and he asked for flexibility with that. They would be available on his website, which was attached to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.
He said statements of support for the Declaration, such as Australia’s, inspired hope, especially when accompanied by concrete initiatives. However, one could not help but feel sad when hearing about the extinction of human beings. Along with that frustration, indigenous peoples faced numerous impediments, keeping them from accomplishing their goals. Understandably, they felt a sense of anger that was rooted in years -– even centuries -– of oppression. That would continue until real progress was made.
Recalling a comment made to him by a Forum participant that “the wind is behind our backs”, he said that statement captured the overall sentiment that animated the Forum’s work. While indigenous peoples still faced many difficult challenges and had anger to overcome, the wind was behind them in their efforts.
Arctic Region
Launching the Forum’s discussion on the Arctic Region, PATRICIA COCHRAN, President of the Inuit Circumpolar Council, said that what happened in the Arctic affected the rest of the world. Indigenous peoples often lived in marginalized areas around the globe and were more affected than most by rising sea levels. “Arctic peoples have experiences to share with all indigenous peoples”, she said.
A focus on the Arctic was necessary because industry, shipping countries, tourism operators and Western academics, among others, were eyeing its seas and other natural resources, she continued. The Arctic was unique in that it had witnessed the environmental effects of various technologies. Heavy metals, mercury and others were in the air, water and food chain. The ozone above the North Pole was thinning due to activities elsewhere. Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPS), such as DDT (dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) and toxaphene, were being transported to the Arctic and becoming trapped in the cold. As a result, indigenous women found themselves with a high concentration of such chemicals in their breast milk -- several times above those found in women in New York City, for example. Inuit had the highest lung cancer rates in the world, and life expectancy was much lower than in other populations.
In addition, she said States were causing problems: the European Union import ban on seal skin products impacted the Inuit, who survived on those exports. Canada supported Inuit on that matter, but refused to endorse the Declaration. She hoped that Canada and the Russian Federation would soon reverse that position. Having Arctic States on the outside of those efforts was not conducive to building a constructive relationship. Climate change had caused Alaskan and Canadian villages to tumble into the sea. It was thinning the routes of hunters, while “black carbon” fell on the snow and ice. What Inuit saw as devastating, industry saw as opportunity -– quicker shipping routes.
Despite that, she reminded the Forum that Inuit were a pragmatic people. They had not thrown up their hands and walked away. Last year, they had convened at a leaders’ summit in response being left out of the Arctic sovereignty debate. Last month, they had adopted a text that asserted their rights under international law. Last month, they had invited people from around the world to attend the Indigenous Peoples Global Summit on Climate Change.
“We look forward to being resilient and to adapt”, she said. Her people would work with States to achieve an international agreement on black carbon and on mercury, and she called for the Forum’s support in those efforts. They would work with industries to ensure they sought the prior consent of indigenous people prior to undertaking activities that affected them, and reach out to former colonizers. “We are optimistic and we will overcome”, she concluded.
MATTIAS AHREN, President of the Saami Council, said the most imminent threat to Saami culture and way of life was climate change brought about by the increased industrial activities. It was sometimes impossible to adapt to those changes. Without reindeer herding, hunting and fishing grounds, the Saami culture and the Saami as a distinct people would die out. It was of great concern that climate change and retreating sea ice were creating a different Arctic, as vast areas, previously inaccessible, were now opening up possibilities for shipping and further exploitation of natural resources. The High North had been relatively undeveloped for energy production. But climate change had altered that. The drive for such resources had resulted in a “race to the Arctic” among northern States and international corporations, who laid claim to the oil, gas and minerals in territories that constituted the traditional land of indigenous people.
He said that developments in international law, recently affirmed by the Declaration, implied that States were obligated to reach agreements with the indigenous people on whose territory they laid claim. “We will no longer accept, nor will international law, that while the wealth of these activities flows south, we are left with the environmental, social and cultural impacts of the exploration, construction and shipping activities. We will no longer accept outsiders coming to the Arctic, taking out the resources and degrading our land, without even having the common courtesy to ask”, he said. “We have to enter a new phase where Governments and multinational corporations stop doing the wrong things, and start doing the right.”
But the efforts to mitigate climate change caused almost as great a problem to the Saami people as climate change itself, he said. The exploding interest in renewable resources, such as windmills and hydroelectric dams, intensified pressure on Saami lands like never before. The Saami had contributed little to climate change, but they were already suffering disproportionately from its effect. In terms of adaptation to climate change, traditional knowledge was the best. He stressed the importance of traditional knowledge in reindeer-herding communities, which had been developed over centuries of close observation of reindeer and nature. Knowledge grew roots where it was developed and used. Indigenous people must have the right to develop their own adaptation strategies, and that went hand in hand with the right to develop their own knowledge and research institutions. Use of traditional knowledge must occur alongside scientific knowledge of governance, public plans and industrial projects.
The Artic Council was often referred to as a good model for international cooperation, and, while its role was strengthened internationally, its workload was increasing and the capacity of indigenous peoples to participate was at a standstill, he said. To maintain the Council as a model for joint decision-making between States and indigenous peoples, States had to provide the indigenous organ with considerably more resources. States and extractive industries, such as oil, gas and mining, in the Arctic region must respect that those resources were situated on, and/or could only be accessed from, indigenous peoples’ territories. That implied that not only States, but indigenous people too, had claims to those resources. That called for agreements between the State or industry and indigenous peoples before any resources were tapped. “Indigenous people could not be sacrificed on the altar of climate change.” Renewable industrial activities aimed at combating climate change must respect indigenous peoples’ rights. Indigenous communities must be able to adapt to climate change. To do that, further encroachment of their territories must cease and their traditional knowledge must be respected. They must also be able to participate in the decision-making of the Arctic Council in reality, and not just in theory.
LOUIS TAPARDJUK, Minister of Culture, Language, Elders and Youth, Minister of Education, Minister of Languages and Minister of Aboriginal Affairs, Nunavut, Canada, said negotiations between Inuit and the Government had culminated in the signing of one of the most comprehensive land claim agreements entered into by an indigenous people in Canada. Inuit was the first and preferred language spoken by a majority of Nunavummiut, and for many, the only language they knew. It was inspiring to know that Kalaallisut, a Greenlandic variety of the Inuit language, was bound to become the official language of Greenland exactly one month from today.
He said that, while experts believed the Inuit language would likely survive the next century, data showed disturbing trends, with its use as a home language in rapid decline and its quality eroding. In Nunavut and other parts of the country, the language was endangered, as a result of past assimilation policies, attitudes towards the culture as inferior and dominance of English. While federal resources earmarked for maintaining French and English-speaking minority communities were touted as “indispensable”, there was a persistent lack of resources dedicated to ensuring that Inuit speakers enjoyed equal education and other services.
“This concern is not to be taken lightly”, he said. Inuit culture and language deserved respect. Among his policy recommendations, he said acknowledgement of the eroding Inuit culture must drive cooperation among Inuit, international and national bodies to prevent the loss of culture and language. States with Inuit populations must allocate resources to achieve equality between Inuit speakers and those using national languages. They should also help raise the national prestige and promote public acceptance of the language by figuring it into nation-building strategies for the Arctic. Finally, the Forum should encourage greater interregional, international and intergovernmental cooperation to strengthen the use of Inuit across the Arctic.
INNUUTEQ HOLM OLSEN, Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs, Home Rule Government of Greenland, and Chairman of the Artic Council, speaking on behalf of Denmark, Greenland and the Faroe Islands, said the Artic Council was a unique international forum comprised of States and indigenous peoples’ organizations. It worked on a consensus basis to advance sustainable development and livelihood of the peoples of the Arctic, as well as to preserve the environment and biodiversity. The rights of the people of the Arctic would be a priority during his chairmanship. Commercial developments in the Artic, as well as the rapid changes that were being felt, must be addressed in a holistic way. That included issues of environmental protection, human health, the sustainable use of resources, as well as serving society’s needs in terms of environmental, social, economic and cultural development. The effects in the Artic were felt more than anywhere else because the ice there was melting at an unprecedented rate. That had global consequences.
He said that an Arctic Council project addressing snow, water, ice and permafrost in the Artic would be finalized in 2011. The Council would present a preliminary report on the Greenland ice sheet to the Climate Change Conference in December in Copenhagen. As part of the International Polar Year, there had been increased scientific research on Arctic issues. That work must not be shelved. He would work to secure the legacy of the Year to further strengthen data collection and scientific cooperation, and to enable scientists, policymakers and indigenous peoples to continue to work together to address and understand issues important to them. The human dimension, including safeguarding the inherent cultural, economic and political rights of Arctic peoples and nations, must remain at the forefront of the Council’s work. The state of human health, in particular, must be addressed. Life expectancy of Arctic people in many places was well below national averages, owing to changes in lifestyle, which had resulted in increasing incidences of obesity, diabetes and cancer. There was also a high suicide rate among Arctic youth.
As maritime traffic, especially of cruise ships, increased in the Arctic, there was a corresponding need to respond to emergencies and disasters, he said. The Council would continue to support operational cooperation between the Arctic States on preparedness and prevention. It would work within existing frameworks and with other countries in the International Maritime Organization (IMO) to make regulations for shipping in the Arctic mandatory. Such regulations would address issues like ship safety, requirements for ship construction, equipment and training, and pollution prevention. In 2010, during the International Year of Biodiversity, Greenland would produce an Arctic highlight report.
As climate change affected biodiversity, it was important to secure long-term monitoring, which would provide valuable information on status and trends, he said. While welcoming involvement from other countries and international bodies, he stressed that those who wanted to engage the Council more closely would have to respect the Arctic peoples’ roots and help them promote sustainable development, rather than create obstacles to their cultural and economic survival, such as the recent ban on seal product imports into the European Union.
Statements
GENNADI D. OLEYNIK, Chairman of the Committee of the Council of Federation for Northern Affairs and Indigenous Peoples, Russian Federation, said that ensuring indigenous peoples’ legal and political situation was a national priority. Last year, the Government approved a policy for the Arctic for “2020 and beyond”, which included initiatives to improve the quality of life for indigenous peoples and preserve their language. The Russian Federation welcomed international cooperation through the Arctic Council. Aside from the eight participating Arctic countries, other organizations participated, marking a unique partnership between Government and indigenous peoples. There was no need for new Arctic treaties. Moreover, marine treaties should be carried out in line with the Law of the Sea.
He said that, at the Arctic Council’s last session in April, his Government had proposed that work start on the drafting of pan-Arctic electronic encyclopaedia, which would set aside a prominent place for indigenous peoples. The Government had improved its concept of sustainable development for indigenous peoples in Siberia, the north-east and other areas, for the period up to 2020. It was necessary to enshrine in law indigenous peoples rights vis-à-vis mining operations, and address compensation for damage caused to their habitat, which resulted in the loss of traditional economic activities.
Regarding the Declaration, he said the General Assembly considered it a gold standard to be followed in the spirit of partnership. It also recognized that indigenous peoples’ situation varied from region to region and historical backgrounds
- - -
Special Rapporteur says optimism for indigenous peoples’ better future animated by positive developments, but tempered by reality of ongoing struggles
Source: United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC)
Date: 20 May 2009
Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues
Eighth Session
5th Meeting (PM)
He Calls on Member States to Supply Information on Human Rights Violations Of Indigenous Persons, Endorse Declaration, Commit Aid for Governmental Reforms
As the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues continued its eighth annual session this afternoon, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous peoples, James Anaya, shed light on his recent efforts to redress their grievances over the deeply-rooted disregard for their values and land rights by Governments and corporations.
"This has been a year of continual challenges in my work, with my optimism for a better future for indigenous people animated by positive developments in many places, yet tempered by the reality of ongoing struggles and violations of indigenous peoples across the globe," Mr. Anaya said.
In the past year, he had received information about a wide range of alleged human rights violations against indigenous people -- from cases involving infringements of their right to free, prior and informed consent of the use of their land and its natural resources to violence or threats against their communities. He had visited Brazil, Nepal, Botswana and Chile to investigate the general human rights situation of indigenous peoples, and planned to do the same in the coming months in Colombia.
Mr. Anaya said he had counselled Ecuador's Constituent Assembly and Chilean officials on how to incorporate indigenous peoples' concerns into their respective Constitutions. He was also helping Suriname's Government draft a law on indigenous land and resources, as part of its implementation of the Inter-American Court of Human Right's judgement in the case of Saramaka versus Suriname -- an issue that provoked ire in a representative of the Organization of Indigenous People of Suriname, who claimed the land rights of his country's indigenous population were not being respected.
While those were positives steps, the challenges to build good practices to advance the indigenous rights agenda were great, he said. He called on Member States to respond to his requests for information on human rights violations, as well as to officially endorse the Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, as Australia's Government had done last month. He also implored them to make the requisite financial commitment to reform legal, administrative and programming frameworks to better address indigenous peoples' concerns and needs.
In a similar vein, Les Malezer, Rapporteur of the expert group meeting on article 42 of the Declaration, which had met in January, stressed the importance of the Declaration as an instrument to motivate States to comply with human rights standards. States should begin a national dialogue with indigenous peoples on human rights, using the Declaration as a guide, while national human rights institutions and indigenous peoples' institutions must be encouraged to fully respect and implement it.
Carlos Morales, Vice Chairperson of the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, a subsidiary body created by the Human Rights Council last year to provide it with special themes on indigenous peoples' rights, said the Expert Mechanism was preparing a study on lessons learned and challenges faced in implementing indigenous rights to education. In August, it would look at lessons learned in implementing the Declaration, as well as questions of adjudication, restitution and compensation for indigenous peoples.
Also speaking today were State members represented by observers from Mexico, Brazil, Venezuela, Spain, Finland, Greece, Norway, Denmark and Ecuador.
Forum members from Morocco, United States, Bolivia, Iran, Uganda and Spain also spoke.
Representatives of the following caucuses, umbrella organizations and indigenous groups also delivered statements: Global Women's Caucus; International Organization of Indigenous Resource Development; Central American Caucus; Federacion de Comunidades Indigenas Guaranies del Guarani; Asian Indigenous Women's Network; Parlamento Indigena de America; Latin American and Caribbean Demographic Centre; Pueblo Chiquitano, CIDOB; Latin America Women's Caucus; Asia Indigenous Peoples Caucus; Coordination of Indigenous Organizations of the Cuenca Amazonia (COICA); and Asia Pacific Indigenous Youth Network.
A statement was also made by the Chief Technical Adviser of the Project to Promote ILO Policy on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples of the International Labour Organization.
The Forum will reconvene at 10 a.m. on Thursday, 21 May. to continue its session.
Background
The Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues met today to continue its eighth annual session, in which representatives of indigenous groups were expected to discuss ways to further implement the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and to examine the relationship between indigenous peoples and industrial corporations, climate change, the Arctic region, and land tenure. (For additional information on the current session, see Press Release HR/4979.)
Statements
Continuing general debate on item 3(c), EVA AGUIRRE, Global Women's Caucus, recommended that the Forum request United Nations bodies and States to disseminate the programme of the Second International Decade, and urge them, in cooperation with the Commission on the Status of Women, to address health, education, indigenous women's knowledge systems, migration, climate change, armed conflict and water issues. She strongly urged that it recommend to the Economic and Social Council coordination of a United Nations experts meeting on indigenous and traditional knowledge. Finally, she recommended that it develop cultural policies to ensure that indigenous women had equal access to education at all levels.
WILTON LITTLECHILD, International Organization of Indigenous Resource Development, recommended that the Forum urge all States parties to the Convention on the Rights of the Child to apply general comment no. 11 (2009) in implementing their obligations, and adopt the proposed resolution referenced in the Global Caucus statement on the rights of the indigenous child to health and education. Finally, he asked that the important report on "Indigenous Peoples and Boarding Schools" (document E/C.19/2009/CRP.1) be considered as an official Forum report.
MARIANA FRANCISCO, Central American Caucus, said that, based on United Nations General Assembly resolution 217A (III), account should be taken of indigenous people in El Salvador. Attention should be placed on human rights violations against displaced persons, resulting from neo-liberal policies, particularly of multinational corporations. The United Nations should monitor displaced persons not yet relocated, due to unsuitable conditions. Lands and sacred sites must also be respected. With that, she called on the United Nations to verify crime among displaced and non-displaced youth, investigate cases of "femicide" and urge that justice be brought to the perpetrators.
GABRIELA GARDUZA ESTRADA, observer for Mexico, reaffirmed her Government's commitment to the full implementation of the Second Decade of the World's Indigenous People, which aimed to boost international cooperation to solve problems facing indigenous peoples. In Mexico, attention to indigenous peoples was carried out through various departments. In that context, she underscored the work of the Secretariat of Public Education, notably in the area of bilingual education, and the Health Secretariat, which provided services with a "cultural reference point" and practiced traditional medicine. The National Institute for Women focused on indigenous women, and other action to combat poverty was under way. She also cited the work of the National Commission for the Development of Indigenous Peoples and the National Commission on Human Rights, particularly its programme to protect indigenous peoples' rights. Those and other departments had cooperated within the framework of the United Nations system, especially with the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), in the context of the Second Decade.
HIPOLITO ACEVI, Federacion de Comunidades Indigenas Guaranies del Guarani, Paraguay, expressed concern over the lack of mechanisms to engage the active participation of indigenous peoples in designing and implementing programmes and strategies to combat climate change. The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and donor countries must intervene to guarantee indigenous peoples a seat at the table. The Forum should recommend in countries where there were pilot projects that indigenous groups be involved in decision-making. There was still no recognition of the land tenure rights of indigenous communities in Paraguay. The Forum should tell the Paraguayan Government that it was obliged to comply with the decisions of the Inter-American Court.
The Forum then turned to its agenda item on human rights, including implementation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
Introduction of Report
LES MALEZER, Rapporteur of theexpert group meeting on article 42 of the Declaration, introduced the expert group's report on the article's implementation (document E/C.19/2009/2). During the meeting, which had been held from 14 to 16 January, the Forum Chairperson had pointed out that the Declaration's adoption marked a major victory for the world's indigenous people and an extraordinary achievement in international standard-setting. It also presented a key opportunity to motivate States to comply with human rights standards. Article 42 signalled a new mandate for the Forum, establishing that the United Nations and Member States should promote respect for and full application of the Declaration and its follow-up.
He said that the meeting had recommended that the Forum adopt a text, which would have the Forum decide to invite participants, including representatives of States, indigenous peoples and United Nations agencies, to submit reports on the issue; appoint a task team comprising eight members to examine reports and communicate with the submitting parties as appropriate; and encourage States to support that procedure and use it as an opportunity to provide the Forum with substantive information on implementation of the Declaration and reliably assessing its effectiveness at the national and local levels.
Further by the text, the Forum, would decide to encourage national human rights institutions and indigenous peoples' institutions to promote respect for, and full implementation of, the Declaration and encourage States to incorporate adequate information on implementing it in the "core report" to human rights treaty bodies. It would also decide to recommend that States create, as soon as possible, a national dialogue with indigenous peoples on human rights based on the Declaration.
The meeting had also recommended that the Forum adopt a text which would, among other things, request that the Secretary-General provide an adequate budget to meet the requirements of article 42, as it applied to the Forum, its secretariat and any relevant action, and that United Nations agencies should, as a matter of priority, directly integrate relevant provisions of the Declaration into their policies, programmes and strategies.
CARSTEN SMITH, Forum member from Norway, presented the general comment of the expert group meeting on the implementation of the Declaration's article 42, noting that the Forum had been assigned a new function and extended mandate with the Declaration's adoption. The Declaration's purpose was to provide the legal basis of all the Forum's activities in the area of indigenous issues.
"All acts against the rights of indigenous peoples are taking place in the jurisdiction of States," he said. The Declaration's implementation was a two-stage process. First, it should be implemented in national legislations, and in that respect, there was a huge implementation gap -- more like a "wide open implementation canyon". Obligations would not be fulfilled until indigenous peoples experienced the results on the ground. It was up to the Forum to close that gap. Article 42 required that the Forum clarify the content and range of its responsibility, and the general comment might serve that purpose.
In addition, the Declaration was a legal document and, thus, open to various interpretations, he said. Calling the text "realistic" and "positive", he said the Declaration was not a treaty, and accordingly, it was not binding. Article 42 only gave duties to the Forum with regard to its new function -- no new authority to accomplish what was required. He closed by saying that the Forum should apply the Declaration as the "superior norm" for all its work.
In the ensuing debate, HASSAN ID BALKASSM, Forum member from Morocco, recalled that international policy had been "absorbative" in that it had refused to speak of indigenous peoples' rights, identity or culture. That policy reached its peak after the adoption of ILO Convention No. 107. Indeed, the 1989 ILO Conference had been a turning point for such policies. Adoption of the Declaration was a victory against the "absorbative" policy that urged State domination over indigenous peoples. Nothing obliged countries to implement the Declaration, but it was extremely important to view it as binding, as it was the only text drafted in decade-long negotiations between Governments and indigenous peoples.
TONYA GONNELLA FRICHNER, Forum member from the United States, asked to hear from the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous peoples and other speakers on the formation of the Task Team in regard to article 42.
CARLOS MAMANI CONDORI, Forum member from Bolivia, said that prior to the Declaration, indigenous peoples' rights were not recognized internationally or by the State. The Declaration pointed to the concept of a "plurinational" State -- one that was being discussed in world forums, such as that held in Brazil. Such discussions would lead to a new relationship among indigenous peoples, States and other cultural groups. The Declaration should be seen as the supreme norm for the Forum, and beyond that, for all indigenous peoples. Implementation should be reflected in national constitutions.
The Forum then turned to a dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous people and other special rapporteurs.
Statement by the Special Rapporteur
JAMES ANAYA, Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous peoples, said "this has been a year of continual challenges in my work, with my optimism for a better future for indigenous people animated by positive developments in many places, yet tempered by the reality of ongoing struggles and violations of indigenous peoples across the globe". He had participated in a seminar in Madrid in February with members of the Expert Mechanism of the Human Rights Council, four Forum members and other experts to explore ways to coordinate and streamline their work.
In his first report to the Human Rights Council in September 2008, he said he had emphasized that the Declaration represented the global common understanding about the minimum content of indigenous peoples' rights. The Declaration built on a well-established body of international human rights law. It provided a normative framework for all United Nations institutions and agencies on indigenous issues. The Council, in its resolution re-authorizing the Special Rapporteur's mandate, directed the Special Rapporteur to promote the Declaration.
Mr. Anaya said that, since becoming Special Rapporteur more than a year ago, he had worked to monitor human rights conditions of indigenous people worldwide and promote steps to improve those conditions. He had attempted to incorporate a gender perspective and be attentive to the particular vulnerabilities of indigenous children, develop work methods oriented towards constructive dialogue with Governments, indigenous peoples, non-governmental organizations, relevant United Nations agencies and other actors. In his work to promote good practices, he was endeavouring to advance domestic legal, administrative and programmatic reforms to implement standards of the Declaration and other relevant international instruments. "Reform of this kind is no small task, as it is necessarily full of all kinds of complexities and requires a strong commitment, both financial and political, on the part of Governments," he said.
At the request of indigenous organizations and the President of the Constituent Assembly of Ecuador, he said he had provided an analysis of certain indigenous issues arising in the context of Ecuador's constitutional revision process. He had also developed a report outlining international standards that were relevant to consultations with indigenous peoples in connection with constitutional reforms in Chile. The Government of Suriname had asked him to help draft a law on indigenous land and resources, as part of its implementation of the Inter-American Court of Human Right's judgement in the case of Saramaka versus Suriname. He continued to monitor progress and challenges in those countries.
Commitment to advance the rights of indigenous peoples in accordance with the Declaration was important for building good practices at the national level, he said. Recently, Australia had officially endorsed the Declaration. That set an important example for the three other States that had not voted in favour of the Declaration when it was adopted by the General Assembly. "I am encouraging those other States to take the same action and proclaim unambiguously their support for the Declaration, and I am optimistic that they eventually will," he said.
Concerning his role of conducting and participating in thematic studies on issues of interest to indigenous peoples, he said his role would be complementary and supportive of the Expert Mechanism's efforts. He had provided information for the Mechanism's current study of the right of indigenous peoples to education. He was collaborating with non-governmental organizations and indigenous experts on a seminar on a dispute-resolution mechanism regarding extractive industries operating or seeking to operate within indigenous territories. He was also involved in a multifaceted study on legal pluralism and indigenous customary law.
As for his role in investigating and reporting on the general human rights situation of indigenous peoples in selected countries, he noted his visits in the past year to Brazil, Nepal and Botswana. He had also conducted a follow-up visit to Chile to evaluate progress in implementing the recommendations in the report of his predecessor, Rodolfo Stavenhagen. He also planned a follow-up visit in the next few months to Colombia, on which Mr. Stavenhagen had also reported. He would be submitting initial and follow-up reports on each of those countries in his annual update to the Council in September.
In terms of his responses to situations of alleged human rights violations, he said his ability to do that relied on the extent of the information given to him by indigenous peoples and their organizations, non-governmental organizations and other sources. While there were no formal requirements for submitting information, it was crucial that it be accurate, complete and up to date. He encouraged indigenous representatives to send him information about the concerns of their respective communities. In the past year, he had received information about alleged human rights violations in countries worldwide. In response, he had sent numerous communications to Governments about those situations.
He explained that those cases involved infringements of the right to free, prior and informed consent, especially in relation to natural resource extraction and displacement or removal of indigenous communities; denial of the rights of indigenous peoples to lands and resources; indigenous peoples in voluntary isolation; incidents of threats or violence against indigenous peoples and individuals; and concerns about constitutional or legislative reforms affecting indigenous peoples, among other situations. It was impossible to respond to all of those cases, given the limited resources. But he did his best to act on detailed and credible information that presented a serious situation -- within his mandate -- and for which intervention had a reasonable chance of having a positive impact, either by drawing attention to the situation or by prompting Government authorities or other actors to take corrective action.
Alternatively, action could be taken when the situation was representative of, or connected to, a broader pattern of human rights violations against indigenous peoples, he added. The first step was usually to forward such information to the Government concerned and request a response. In some cases, he had issued public statements calling attention to, or expressing concern over, alleged human rights violations. He might also issue observations with analyses and recommendations that could be useful to the Governments and indigenous peoples concerned to address the situations. "I am committed to working to ensure that indigenous peoples' voices are effectively heard, and to facilitate constructive dialogue among all concerned," he said.
CARLOS MORALES, Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, providing background, said that by Human Rights Council resolution 6/36 (2007), the Council established a subsidiary body of experts to provide it with special themes on indigenous peoples' rights. The Mechanism could also submit proposals to the Council for approval. It had held its first session in October 2008, marking a new stage in the promotion of indigenous rights worldwide. Discussions, which had included the participation of indigenous representatives, had focused on two themes: submitting recommendations to the preparatory meeting for the 2008 Durban Review Conference, held in Geneva, and preparing a study on lessons learned and challenges faced in implementing indigenous rights to education. That study, to be completed in 2009, would be submitted to the Mechanism's second session and, later, to the Human Rights Council.
He also described a seminar in Geneva in which representatives of indigenous organizations, States and United Nations bodies had discussed working methods and future themes. Among the key issues covered were self-determination treaties, land and resources, and a proposal to broaden the mandate of the voluntary fund. The General Assembly had approved broadening the fund to facilitate indigenous peoples' participation in the Mechanism's sessions. He urged greater support for that fund. He noted that the Mechanism's Chairperson had presented a report (document A/HRC/10/56) to the Council on 17 March. While that report had yet to be approved, States' comments had thus far been positive.
The Mechanism's second session, to be held from 10 to 14 August, would focus on the Declaration. A provisional agenda had been submitted, which included a study of lessons learned in the implementation of the Declaration in the area of education. Other issues to be covered were questions of adjudication, restitution and compensation for indigenous peoples.
In the ensuing dialogue, PAIMANACH HASTEH, Forum member from Iran, asked Special Rapporteur Anaya about the main challenges in his work, emanating from States, the United Nations or indigenous communities. Also, what type of collaboration did he receive from other special rapporteurs, as often, issues were shared, especially concerning migrant rights, violence against women, and the right to food, among others?
Responding, Mr. ANAYA spoke of needing more State cooperation in terms of setting dates for country missions and in responding to his requests for information on human rights violations. As for coordination with other "mandate holders", it was not uncommon for him to issue joint communications to Governments. He tried to always have a reason to be involved in a joint communication. The human rights of indigenous individuals were protected by all existing standards, and all "mandate holders" should have them in mind. He had not taken part in joint country visits, but that could be a creative way to mainstream human rights issues throughout the system.
ELEANOR BANG-OA, Asian Indigenous Women's Network, said indigenous women in her region suffered disproportionately from various phenomena. Violence against women continued, intolerance prevailed and gender discrimination prevented indigenous women from fulfilling their potential. The situation was further complicated by women's complacency, which resulted from a lack of opportunities. She recommended continuing support to women's organizations to monitor the implementation of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, at the national level; strengthening efforts to inform indigenous women of their human rights, and mobilizing resources to help them take part in various mechanisms.
LINO VILLCA, Parlamento Indigena de America, said that Bolivian indigenous peoples' rights had been constantly violated. "We are owners of our own land yet walk around as if we are foreigners," he asserted. His organization endorsed the letter received on the use of the cocoa leaf, a traditional practice. Chewing of the cocoa leaf had been banned, and he asked that the leaf be removed from the list of banned substances. Second, he denounced a "major genocide" undertaken by groups in power in which 20 individuals had been killed in September. Also, there had been attempts to "Balkanize" his country and undermine President Evo Morales.
MARCIO AUGUSTO FREITAS DE MEIRA, President of the Brazilian Foundation for Indigenous Issues, said that in August 2008, Mr. Anaya had visited Brazil to assess national policies concerning indigenous peoples. The speaker looked forward to Mr. Anaya's assessment of the situation and his recommendations for improvement.
MOIRA MENDEZ ( Venezuela) said Venezuela was committed to helping indigenous people. The new Constitution of Venezuela had established a plurinational, multi-ethnic society that respected the rights of indigenous peoples. Venezuela recognized the right to collective land ownership. In 2005 alone, 794 hectares of land had been handed over to many indigenous peoples. The Venezuelan Government was building a society based on Indo-American socialism. The Government supported the indigenous peoples' effort to reclaim their rights and ancestral land.
BIRGITTE FEIRING, Chief Technical Adviser of the Project to Promote ILO Policy on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples of the International Labour Organization (ILO), said the Director-General of ILO and the ILO Committee of Experts welcomed adoption of the Declaration, which reaffirmed the rights contained in ILO Convention No. 169. The Convention was silent on the issue of self-determination, but it did provide for participation, consultation, self-management and the right of indigenous peoples to decide their own priorities. The Convention and the Declaration were compatible and mutually reinforcing, and ratification of the Convention was an important contribution to implementing the Declaration.
She said it was symbolic, therefore, that Nepal had ratified the Convention in 2007, one day after adopting the Declaration. Since then, Chile had joined the group of ratifying countries. ILO was supporting several initiatives worldwide to promote further ratification. It had a series of new publications to serve as practical tools for implementing indigenous peoples' rights, including a Practice Guide, a Compilation of Case Law, as well as an Overview Report on constitutional, legislative and administrative provisions concerning indigenous people in Africa.
FABIANA DEL POPOLO, Latin American and Caribbean Demographic Centre (CELADE), Population Division, Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), said the Commission had given priority to gathering information on indigenous peoples in its collection of census data. In 2008, socio-demographic research had been improved. ECLAC had held meetings to better the participatory process of gathering information on indigenous peoples. Most Latin American countries had included questions on indigenous peoples in census questionnaires and had identified indigenous people in the 2010 round of national censuses. In Latin America, there were at least 660 indigenous groups, posing great challenges with regard to information on human rights. It was no longer feasible to delay statistics gathering and dissemination. At least ECLAC had the commitment of countries of the region in that process.
ENEIDA CHARUPA, Pueblo Chiquitano, CIDOB, Bolivia, called on the United Nations to support indigenous women in Latin America. Only that way could indigenous women begin to achieve their goals, instead of just being referred to in documents. They no longer wanted to inspire pity because they were capable of their own development. Countries represented in her organization were United Nations Member States. Those countries should guarantee rights for women, particularly indigenous women. United Nations assistance should reach women through their legally and legitimately established organizations.
STANLEY LIAUW-ANGIE, Organization of Indigenous People of Suriname, said that despite Suriname's support for adoption of the Declaration and judicial rulings against Suriname by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, the rights of indigenous people in Suriname were not being fully respected, particularly in terms of land rights and the right to free, prior and informed consent. Small-scale gold mining had negatively impacted the health of indigenous people in Suriname, but no effective measures had been taken to address water resource destruction, pollution and environmental illnesses due to mercury intoxication.
He called on the Forum to urge the Suriname Government to ratify the Declaration and the Framework Law on Indigenous Rights in Suriname; adhere to the principles of free, prior and informed consent, including with regard to the Infrastructure Initiative for the South American Region; abolish gold mining in indigenous areas; conduct environmental and social impact assessments prior to mining activities; and revise the Mining Act in accordance with indigenous peoples' rights.
DOLORES MARTIN, Director of the Indigenous Programme, Spanish Agency of International Cooperation for Development of Spain, said Spain aimed to promote the Declaration through various actions, particularly cooperation for development, in accordance with article 42. She pointed to a project aimed at strengthening the Permanent Committee on Indigenous Peoples' Rights of the Office of the Attorney-General. Spain sought to strengthen the organizational structures of indigenous peoples in El Salvador, increase their political participation and promote recognition of their rights.
She noted that the Spanish Government had hosted in Madrid the International Forum of Experts' "Implementation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples: the role of the United Nations mechanisms with specific mandate regarding the rights of indigenous peoples". That gathering had aimed to promote cooperation between the Forum, the Special Rapporteur and the new Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
JARMO VIINANEN ( Finland) said his country had participated in the drafting of the Declaration in cooperation with its indigenous people, the Saami. The Declaration's message had been adopted by a growing number of States and was a tool for indigenous peoples' full and effective participation in decision-making. For it to have its intended positive effects, Governments, non-governmental organizations and others must take steps to raise awareness about it.
He said that instead of creating new obligations, the Declaration pursued the important goal of indigenous peoples' full entitlement to rights, as set forth in existing international agreements. States were encouraged to promote respect by enhancing implementation of any human rights instruments to which they were party. As for the Forum, he supported its role as the important global arena for addressing questions on indigenous issues. It had a notable role in the possible issuance of interpretive statements on the Declaration and capacity-building, among other things. The Declaration's spirit was not necessarily enhanced by introducing new reporting obligations for States. Addressing the draft Nordic Saami Convention, he said an analysis of its provisions was under way and the relevant working group hoped to submit a memorandum this fall.
MIRIAM SANCHEZ, Latin America Women's Caucus, said decisions on traditional lands had been made without the free, prior and informed consent of Latin American peoples. What had happened to the contribution of the women who attended the Forum? States had appropriated their lands and waters, usurped their identity and prevented their practices on sacred sites, and she asked the Forum to ensure compliance with treaties to eradicate violence, racism and discrimination. Also, there should be a role for indigenous youth, and a special rapporteur should report on indigenous women suffering human rights violations.
JOAN CARLING, Asia Indigenous Peoples Caucus, said the militarization of communities and the expropriation of land continued, despite protests. The human rights situation had yet to improve dramatically, and most Governments had yet to recognize indigenous peoples as peoples with collective rights, as outlined in the Declaration. States should pave the way for their recognition, and she called for the creation of a mechanism for indigenous peoples that also involved States and United Nations agencies. That mechanism could be a platform for meaningful dialogue. Implementation of the Declaration should resolve -- rather than aggravate -- outstanding conflicts. She appealed to Asian States to move towards implementation.
ERIKA DAES ( Greece) speaking on the implementation of article 42, proposed the appointment of a legal adviser to the Forum's secretariat to guide that process. Indeed, the Declaration called for a genuine partnership between States and indigenous peoples. That officer would provide interpretation of article 34, which focused on the right to develop and maintain institutional structures, among other things. That person's duties would also include maintaining a comprehensive research database of domestic and international law-related articles, reports, judicial decisions and international human rights and humanitarian law instruments. Second, she urged the Forum to encourage the indigenous community to submit best and worst State practices, as well as propose sustainable development projects, with the understanding that they would be forwarded to the UNDP for possible approval and funding.
EGIL OLLI, President of the Saami Parliament in Norway, said that, although his people had been consulted on several big issues in recent years, with satisfactory results, they had not been sufficiently consulted on all issues related to the exploitation of natural resources in their territories, particularly marine mining of minerals and salmon fishing. The Saami Parliament had not given its consent to a recently proposed national mineral mining act, because it did not apply the same administrative procedures throughout all traditional Saami areas and did not meet his Parliament's standards for sharing benefits.
Regarding fishing rights, he said that the Ministry of the Environment had begun to prepare stricter regulations on salmon capture, but the Saami Parliament could not consider those before Saami rights had been decided, both off the coasts and in the fjords. He encouraged the Permanent Forum to conduct a more thorough study on indigenous peoples' rights to marine resources, pledging that his Parliament would contribute to that. He expressed general satisfaction, despite the problems he mentioned, over the collaboration established by the Saami Parliament with the national, regional and local authorities in Norway, cautioning, however, that it would take time and resources to overcome centuries of discrimination and neglect.
MIGUEL PALACIN QUISPE, Coordination of Indigenous Organizations of the Cuenca Amazonia (COICA), Peru, called on the Forum to urge the Peruvian Government to redress human rights violations against indigenous peoples and the confiscation and illegal use of their land. Indigenous people had a voice in the Forum, but the economic liberalization regime practised by Governments endangered the rights of people in the South. Mining companies had militarized indigenous areas and they had committed crimes in Colombia, Peru and Chile. He asked whose rights were being talked about, and whether they were the rights of multinational companies or of the indigenous people. The Forum and the United Nations should monitor the compliance of corporations and States with the treaties. The Millennium Development Goals must be enshrined in the constitutions of Member States. He called on the Forum, Governments and organizations to carry out a worldwide campaign in support of Mother Nature. The energy and food crisis were affecting everyone. All had to learn to live together and to live well. But that did not mean economic growth. It meant ensuring equality for all.
JENNIFER AWINGAN, Asia Pacific Indigenous Youth Network, said the National Indigenous Youth Conference on the Declaration and climate change, held in the Philippines in May, had been attended by 68 people representing 38 indigenous youth organizations from 23 indigenous communities worldwide. Youth leaders had united to defend their land, life and resources, and to promote indigenous peoples' rights at all levels. She called on all countries that had not yet done so to support the Declaration, and on States in Asia and the Pacific to recognize indigenous peoples' rights and to adopt the Declaration and implement it in good faith in their respective countries. The Philippines had a law for indigenous people, but other laws and policies, such as the 1995 Philippine Mining Act and the National Protected Areas System, undermined indigenous peoples' rights.
Thus, she said she supported the call to review the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act and to take into account the recommendations of indigenous communities and organizations that had conducted a 10-year review of its implementation. She asked the Forum to recommend that the Philippine Government review the Act. The Forum, Governments and United Nations agencies should include indigenous youth and their organizations in monitoring and implementing the Declaration, particularly articles 7, 13, 14, 17, 21 and 22, which concerned indigenous children and youth.
EVA RAABYEMAGLE ( Denmark) supported the permanent inclusion of an agenda item dealing with the Declaration, as well as the idea of inviting all relevant actors to submit implementation reports, with a view to constructive dialogue. Denmark was willing to engage in that dialogue, and this year, had submitted, with Greenland, a report on the Greenland self-government process. She strongly supported efforts to strengthen respect for implementing the Declaration and was pleased to see that three United Nations mechanisms -- the Forum, the Special Rapporteur on the situations of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous people, and the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples -- were emphasizing close coordination. There were strong synergies that could be enhanced by that. Finally, she urged the upcoming panel in the Human Rights Council on the relationship between climate change and human rights to include representatives of the Forum and Expert Mechanism in that discussion.
PEDRO DE LA CRUZ, Member of the National Assembly of Ecuador, said his country was a "plurinational" State that recognized the rights of indigenous peoples, including through the administration of justice. Recalling a question yesterday about a mining conflict, he said that, during his country's "neoliberal stage", legislation had emerged that allowed the sale of lands to multinational corporations for $1 to $17 per hectare. Concessions had been provided. The cost then increased to $20 per hectare of land, including for protected areas, for mining companies. Today, Ecuador was working on a mandate to reverse those concessions. Some 4 million hectares had fallen under the land provisions, but a law was being created that gave the State ownership of those lands. Today, the State prohibited mining on protected lands. In addition, water resources were to be used for consumption, food sovereignty, and agricultural purposes -- in that order.
MARGARET LOKAWUA, Forum member from Uganda, noticed that only a few of Mr. Anaya's visits had been to Africa. Official invitations had been made, but what if indigenous peoples were unable to report on their conditions, due to situations outside of their control, such as conflicts?
BARTOLOME CLAVERO SALVADOR, Forum member from Spain, spoke about the documents produced when an official visit did not take place in the classic sense of the term. Pointing to the reports submitted to the Constituent Assembly of Ecuador, and to Chile on the international standards for consultation, he said dissemination of those two reports was not as broad as that for others, but he deemed them more important.
For information media • not an official record
- - -
United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues 8th Session
New York, May 18-29, 2009
INDIGENOUS PEOPLE WORLDWIDE URGE GOVERNMENTS TO REDRESS ENTRENCHED LACK OF RESPECT FOR THEIR VALUES, OVERHAUL LEGISLATION, ENDORSE DECLARATION, IN PERMANENT FORUM
The Permanent Forum on Indigenous Peoples continued its eighth annual session today, with indigenous speakers decrying Governments’ near-total disregard for their rights in the development of roads, waterways and extractive projects; negotiation of free trade agreements; and drafting of national legislation that impacted their lives.
In a day-long meeting that heard almost 60 speakers take the floor, indigenous representatives from all regions called on States that had not yet done so to swiftly endorse the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and redress what they viewed as an entrenched lack of respect for their values -- even existence -– laid bare in unjust laws and “policies of territorial manipulation”.
A representative of the Asian Indigenous Peoples Caucus said the situation was desperate in his part of the world, where indigenous peoples were losing their lands at an alarming rate, due to development of hydropower and other projects. They needed technical support to protect their natural resources, and he called on States, the World Bank and other multilateral institutions to consider alternative systems to fossil fuel-based energy, bio-energy and hydropower dams.
Echoing that call, a representative of the Coordinator of the Indigenous Organizations of the Amazonian River Basin (COICA) was concerned that people in his region were being repressed by Governments that signed contracts with multinational companies without considering their right to free, prior and informed consent. Moreover, indigenous peoples’ access to water was not being prioritized and he condemned Governments’ refusal to declare water as a human right. He asked the Forum and participating countries to demand implementation of environmental and social standards for projects carried out in indigenous territories.
“We are not trying to take crumbs from the table,” the delegate from Red de Instituciones y Organizaciones Mayas del Quiche, Maya Vision asserted. “We have our own worth and contribute to our societies.” Because of that, Governments had to comply with the international conventions they signed. Indigenous peoples had a right to be consulted on issues on which they were vulnerable -– yet they lacked the ability to make real decisions in social, political and environmental spheres.
Responding to those calls, a participant from the United Nations Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR) discussed a training programme that aimed to strengthen indigenous representatives’ ability to negotiate improvements to all areas under the Forum’s mandate: health; education; culture; environment; economic and social development; and human rights. Most cases focused on the two greatest challenges to indigenous peoples: conflict over land and resource issues; and marginalization from political and economic processes.
The meeting also heard from representatives of Government -– participating as observers -- and international financial institutions who stressed the importance of conservation and the equitable sharing of benefits.
For their part, Government representatives defended measures taken to address challenges faced by indigenous peoples and outlined steps to improve health, education and other services in the areas in which they lived. Mexico’s delegate said her Government had substantially increased the federal budget for guaranteeing a full life for indigenous people -– from 13.3 million pesos in 2001 to 31 million pesos in 2008. Some 38.1 million had been earmarked in 2009, a 22.8 per cent increase over last year. She conceded that Mexico needed to move from commitment to action in the implementation of the rights set forth in the Declaration.
The representative of Namibia’s Office of the Prime Minister pointed out that the term “indigenous people” was not suitable for his country, since all Namibians were indigenous, but the term “most marginalized people” was applicable and it referred to the extreme poor. To make that connection, he discussed the creation of a programme to integrate San communities into the economic mainstream, and thus achieve the Millennium Development Goal to eradicate extreme poverty.
The representative of the Russian Federation noted that national legislation on indigenous peoples was still being fine-tuned in accordance with the Declaration and the Second International Decade of the World’s Indigenous People.
Similarly, the Assistant Deputy Attorney-General of Canada -– whose Government was criticized throughout the day for a perceived lack of attention and resources devoted to indigenous rights -- said her country hoped to dismantle various barriers to safety, socio-economic prosperity and equality confronting indigenous women.
Offering another way forward, a representative from the Convention on Biological Diversity said the Natural Resources Stewardship Circle of the aromatic, perfume, and cosmetics industry adopted a Declaration that supported the goals of the Convention, the Declaration, the Global Compact, and ILO Convention No. 169. That industrial sector -- a more than $40 billion annual industry -- was sourced largely by natural extracts directly from indigenous and local communities. Such “win-win” creative partnerships between the private sector and indigenous people benefited biodiversity, the environment and indigenous communities.
Also speaking today were State members represented by observers from Nicaragua, Brazil, Finland, Spain, Guatemala, and Ecuador.
A Deputy Director of Special Projects of the Office of the Prime Minister of Namibia and the Assistant Deputy Attorney-General of Canada also made statements.
Representatives of Colombia, Chile, Spain and Viet Nam spoke in exercise of the right of reply.
Forum members from Bolivia, Morocco, Spain, Congo, and Uganda also spoke.
Speaking on behalf of United Nations specialized agencies and other intergovernmental organizations were representatives of the International Labour Organization (ILO), the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), and the International Organization for Migration (IOM).
Also delivering statements were representatives of the following caucuses, umbrella organizations and indigenous groups: Asian Indigenous Peoples Caucus; Assembly of First Nations; Confederación Mapuche de Neuquén, Organización Pueblo Mixe of Mexico and the National Indigenous Organization of Colombia (ONIC); Coordinator of the Indigenous Organizations of the Amazonian River Basin (COICA); Forum for Indigenous Perspectives in Action; Organización Regional de Los Pueblos Indígenas del Estado Zulia (ORPIZ); Enlace Continental de Mujeres Indigneas -- Región Sudamérica; International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN); Congresista de Peru; International Indigenous Women’s Forum; Global Indigenous Women’s Caucus; Quebec Native Women Inc./Femmes Autochtones due Quebec Inc.; Internationale Touaregue; and the Australian Caucus of Non-Governmental Organizations.
Representatives of the following caucuses, umbrella organizations and indigenous groups also made statements: Native Women’s Association of Canada; Global Women’s Caucus and indigenous organizations of Asia, the Americas, the Pacific, Africa and the Caribbean; Innu Nation; Collectif des femmes du Printemps noir de Kabylie; Autonomia Eraiki; Retrieve Foundation of Ireland; Habitat Pro; Onondaga Nation, Six Nations Iroquois Confederacy Haudenosaunee in the United States; Khmers Kampuchea-Krom Federation; Montagnard Foundation; Cordillera People’s Alliance; International Organization of Indigenous Resource Development; El Molo Forum; Wolf Lake First Nation; Brazilian National Foundation for Indigenous Issues; and the National Foundation for Development of Indigenous Nationalities of Nepal.
A statement was also made by a parliamentarian of Peru and the First Vice President of the Indigenous Parliament of America (PIA).
The Forum will reconvene at 3 p.m. on Wednesday, 20 May to continue its session.
Background
The Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues met today to continue its eighth annual session in which representatives of indigenous groups were expected to discuss ways to further implement the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, the relationship between indigenous peoples and industrial corporations, climate change, the Arctic region, and land tenure. (For additional information on the current session, see Press Release HR/4979.)
Statements
ELISA CANQUI MOLLO, Forum member from Bolivia, commenting on statements made yesterday by observers from Ecuador, Brazil and Colombia, commended advances in public policy, but wondered where indigenous peoples’ economic rights really stood. There was also a humanitarian question. Indigenous peoples were being moved -– and sometimes held hostage -- as part of conflict that raged between Governments and rebel groups. Could those Governments respond to such concerns?
HASSAN ID BALKASSM, a Forum member, Amazigh activist and attorney from Morocco, and an attorney accredited by the Higher Court in Rabat, as well as President of Tamaynut Association and the Indigenous Peoples of Africa Coordinating Committee, said the Second Decade, as well as the Declaration, called for international action. While those were important documents, at the moment, they were just statements of intent. They must be put into action and become part of international law. Mining companies were extracting minerals in areas without any prior consent from indigenous peoples. Governments must afford protection to indigenous peoples and not be complicit with the companies or facilitate their investments without prior informed consent from indigenous communities in the area.
BARTOLOMÉ CLAVERO SALVADOR, Forum member from Spain, recalled Chile’s ratification of International Labour Organization (ILO) Convention No. 169 and Colombia’s withdrawal of reservations and current support for the Declaration. The representative of Chile had spoken of constitutional reform -- and ongoing consultations on that reform. Chile had invited the Special Rapporteur on human rights and fundamental freedoms to study those reforms vis-à-vis international standards. He had concluded that Chile was not complying with what was needed, particularly as there was no recognition of indigenous peoples’ right to water. The constitution had done away with that right. With tourism in the north and logging in the south, the water left for indigenous peoples was wastewater. As for Colombia, there was contradiction between its written report and the oral presentation, which noted support of the Declaration. He urged revision of the laws that had deprived indigenous peoples of their rights to resource use and urged the Government to do something about its declarations of intent.
FAMARK HLAWNCHING, representative of the Asian Indigenous Peoples Caucus, said most Asian Governments had not yet recognized indigenous peoples and had not adopted policies that were acceptable to them. Nor had they implemented key recommendations made by the Forum in previous sessions. Among those recommendations were that Asian States recognize indigenous peoples constitutionally and legally as peoples, promote legal reform, particularly with regard to recognizing indigenous peoples’ collective land rights and their customary laws and institutions, and abandon transmigration policies and programmes as well as prevent illegal migration into indigenous territories. Asian Governments, United Nations agencies and other intergovernmental organizations and international financial institutions had also not adopted the principle of free, prior and informed consent.
He said that the situation of indigenous peoples in Asia remained desperate in relation to the recognition of indigenous peoples’ rights to land, territories and resources. They continued to lose their lands at an alarming rate due to large-scale development projects, including those involving plantations, extractive industries, hydropower development and road construction. He appealed for immediate implementation of several key Forum recommendations, including that technical support be given to protect and nurture indigenous peoples’ natural resource management, including for environmentally-friendly technologies, biodiversity and cultural diversity. He also called on States, the World Bank and other multilateral institutions to consider alternative systems to fossil fuel-based energy and large-scale bioenergy and hydropower dams. There was a lack of disaggregated data of the situation of indigenous peoples. Indicators on poverty, heath and sustainability should guide programmes affecting indigenous peoples.
WILTON LITTLECHILD, Regional Chief of the Assembly of First Nations, said that if Canada was sincere about promoting indigenous peoples’ rights, it must respect the statement made at the Forum’s fourth session that economic and social development must be understood from indigenous perspectives. Indigenous communities had been adversely affected by diverse factors that limited growth. Many lacked access to the necessary economic resources to properly develop their economies, a situation often tied to the need for control over traditional territories and resources. Infrastructure, including access to modern technology, was required, as were “tele-health” systems, water monitoring and long-distance learning capacities.
As such, he urged the Forum to call on Canada to implement various measures, including legislative, fiscal and political support, that would respect indigenous peoples’ right to economic development. Canada must also respect indigenous peoples’ right to free, prior and informed consent, and consult with indigenous peoples in a manner that respected constitutional obligations, fully responded to their goals and assisted in the design of the new Aboriginal Economic Framework. That framework must consider indigenous peoples’ economic growth needs, regardless of whether those economies were at a development, emerging or dynamic phase.
BIRGITTE FEIRING, ILO Office for the United Nations, New York, said there was no doubt that the Forum’s work, together with indigenous organizations, United Nations agencies and Governments, had enlarged the knowledge base on indigenous peoples’ economic situation. But the question should be asked: to what extent had that situation improved, particularly with regard to accessing education, health services and employment? While progress had been made with regard to overall coordination and awareness, country-level implementation was lacking.
She said that the Forum’s broad recommendations reflected the holistic nature of indigenous peoples’ aspiration for self-determined development, which would require profound legislative, policy and institutional changes. Hopefully, the more specific recommendations would contribute to fulfilling that aspiration, but achievements risked being undermined by other factors. She cautioned that the aid effectiveness agenda, which guided international development assistance, carried risks for further exclusion of indigenous peoples if safeguards were not developed. Donors might harmonize policies to provide support to Governments that did not take into account indigenous peoples’ rights. As to how to measure impact, the ILO had undertaken efforts at national, regional and international levels, but it had been difficult to operationalize them. She wondered if specific and time-bound targets could be developed to hasten implementation of the Declaration.
ROMAN KASHAEV ( Russian Federation) said his country was the most multi-ethnic country in the world. It had 46 ethnic groups and 280,000 units living in 30 areas of the country. National legislation on indigenous peoples was still being fine tuned in accordance with the Declaration and the Second Decade. The Government had been taking a myriad of steps to improve health, education and other services in areas in which indigenous people lived. A national policy protected indigenous people in the country’s north. It aimed at preserving their cultural heritage and traditional occupations, raising their level of access to education, reducing child mortality and improving their overall health. The policy would be carried out in three stages from 2009 to 2025.
Further, he reported, there were proposals to introduce several amendments to federal legislation in order to better protect indigenous communities, also in the north, including in Siberia. And work was under way to develop another important legislative act to determine losses, including lost profits, that indigenous peoples incurred for losing access to their land and other natural resources, as well as a procedure to address damages to their ancestral land. The Russian Federation was ready to contribute constructively to indigenous issues of other countries.
STEDMAN FAGOTH, Minister of Fisheries of Nicaragua, said that autonomous regions were recognized in the Constitution. Natural resources belonged to communities, and not to the State. But 25 per cent of those resources were allowed to go to the State: “Resources belong to us,” he asserted, naming gold, water and soil among those resources. Such laws had broken ground and were starting to work. No treaty could be concluded without the consent of communities. For example, after signing a license for a fishing vessel, that vessel could not set forth without the community’s consent. The same held true for hydrocarbons. However, there were two companies conducting exploration, without the permission of the regional councils, which was not acceptable. Turning to gender, he said that national law 648 outlined measures for women to claim their economic rights. On other matters, he said education was a regional decision.
JORGE NAHUEL, a representative of the Confederación Mapuche de Neuquén, Organización Pueblo Mixe of Mexico, and the National Indigenous Organization of Colombia (ONIC), said extractive industries were destroying ancestral homelands at an alarming rate in Mexico, Colombia and other Latin American countries. The Forum should recommend that States obtain prior consent from indigenous people before allowing extractive industries to begin a project. He called for impact studies to be undertaken before any project began, in accordance with international human rights law and the Declaration. Governments must hold consultations with indigenous groups prior to approving land mining projects.
He said that the Secretary-General, the United Nations and its agencies should call on Member States to enact legislation to protect indigenous peoples. The Forum should urge the World Bank to eliminate venture capital for extractive industries. It should also recommend that the World Health Organization (WHO), with full participation of indigenous peoples, carry out a study on the impact of cyanide and heavy metal on indigenous communities. Governments should also pass legislation that prohibited open mining in indigenous areas.
EGBERTO TABO, Coordinator of the Indigenous Organizations of the Amazonian River Basin (COICA), demanded respect for indigenous peoples’ right to self-determination and was concerned at the lack of implementation of free, prior and informed consent, as outlined in the Declaration, notably in the extractive industries. The Forum must take steps to protect Amazonian peoples, who were being repressed by a Government that signed contracts with multinational companies without indigenous peoples’ prior consent. As a result, plant and animal species were disappearing and the harmony of ecosystems was being destroyed by so-called development work, which evicted indigenous peoples from their land.
Moreover, he worried, indigenous peoples’ access to water and other natural resources was not being prioritized, and he condemned Governments that refused the declaration of water as a human right. He asked the United Nations to take a lead role in that debate. Indeed, large companies provoked conflict in internal communities in order to gain control of natural resources. The Forum, and participating countries, should demand the implementation of environmental and social standards for projects carried out in indigenous territories. Amazonian Basin peoples had rights, and the Forum must take a stand, particularly on those peoples’ decision for voluntary isolation, which was jeopardized by businesses.
GABRIELA GARDUZA ESTRADA ( Mexico) said her country had consistently submitted timely reports on follow-up to the Forum’s recommendations. The Mexican Government had substantially increased the federal budget for guaranteeing a full life for indigenous people. In 2001, that budget was 13.3 million pesos. In 2008, it was 31 million pesos. The Government had earmarked 38.1 million in 2009, a 22.8 per cent increase from the previous year. Despite great efforts on the part of the Government and indigenous leaders, more were needed to implement the rights set forth in the Declaration. Mexico was well aware of that and of the need to move from commitment to action. It was necessary to ensure that indigenous people achieved their full rights.
In that regard, she said, Mexico had dedicated much attention to the Millennium Development Goals, and support for indigenous peoples had been incorporated in all aspects of the Government’s plans and programmes to achieve the Goals. Mexico’s 2006 report on the Goals incorporated specific indicators for the indigenous population, and the 2010 national census would include indicators on indigenous peoples. She hoped that that information would help improve public policy and, thus, compliance with international agreements on indigenous issues. She supported the proposal to reduce the number of the Forum’s recommendations on an annual basis so that all stakeholders could fulfil them.
GERSON H. KAMATUKA, Deputy Director, Special Projects, Office of the Prime Minister of Namibia, said his Government had signed the Declaration and was looking forward to constructive dialogue. The term “indigenous people” was not suitable, since all Namibians were indigenous, but the term “most marginalized people” was applicable and it referred to the extreme poor. The Cabinet had approved the creation of a programme that would help integrate San communities into the economic mainstream, and thus achieve the Millennium Development Goal to eradicate extreme poverty. Since the inception of that programme, various projects had been undertaken to improve San peoples’ access to education and employment, among other things. Since 2005, some N$3 million had been spent on it. The Government would continue to assist its most marginalized communities where possible, depending on the availability of resources.
MICHAELA BERGMAN, representative of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), said that international financial institutions had a mandate to promote the transition to market economies in 30 countries. For the Bank, indigenous people were a specificity of the Russian Federation and, therefore, policy was tailored for the post-Soviet context. Indigenous people were partners in the transition process, taking into account special measures, the Declaration and their circumstances in the Russian Federation. The Bank’s policy aimed to avoid adverse impacts on the lives of indigenous people, enable them to benefit from Bank-supported projects, foster good-faith negotiations and informed participation, and respect and preserve their culture. That meant meaningful consultation, compensation and benefit-sharing, as well as respect for indigenous peoples’ autonomy, decision-making processes and their preferred language.
She said that in cases where indigenous people were relocated from their traditional customary land, or where their land or use of their cultural resources was affected, the Bank required clients to enter into good-faith negotiations with indigenous people, ensure their informed participation and obtain their free and prior consent before starting activities. An increasing number of companies had recognized that a “regulatory” license to operate was insufficient for sustainable operations. By obtaining an indigenous community’s consent and approval to go ahead, the company de facto received a social license to operate. That reduced the risk of incurring losses due to delays, conflict and protests which damaged a company’s reputation. The challenge was to reach a common understanding. The Bank was planning workshops with indigenous peoples’ representatives and the private sector.
JITEN YUMNAN, Forum for Indigenous Perspectives and Action, spoke about the importance of free, prior and informed consent for indigenous peoples in India. In his country, they were being denied self-determined development and natural resource use. In the north-east, for example, the Government had pursued extractive industries, and economic policies were being formed from a national security perspective, which undermined indigenous peoples’ rights. A dam project had taken indigenous land and destroyed many sacred sites. That decision had been made without the free prior and informed consent of inhabitants. Also, the confiscation of agricultural land undermined food sovereignty and fostered dependence on outsiders.
He called on the Forum to urge the Indian Government to implement its recommendations: respect their right to self-determination, and to free, prior and informed consent before undertaking development projects; ensure that a human rights-based approach to development was fully implemented; and stop using the military to pursue mega-development projects. Also, the World Bank and Asian Development Bank must respect indigenous peoples’ rights to land and resources.
LISANDRO MARQUEZ, Organización Regional de Los Pueblos Indígenas del Estado Zulia (ORPIZ), which was a member of COICA, spoke on behalf of various grass-roots organizations, saying that land was a guarantee of survival for indigenous peoples. As such, Governments must acknowledge plurality. He discussed an example of that desire in Venezuela, where indigenous peoples had carried on their struggles for years. President Hugo Chávez had recognized land owned by indigenous peoples as part and parcel of economic development. National resources -– air and water included -- should not be damaged in any way. Moreover, traditional medicine must be acknowledged, as should women’s rights, the demarcation of lands, and protection of local languages. Like Bolivia, Venezuela was a protagonist in its own history, and one must not forget what had been achieved. He stood with indigenous peoples whose Governments had not respected their independence and had allowed their lands to be desecrated.
JOHN SCOTT, Programme Officer, Traditional Knowledge, Social, Economic and Legal Affairs, Convention on Biological Diversity, said the Convention valued partners in the private sector and indigenous and local communities. In October 2008, the Natural Resources Stewardship Circle of the aromatic, perfume, and cosmetics industry adopted the Natural Resources Stewardship Circle Declaration in an effort to support the goals of the Convention, the Declaration, the Global Compact, and ILO Convention No. 169. That industrial sector, a more than $40 billion annual industry, was sourced largely by natural extracts directly from indigenous and local communities. The Circle, in collaboration with Tribal Link, the Convention secretariat and the Forum, had met at United Nations Headquarters last week to seek advice from indigenous representatives on how the industries involved could implement the goals of the Circle’s Declaration. That meeting produced a procedural report and initial draft guidance.
He said that such “win-win” creative partnerships between the private sector and indigenous people benefited biodiversity, the environment and indigenous communities. They helped to achieve the Convention’s goals of conservation, sustainable use and equitable sharing of benefits. Raw materials purchased directly from indigenous communities could help foster sustainable development, entrepreneurship and sustainable use of biodiversity at the local level. He stressed the challenge of the private sector to self-regulate in view of the current economic crisis. Industry’s ability to continue to benefit from services provided by biodiversity was under threat. With current loss rates, it was projected that by 2050 an additional 1.3 billion hectares of land would lose their entire original biodiversity. Environmentally-sustainable and socially-ethical practices that provided clear guidance could be a useful model for other industrial sectors to consider.
TARCILA RIVERA, Enlace Continental de Mujeres Indigneas -- Región Sudamérica, asked the United Nations to appeal to Governments to fully adopt the Declaration so that it could be used a tool for ensuring indigenous women’s rights. Also, women’s role as managers must be acknowledged, and an analysis should be made of strategic programmes. The Forum should recommend that Governments work with young indigenous peoples to increase their income. States should provide the legal security of indigenous peoples’ collective land, as that would help ensure sustainable development. Free, prior and informed consent must become a reality. Measures must also be put in place to protect women and children from violence and discrimination, and States should include indicators to record the way in which indigenous people lived. As for the impacts of extractive industries on indigenous peoples, children and women were the first to be affected, notably seen in the lack of food security.
TRISHA RIEDY, Manager and Senior Trainer, Peacemaking and Conflict Prevention Programme, Peace and Security and Diplomacy Unit, United Nations Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR), said the UNITAR Training Programme to Enhance the Conflict Prevention and Peacebuilding Capacities of Indigenous Peoples’ Representatives had been created in 2000 based on the requests of indigenous peoples’ representatives worldwide and recommendations of United Nations Special Rapporteurs. The training aimed to strengthen indigenous representatives’ ability to negotiate improvements to all areas under the Forum’s mandate: health, education, culture, environment, economic and social development, and human rights. Most cases and negotiation simulations in training focused on the two greatest challenges to indigenous peoples: conflict over land and resource issues; and marginalization from political and economic processes.
She said that the training programme reviewed rights-based and problem-solving negotiation processes to strengthen the capacity of indigenous representatives to analyse root causes of conflict and engage in constructive dialogue with Governments, the private sector and other communities to resolve conflicts in a mutually beneficial, sustainable way. UNITAR actively sought indigenous women’s participation and contribution for each training programme. Women comprised 40 per cent of training participants. The aim was to build on their capacity to analyse sources of conflict, identify the interests and concerns of the various parties involved, and engage in dialogue and negotiation to improve the condition of life for their communities in all sectors. Indigenous experts and former participants were consulted in the design and planning of each UNITAR training programme to ensure that the programme addressed key concerns and evolving issues faced by indigenous peoples.
ANNELIE FINCKE, International Union for Conservation of Nature, said indigenous peoples’ rights -– and, more generally, rights-based approaches to conservation –- were featured at the 2008 Fourth World Conservation Congress, which brought together 8,000 people from indigenous communities, United Nations agencies and businesses. At the Congress, the Declaration was profiled as a guiding framework for conservation work taking place on indigenous lands. International Union members took decisions upholding standards for free, prior and informed consent, and in support of fair restitution of land and natural resource rights. An important set of decisions concerned the integration of the concept of “indigenous conservation territories”, recognized as protected areas owned and managed by indigenous peoples. The Congress called on Governments and others to protect indigenous peoples by protecting those lands from threats.
Also addressed had been emerging mechanisms for reduced emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, she said. A resolution had been adopted urging all parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change to ensure indigenous peoples’ equitable participation. All climate change response measures must respect human rights; they could not ignore the rights dimension of the phenomenon. Capacity building was critical to developing rights-based approaches, and the links between climate change, conservation and indigenous peoples’ rights must be better understood.
ISABELLE HERNANDEZ CASTRO, Red de Instituciones y Organizaciones Mayas del Quiche, Maya Vision, spoke about Guatemalan indigenous peoples and urged the Government’s compliance with the international conventions it had signed. Indigenous peoples had a right to be consulted on issues on which they were vulnerable -– particularly on environmental, social, cultural and political issues. “We are not trying to take crumbs from the table,” she said. “We have our own worth, and contribute to our societies.”
She said that Guatemalan indigenous peoples were the majority, but they were struggling to achieve true recognition, which was still weak. They were used for folklore and tourism, but lacked the ability to make decisions in social, political and environmental spheres. Abject poverty continued at high levels compared to the mixed-race population, a result of racist policies. Youth hoped to overcome obstacles, but they were often subjected to gang and criminal activity. The Government had asked states to legalize immigrants, but those were the wrong policies. Governments also had sold lands to companies for mega-development projects, which indigenous peoples had already developed.
HILARIA SUPA HUAMÁN, a parliamentarian of Peru and First Vice President of the Indigenous Parliament of America (PIA), said supreme decrees had been handed down by the Government, which encroached upon the rights of indigenous peoples, depriving them of their land in order to allow for private investment. That was impoverishing indigenous peoples. Last year, the same demands were made. But there had been no progress made since then, particularly in Peru. Peru had been split into two different countries. There had been no respect for treaties, ILO Convention No. 169, or the Declaration. Extractive industries did not respect human rights or Mother Nature. The white man did not know how to respect his Mother. Indigenous people respected Mother Earth. Little by little, Mother Nature was being killed. What was the hope then for future generations?
She called on the Chair to have the Declaration take on the form of international law so that indigenous peoples and their communities would be respected. The Amazon was the land of the world. Indigenous people had their feelings and their rights. For that reason, the three international treaties that referred to indigenous peoples’ rights must be taken on by Member States and become international law. Peru had a bill before Parliament, but it had not been enacted. The Chair should recommend that the Peruvian Parliament enact that bill.
GLORIA RAMOS PRUDENCIO, Congresista de Peru, said extractive industries had plundered Peru’s resources, both on the coasts and plains. Initiatives, such as eco-tourism and exploitation of medicinal plants, could foster harmonious development with diversity. Oil industries were exploiting indigenous territories, protective areas and biodiversity. Moreover, Peru did not recognize indigenous peoples’ rights in its negotiation of the Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with the United States, whose aim was to achieve profits even at the expense of environmental and natural resources. Foreign companies were not meeting their environmental commitments.
As such, she said people in the Peruvian Amazon had been on strike since 3 April and attacked by armed forces. On 7 May, Peru’s Congress approved a multiparty report, which outlined the unconstitutionality of legislative decrees in facilitating the Free Trade Agreement. A multiparty commission had 10 days to reach a judgement on the matter, and in August, would submit a report on health, education and environmental alternatives. She asked the Forum to urge the Peruvian Government to repeal laws and decrees that adversely impacted indigenous peoples.
LEIA BEZERRA DO VALE ( Brazil) said her Government had established the Special Secretariat for Women’s Policies in 2003 to develop public policies aimed at improving the lives of Brazilian women and reaffirming the Government’s commitment to them. To achieve its objectives, the Special Secretariat took joint action with other ministries and secretariats to address the dual challenges of incorporating women’s specific needs in policy and of ensuring that full citizenship could also be exercised. Recently, the Special Secretariat had organized a series of national events to consult women to determine their demands and priorities. Subsequently, two national policy plans had been developed with, among others, the active engagement of indigenous women and the National Indigenous Foundation (FUNAI).
She said that the National Indigenous Foundation had, as the primary agency with responsibility for executing public policies related to the indigenous population, given particular priority in its 2008 and 2009 internal planning process to organizing 13 regional seminars for indigenous women. Those aimed at promoting analysis, clarification, and discussion of the “Maria de Penha” Law and its applicability to indigenous community members. The seminars not only considered the available legal mechanisms for defending women victims of violence, but the international human rights instruments and customary rights of indigenous people provided for in international treaties to which Brazil was a party. The Foundation had also held a total of 13 workshops throughout Brazil between 2006 and 2008, with the participation of 410 women representing 159 distinct ethnic groups. These meetings had led to the implementation of eight pilot projects intended to strengthen the economic lives of indigenous communities, vis-à-vis food production, traditional farming and the production of goods and tools; to provide for the production and marketing of goods for markets outside indigenous villages; and to contribute to food and nutritional security in the communities.
ELIZABETH SANDERSON, Assistant Deputy Attorney-General of Canada, said her Government had made progress in implementing a number of the Permanent Forum’s recommendations regarding indigenous women and hoped to dismantle the barriers to safety, socio-economic prosperity and equality confronting indigenous women. Towards that goal, the second National Aboriginal Women’s Summit had been held in July 2008 in Yellowknife, Northwest Territories, allowing women to come together to discuss and prioritize issues that should be addressed to strengthen their communities. The Summit had carried forward three original themes from its predecessor: health, safety and wellness; equality and empowerment; and strength, balance and honour. Canada also planned to have the Summit’s work inform its Federal Action Plan for Women, which the Government had announced in June 2008. Its three pillars would focus on women’s economic security and prosperity, encouraging women’s leadership and democratic participation, and ending violence against women.
She said Canada was also working to develop a new federal framework for Aboriginal economic development, and had held a round table for Aboriginal women to share their technical knowledge, expertise and experience in that area in April. The Government also sought to integrate the different perspectives of indigenous women in policies and programmes, including using a cultural lens specific to the Aboriginal population within the context of gender analysis. Elsewhere, it sought to provide indigenous women with quality health care and to end violence against them, particularly by addressing the country’s large number of missing and murdered Aboriginal women. Canada was also working to put in place legal frameworks to ensure the rights of Aboriginal people, including their human rights. Last year, national legislation had been passed to provide full legal access to the country’s central human rights act. This year, legislation had been introduced to provide basic rights and remedies to individuals on reserves, regarding family homes and other matrimonial interests and rights. Finally, Canada sought to address the needs and challenges of indigenous women in urban centres by renewing its Urban Aboriginal Strategy of 2007.
LILIANE MUZANGI, Forum member from the Congo, recalling that indigenous women continued to be raped and displaced by war, hoped the eighth session would produce various texts that resoundingly condemned such ignoble attacks. Women, particularly indigenous women, played an important role in their families and communities. If such violence continued, society would not survive long.
MONICA ALEMAN, International Indigenous Women’s Forum, presented a report on indigenous women, whose goal was to identify advancements made in carrying out the Forum’s recommendations between 2002 and 2008. Data had been collected via a participatory process. The report consolidated responses from indigenous organizations and was a first effort to monitor and follow up implementation of the Forum’s recommendations.
She proposed that the Forum institutionalize a gender perspective in its work; facilitate meetings between indigenous organizations and their country delegations; appoint a Forum member as special rapporteur to investigate cultural practices that negatively impacted indigenous women; and periodically review the implementation of recommendations related to women.
YOLANDA TERAN, Global Indigenous Women’s Caucus, said it was necessary to affirm the rights of indigenous women to ensure that they were protected by the Declaration. That required acknowledging on a global scale that indigenous people had the right to move freely. Urban indigenous women represented half of all indigenous women globally. They faced the brunt of violence in urban areas, which impacted entire indigenous communities, degrading the women and their communities. Indigenous women were often subjected to violence in immigrant detention centres.
She said the Forum should take several steps to ensure protection of indigenous women and their rights. It should urge Governments to implement article 10 of the Declaration, concerning not forcibly removing indigenous people from their territories, and a legal mechanism should be created for that purpose. The Forum should also request that the Special Rapporteur study the situation of indigenous women migrants in rural and urban environments and that United Nations bodies and agencies develop programmes to address the needs of indigenous women, including migrant women. Governments should fund programmes according to a rights-based approach, in line with the provisions of the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families. Additionally, undocumented migrant indigenous women must be given assistance in their local language.
Right of Reply
The representative of Colombia, speaking in exercise of the right of reply, stressed the importance of indigenous issues related to women. Discriminating against or jeopardizing their rights must be avoided. Women must be recognized as victims of racial discrimination, not perpetrated by the State, but rather rooted throughout the Latin American world. Colombia had made strides at combating that phenomenon, notably by strengthening indigenous communities and vulnerable groups. Indigenous peoples should be part of indigenous institutions, he added.
He said his Government, through a council on the protection of indigenous women, was promulgating domestic legislation and working to carry out international provisions. It promoted programmes backed by women and fostered women’s participation in various committees to draft articles. Attention must be paid to health and education.
Chile’s representative, also speaking in exercise of the right of reply, said a new bill was before Chilean legislators to set up a National Council of Indigenous People as a body that was independent from the Government. During the preparatory phase of creating such a body, 4,000 communities of indigenous people had been involved and 1,500 people had participated in workshops on the matter. The second phase of consultations was under way. Constitutional reform was also being studied. He stressed the importance of indigenous peoples’ participation in the workshops so that they could be involved and could inform their communities. Documents on the workshops and the Government’s involvement would be presented to Chile’s Congress.
Concerning constitutional reform over water rights, the text of that reform had been submitted to indigenous leaders, he said. Chile’s Constitution established that rights to land belonged to the State. It was up to the Government to ensure that all citizens participated, in order to bring about changes that society needed. That was the only way in which a democratic society could face challenges. Article 2 of ILO Convention No. 169 referred to the use of natural resources. The Government had to embark on wide-ranging consultations with indigenous peoples to look at codes of conduct and to ensure that indigenous people were consulted whenever natural resources were exploited.
ELLEN GABRIEL, President of Quebec Native Women Inc./Femmes Autochtones due Quebec Inc ., said that the nationality and identity of indigenous peoples were threatened by that country’s forced assimilation practices. It was also disappointing that the Government of Canada continued to oppose the indigenous peoples’ Declaration. While Canada had made some attempts to provide access to human rights instruments for indigenous women and their communities, the Indian Act continued to undermine indigenous women’s rights. Without reinforcing indigenous women’s role in nation building, there was no assurance that their traditional customs, languages and forms of governance would be perpetuated. The role of indigenous peoples could be reduced to artefacts in museums. Therefore, it was imperative that all States practiced, in good faith, the process of free, prior and informed consent.
She said that while the international community congratulated the Canadian Government for its apology last year to the Indian Residential School survivors, there had been no change in the status quo. Quebec Native Women recommended that all Member States, including Canada, create national strategies to prevent violence against indigenous women and children; consult with indigenous culture and traditions; and implement the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the articles of the indigenous peoples’ Declaration to adequately help indigenous peoples overcome the effects of colonization. They should also implement gender-based analysis in all State policies and programmes, especially those that affected the collective rights of indigenous peoples. Among other priorities was the role of indigenous people in watershed protection; indigenous peoples’ representation in decision-making regarding land management and water rights; and prevention of exploitation of indigenous lands prior to settlement of land claims.
TUOMAS ASLAK JUUSO, representative of the Finnish Sami Youth Organization and member of the delegation of Finland, said roughly half of Finland’s Sami people lived outside their traditional homeland, with the number living in urban areas rising. That urbanization challenged the enjoyment of the rights to which indigenous peoples were entitled, particularly those relating to culture and language. The central question was how the culture, identity, traditional knowledge and cultural heritage of indigenous peoples could best be preserved outside a tightly-knit community. The Sami youth should also be able to exercise the right to choose, on equal ground with the rest of the population, the type of education and livelihood to pursue.
He said that in tackling those challenges, the State had a responsibility to fulfil its obligations to the Sami people wherever they resided. Education and day care should be provided in the Sami languages, through systematic policy efforts. More advances were needed in the direction of the Government’s Development Programme for Chid and Youth Policy, which had been adopted in 2007 and aimed to make Sami culture better known through improved teaching curricula at all levels. Further, given the increased expectation for Sami women and girls to perform well within modern society, while also preserving their “traditional” Sami identity, the gender perspective needed strengthening within Sami self-governance. Sami organizations also played an important role in bringing people together and creating the possibilities for strengthening Sami culture, and indigenous women, particularly those in urban communities, represented a tremendous resource for increasing information sharing on indigenous culture. The more constructive contact between indigenous people and the rest of society, the better the chance of fulfilling indigenous peoples’ rights.
DELORIS MARTIN, Spanish Agency for Cooperation and Development, described actions taken by her Government for the 2009-2010 period. In terms of economic and social development, Spain’s approach had promoted respectful cooperation with indigenous peoples, including those living in voluntary isolation. In May 2008, it had held an information meeting with Spanish corporations on the importance of free, prior and informed consent. The Government had tried to implement the Forum’s recommendations, take other measures to protect biological diversity, and promote efforts against climate change, among other environmental issues.
Moreover, she noted, the Government had financed the Second Latin American meeting on Local Governments and Indigenous Territories, held in Guatemala. Turning to indigenous women, she said the Government’s support had been evident in such areas as gender, education, sexual and reproductive health, and economic development. The Government also had focused on bilingual and cultural education as a means of empowering indigenous girls. Spain had ratified ILO Convention No. 169, and her Agency had published a report on the implications of that ratification. She invited all to hear a presentation on that report next Thursday.
AMY MUEDIN, Adviser, International Organization for Migration (IOM), said in March 2007, the organization had participated in an expert group meeting on urban indigenous peoples and migration in Santiago, Chile, to discuss the challenges of improving the quality of life of urban indigenous peoples and the ongoing rural-urban migration process. It had been noted that, while migration and urbanization was not a homogenous experience for indigenous peoples, indigenous women had particular vulnerabilities. In Asia, indigenous migrant women were particularly affected by the downside of urbanization and they needed special support, including protection against physical and emotional harassment, as well as support to counter the risk of being lured into human trafficking networks. Previous Forum sessions had raised concerns over indigenous migrant women’s particular difficulty in integrating into societies of destination.
She said that some indigenous people moved to urban areas due to pull factors relating to employment and educational prospects, improved access to health and housing services and increased political participation, and social recognition and opportunities they might lack in their native communities. Indigenous migrants to urban areas did not leave behind their identities and they must not be artificially divided into urban and rural members of indigenous peoples. Their rights and identity should be considered wholly, irrespective of whether they lived on their territories or in urban areas. There was limited data on the migration process and on indigenous women’s migration to urban areas. That scarcity prevented adequate policymaking on migration issues with regard to indigenous peoples, specifically indigenous women. Policies, programmes and legislation designed to protect the rights of migrant women were often ineffective unless the indigenous women’s status was explicitly recognized or addressed.
SARAH FORTUNE, Internationale Touaregue, said improving women’s condition was not always the priority concern of Governments. In Niger, 85 per cent of the Tuareg women lived outside of cities. Her people had their own capacities that allowed them to live in arid areas, and the Forum could help them protect their habitat. Women’s lives were imperilled, their husbands were being killed by a military junta and there was radioactive contamination of their lands that had given rise to health concerns.
Against that backdrop, she asked that an external independent body study the health of peoples living in northern Niger, particularly women and children. She urged the Forum to raise the question of creating a demilitarized zone that would allow free movement of people looking for pasture land; the establishment of a food bank; special support for water in her region; and involvement of women’s organizations in the decision-making in such areas.
DOT HENRY, on behalf of the Australian Caucus of Non-Governmental Organizations, called on Governments to eradicate discrimination and violence against indigenous women and children through holistic approaches to essential services and culturally-appropriate education and justice strategies. Acknowledging that Australia had now agreed to support the Declaration, she called attention to the article on promotion of the rights and special needs of women, stressing that the participation of indigenous women in pursuit of that objective was essential.
She also called for the provision of adequate resources for existing programmes in Australia that aimed to prevent violence against women and for the creation of national services to respond to Foetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD). Welcoming the National Apology to the Stolen Generations, she called for the development of a strategy to make it more effective. She also called on the Permanent Forum to work for an end to national policies that denied indigenous women access to social services, to promote adequate national funding to fight domestic violence in all settings, and to urge all States to establish national indigenous women’s advocacy bodies.
MARCO ANTONIO CURRUCHICH, Commissioner of the Presidential Commission on the Fight against Racism and Discrimination of Guatemala, expressed concern that 46 per cent of the Forum’s recommendations had not been implemented, or that there was no information on their implementation status. Financial resources were needed to continue implementation. Guatemala had a programme to protect the rights of indigenous women that developed actions, strategies and processes for the respect, promotion and compliance with the rights of indigenous women and their protection before the law. It had developed an agenda to empower Maya, Garifuna and Xinka women. Leaders from those communities participated in plans to improve their living conditions. The aim was to raise their profile and to foster gender equality, respect their cultural identity, and improve their quality of life in the public and private sphere through cross-cutting thematic strategies.
He said that the Defence for Indigenous Women programme provided free social, psychological and legal advice to indigenous women in their native tongue. It also ensured legal protection in cases that required court proceedings. On 13 March, the Government had launched the Campaign to Promote the Rights of Indigenous Women in coordination with Defence for Indigenous Women, the Presidential Commission on the Fight against Racism and Discrimination, and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) in Guatemala. In October 2006, the Government had created a public policy for coexistence and the elimination of racism and racial discrimination. That policy was the collective effort of public and social institutions, social scientists and activists, and the Government. It was based on the idea that society could move from exclusion and discrimination to a reality based on pluralism and democracy.
GONZALO OVIEDO, Senior Adviser, Social Policy, International Union for Conservation of Nature, stressed that indigenous women were particularly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change, including food insecurity. As such, they should be included in decision-making processes to improve access to land and solve food security problems.
Describing his organization’s work in gender equality, he noted a workshop with indigenous women and gender experts to explore the links between biodiversity and gender equality. The main outcome of that workshop was an analysis of -- and action plan for -- gender mainstreaming in biodiversity. Another series of national workshops organized throughout Central and South America allowed participants to identify indigenous women’s needs. The meeting produced a publication that became part of a regional agenda to boost indigenous women’s roles. In closing, he said the International Union stressed the importance of gender equality in development and the need to increase indigenous women’s participation in decision-making on natural resource issues.
BEVERLY JACOBS, President of the Native Women’s Association of Canada, said because of the genocidal and assimilationist policies of Canada, indigenous women had to deal with the various barriers and impacts of colonization today. Indigenous women in Canada had consistently said that they came from Nations, that they wanted their homes and their communities to be safe and healthy, and that they could not separate themselves individually from their Nations. Her association recently published a report regarding missing and murdered aboriginal women in Canada. The high rates of violence facing indigenous women in all walks of life required a systemic response. According to the report, as of 31 March, the estimated number of missing or murdered aboriginal women in Canada since 1970 was 520. Of that total, 347, or 67 per cent, had been murdered, and 126 were still missing. Forty-three per cent of the cases, or 233 women, had been missing since 2000; 150 of the 346 murder cases remained unsolved. More than half of the missing women were under the age of 30 at the time of their disappearances.
She said there was a critical need for a national plan of action to stop all forms of violence against indigenous women and girls, regardless of where they lived. Such a plan must include provisions to ensure collection and dissemination of information on the identity of indigenous victims of crime and perpetrators of crime, clear protocols and guidelines to ensure effective and appropriate response by the police and the justice system, and measures to address discrimination, poverty and low socio-economic status. A statement supporting that call had been issued at the Third Indigenous Leaders Summit of the Americas, held in February. She called on the Government of Canada to adopt a comprehensive national plan of action and provide better guidance and accountability for police, consistent and thorough collection of statistical data, and improved measures to close the gap in the standard of living between indigenous women and others in Canadian society.
JENNIFER AWINGAN, on behalf of the Global Women’s Caucus and indigenous organizations of Asia, the Americas, the Pacific, Africa and the Caribbean, expressed concern over the situation of indigenous women and children who had been forced to migrate due to State violence against them. She said that they had often been forced into urban areas, which had often made them even more vulnerable to violence. She welcomed the Permanent Forum’s recommendation to compile and disaggregate data on indigenous women’s issues. She called on it to recommend that States and United Nations agencies, when collecting data and conducting workshops, consider the impact of armed conflict, military occupation and military activity on indigenous women.
KATHLEEN MCHUGH, Assembly of First Nations, strongly opposed legislation dealing with matrimonially-willed properties in Canada and urged that it not be sent for further consideration in legislative committee. Any proposed legislation affecting First Nations must be done in full consultation with the group. The bill did not have her organization’s free prior and informed consent, and she asked Canada to reconsider moving forward on any initiative that did not have such consent. Moreover, indigenous women’s rights must be promoted, protected and broadened.
Taking up the implementation of the Declaration’s article 42, she emphasized support for recommendations made in paragraph 64, notably for establishing a national dialogue with indigenous peoples on human rights. First Nations also supported recommendations in paragraph 65. In the implementation of article 42, she recommended that the Forum adopt and apply gender-balanced analyses to promote full respect for the Declaration. She also urged the Secretary-General to support and promote special budgeting consideration for gender, women and youth. Both were critical to ensuring women’s vital expertise in the Declaration’s application.
DENIS VOLLANT, Innu Nation, said the Forum should consider the Innu as human beings. Innu meant human being in his native language. Forestry and other industries that had entered Innu lands had devastated and threatened the Innu way of life. Canada’s Prime Minister had publicly apologized to the indigenous people of the country, but he had still not signed the Declaration. Indigenous people still had problems educating their children because of scant funding. That backlog in development directly affected their lives. There must be funding for a symposium on education, as only through education could indigenous people stand on their own two feet.
NAIT SID KAMIRA, Collectif des femmes du Printemps noir de Kabylie, said women in her region were “doubly repressed” in that they had to secure their legitimate rights in a predominantly Muslim culture.
- - -
‘WE IGNORE INDIGENOUS PEOPLES AT OUR PERIL’, SAYS DEPUTY SECRETARY-GENERAL, AS PERMANENT FORUM OPENS EIGHTH ANNUAL SESSION AMID ‘SWARM OF CRISES’
The Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues this morning opened its eighth annual session aimed at finding ways to further implement the landmark 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, which gained momentum last month when the Australian Government officially endorsed the accord after previously voting against it.
The Forum’s two-week session, in which some 2,000 representatives of indigenous groups, as well as representatives of Government, civil society, academia, the United Nations and other intergovernmental organizations were expected to participate, would also look at the relationship between indigenous peoples and industrial corporations, the need to promote corporation social responsibility, climate change, the Arctic region and land tenure.
In an opening address, United Nations Deputy Secretary-General Asha-Rose Migiro said the Forum was meeting at a crucial time, as the world grappled with a “swarm of crises”, including intensified hunger, poverty, global warming and security threats. Indigenous peoples had a record of resilience in the face of great adversity, but they still suffered from prejudice and marginalization. Indigenous women were brutalized by violence. Powerful forces continued to take land from indigenous peoples, denigrate their cultures and directly attack their lives. Such acts violated every principle enshrined in the Declaration and offended the conscience of humanity.
The Forum had resulted from a decades-long effort to put indigenous peoples’ concerns on the global agenda, she said. A Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous people was making heard the voices of indigenous survivors of human rights violations and was working with Governments to improve indigenous people’s lives. United Nations agencies and other intergovernmental organizations had adopted policies on indigenous issues and were doing more to improve action on the ground. At the same time, indigenous peoples had greatly impacted the United Nations work, contributing to the Forum on Forests and the Commission on Sustainable Development.
Still, delegates must do more than just raise indigenous peoples’ living standards. They must also heed their warning and seek their counsel in such shared objectives as sustainable development, which had been a priority for the indigenous world long before it became an international buzz word. Too often that wisdom and traditional knowledge was overlooked or stolen, and that must change. “We ignore indigenous peoples at our peril. But if we listen to them, society as a whole will benefit,” she said. That meant bringing their contributions to the table in international negotiations, notably those leading up to the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen in December.
Newly elected session Chairperson, Victoria Tauli-Corpuz of the Philippines agreed, stressing the need to look at how indigenous people -- who had consistently criticized the unsustainable policies of deregulation, liberalization and privatization that had caused the global economic recession -- could in fact help solve those economic woes. The Indigenous Peoples’ Global Summit on Climate Change, held in April in Alaska, had recommended that decision-making bodies of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change create formal structures to fully bring indigenous people into discussions and policymaking, as well as organize technical briefings in which indigenous peoples could share their traditional knowledge and its relation to climate change.
Governments, United Nations agencies, international institutions and the private sector must also change their approach by increasingly mainstreaming indigenous peoples’ issues into their work, respecting indigenous peoples’ right to free, prior and informed consent, and increasing their participation in programme and policy design, implementation and monitoring, she said. Too often there was a lack of awareness and understanding that current formulas could not be applied to indigenous peoples, who had a right to pursue their own economic, social and cultural development, in accordance with local cultures, identities, traditional knowledge and livelihoods.
Ms. Tauli-Corpuz lauded Australia’s Government for endorsing the landmark United Nations Declaration and Colombia’s Government for supporting it during last month’s Durban Review Conference on racism and racial discrimination. She expressed hope that those pronouncements would lead to better protection of and respect for indigenous peoples’ rights in both countries. At the same time, she called on the Forum to work in partnership with United Nations agencies and programmes, drawing on each other’s strengths, to ensure that the rights of indigenous people were protected. “Always keep in mind that we are talking here as partners, and not as protagonists. The odds we face in getting our rights respected and our self-determined development operationalized are many,” she said.
Rachel Mayanja, Assistant Secretary-General of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs, said United Nations agencies were in fact responding well to the Forum’s recommendations on economic and social development. But follow-up to the recommendations was difficult, due to a lack of information from many Governments, particularly on the state of human development of indigenous peoples. Indigenous peoples grappled with extreme poverty, high infant and maternal mortality, as well as land rights and land ownership disputes. Human Development Reports should highlight their plight in order to identify those and other challenges to development. Future reports, she said, should include a section on the poorest-performing provinces or subregions and present disaggregated data to identify populations that were clear outliers of human progress. Implementing the Forum’s recommendations required a long-term approach, and good practices should be compiled and disseminated.
General Assembly President Miguel d’Escoto Brockmann also lauded Australia’s recent endorsement of the 2007 Declaration, and expressed optimism about developments in Latin America, where Bolivia had adopted the accord as national law. Partnerships to fully and effectively implement it were crucial. He also pointed to the Assembly’s recent adoption of a resolution on indigenous issues, which called for a mid-term assessment report of the Second International Decade of the World’s Indigenous People. Indigenous peoples continued to face marginalization, extreme poverty and other human rights violations that threatened their ways of life and, in some cases, survival. It was a “bitter irony” that while indigenous people did the most to protect Earth from “rapacious” agro-industrialists, they were most hurt by the global economic crisis. That injustice underscored the need to urgently implement the Declaration and goals of the Second Decade.
In keeping with tradition, the session was opened by an invocation, from Tododaho Sid Hill, Chief of the Onondaga Nation. Taking the floor next, a representative of the Assembly of First Nations Women’s Council led delegates in a ceremonial song that honoured women as life-givers, providers, mothers, daughters, grandmothers and aunties.
During the meeting, the Forum adopted the agenda for the session and elected by acclamation Michael Dodson (Australia) as Rapporteur, and Tonya Gonnella Frichner (United States), Margaret Lokawua (Uganda), Elisa Canqui Mollo (Bolivia) and Pavel Sulyandziga (Russian Federation) as Vice Chairpersons.
Also speaking today were State members represented by observers from Germany, Brazil (also on behalf of the Brazilian National Foundation for Indigenous Issues), Chile, Ecuador, Canada and Colombia.
Speaking on behalf of United Nations specialized agencies and other intergovernmental organizations was a representative of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), and a delegate speaking on behalf of the Secretary-General’s Special Representative on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises.
Also delivering statements were members of the following caucuses and umbrella organizations: Global Indigenous Peoples’ Caucus, African Caucus, New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council and Global Indigenous Women’s Caucus.
Other statements were made on behalf of the Chief Deskaheh of the Haudenosaunee, and by both a professor at the Universidad Mayor de San Andrés (UMSA) and a human rights and administration of justice activist from Spain.
The Chairperson introduced the Report of the international expert group meeting on extractive industries, indigenous peoples’ rights and corporate responsibility (document E/C.19/2009/CRP.8).
The Forum member from Bolivia presented a paper entitled “Impact of Corporations on the Lives and Territories of Indigenous Peoples” (document E/C.19/2009/CRP.11), while the Forum member from the Russian Federation spoke.
The Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues will reconvene at 10 a.m. Tuesday, 19 May, to continue its eighth annual session.
Background
The Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues opened today its eighth annual two-week session in which some 2,000 representatives of indigenous groups were expected to discuss ways to further implement the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which gained momentum last month when Australia officially endorsed the accord after previously having voted against it. Other issues to be taken up included the relationship between indigenous peoples and industrial corporations, climate change, the Arctic region and land tenure.
The Permanent Forum was established by the Economic and Social Council in 2000 to discuss indigenous issues relating to economic and social development, the environment, education, health and human rights. It is composed of 16 independent experts functioning in their personal capacities; eight are nominated by Governments and eight directly by indigenous organizations in their regions. (For additional information on the current session, see Press Release HR/4979.)
Documents
Before the Forum were the session’s agenda (document E/C.19/2009/1), proposed organization of work (document E/C.19/2009/L.1), and several documents related to indigenous peoples’ concerns, including a concept note submitted by the Permanent Forum Special Rapporteurs on the extent to which climate change policies and projects adhere to the standards set forth in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People (document E/C.19/2009/5); and a number of analyses prepared by the secretariat of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues: on economic and social development (document E/C.19/2009/7); indigenous women (document E/C.19/2009/8); and the Second International Decade of the World’s Indigenous Peoples (document E/C.19/2009/9).
Also before the Committee was a note by the secretariat of compiled Reports received from the United Nations system and other intergovernmental organizations (document E/C.19/2009/10), including those of the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC); secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, United Nations Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR); International Organization for Migration (IOM); United Nations Department of Public Information; United Nations Department of Political Affairs; World Food Programme (WFP); United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-Habitat); United Nations Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM); International Labour Organization (ILO); and Inter-American Development Bank.
Opening of Session
The opening proceedings of the Forum were presided over by Rachel Mayanja, Assistant Secretary-General of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs.
According to tradition, the session opened with expressions of gratitude to nature from TODODAHO SID HILL, Chief of the Onondaga Nation. He first gave thanks to the Mother Earth. Duties were also given to berries and trees. The maple tree was the leader of the trees and he asked all to put their minds together as one to give thanks. The leader of the berries was the strawberry that helped all to be at peace. Next, he gave thanks to the deer, leader of the animals that gave themselves for humankind, and then to the eagle, leader of the birds and the “winged ones”. He gave great and respectful thanks to the fresh water that helped Mother Earth carry out her duties. Foods replenished thoughts and minds and he asked all to “roll up their thoughts as one” in thanks. As for the gentle winds that strengthened the roots of all that was planted, he gave thanks to them for helping to “keep our minds straight”. Thunders replenished the water and he thanked them for carrying out their duties. Directing his thoughts to the sky, he thanked the sun for warming the Earth, the moon for moistening the Earth and the stars for helping the moon. He finally gave great thanks to the Creator who intended for humans to love one another in peace.
Taking the floor next, a representative of the Assembly of First Nations Women’s Council led delegates in a ceremonial song that honoured women as life-givers, providers, mothers, daughters, grandmothers and aunties. (A circle of women formed around the parameter of the room).
Introductory Statements
General Assembly President MIGUEL D’ESCOTO BROCKMANN, of Nicaragua, recalled that on 13 September 2007, the General Assembly overwhelmingly adopted the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, saying that the challenge now was to fully and effectively implement that accord. “Partnerships are crucial to achieve this objective,” he asserted.
In that regard, he welcomed Australia’s recent endorsement of the Declaration. He also expressed optimism about developments in Latin America, where Bolivia had adopted the Declaration as national law. The Forum’s emphasis on accountability and its decision to devote the eighth session to the follow-up of its recommendations in three of its mandated areas was highly significant. He hoped that analysis of those recommendations -- and the in-depth dialogue with six United Nations agencies -- would strengthen partnerships. Indeed, the goals of the Second Decade of the World’s Indigenous People included the promotion of partnerships, and enhancement of monitoring mechanisms and accountability.
He also discussed the Assembly’s recent adoption of a resolution on indigenous issues, which called for a midterm assessment report of the Second Decade. Despite progress, indigenous peoples continued to face marginalization, extreme poverty and other human rights violations that threatened their ways of life and, in some cases, survival. The global economic crisis would have a further negative impact on them, and it was a “bitter irony” that those doing the most to protect Earth from “rapacious” agro-industrialists were most hurt by the crisis. That injustice underlined the urgency of action needed to implement the Declaration and goals of the Second Decade.
In that context, he drew attention to the 1-3 June summit, which would bring together leaders from 192 Member States to address the global and economic crisis and its impact on development. It was deeply relevant to indigenous peoples around the world who were struggling to have their voices heard. He closed by commending participants for their commitment to indigenous peoples’ rights. “In this time of broken promises and eroded trust, it is truly significant that you have placed both hope and trust in this United Nations Forum,” he said.
Following her election, by acclamation, as session Chairperson, VICTORIA TAULI-CORPUZ said the challenge today was to have a more in-depth understanding of the global economic recession and how it was affecting indigenous people worldwide. It was necessary to explore how indigenous people could help solve the crisis, even though they had not caused it. It was timely and highly relevant that this year’s Forum would review implementation of its recommendations on economic and social development, indigenous women and the Second International Decade of the World’s Indigenous People. Those recommendations called on Governments, United Nations agencies, international institutions and the private sector to change their approach to the indigenous world by increasingly mainstreaming indigenous peoples’ issues into their work, respecting indigenous peoples’ right to free, prior and informed consent, recognizing their collective rights, and increasing their participation in programme and policy design, implementation and monitoring.
She said there was often a lack of awareness and understanding that current programme and policy formulas could not be applied to indigenous peoples. Indeed, they had a right to pursue their own economic, social and cultural development, in accordance with their cultures, identities, traditional knowledge and livelihoods. That required their effective, meaningful participation in decision-making bodies at all levels, and equal partnerships with the State and private sector. “Racism and discrimination against indigenous peoples is still very much alive,” she said, stressing that the 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples should apply to indigenous peoples’ particular historical context and present circumstances to combat racism. The United Nations was increasing its attention to indigenous women’s issues. In March 2005, the Commission on the Status of Women adopted its first ever resolution on indigenous women. Indigenous women should be protected at all times and by all provisions of the Declaration.
Article 22 of the Declaration called for particular attention to the rights and special needs of indigenous peoples, and it called upon States to take steps to ensure that indigenous women enjoyed full protection and guarantees against all forms of violence and discrimination, she said. Violence against indigenous women was a daily reality in many countries and its elimination must be an indicator for measuring progress in implementing the Declaration. She congratulated Australia’s Government for endorsing the Declaration on 3 April and Colombia’s Government for supporting it on 21 April during the Durban Review Conference. She expressed hope that those pronouncements would lead to better protection of and respect for indigenous peoples’ rights in both countries.
Last year, the Forum had agreed to a new multi-year programme, in which one year would be dedicated to review and the following to policy, she noted. This year, the Forum would review implementation of recommendations and conduct in-depth dialogues with the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) and the Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Those dialogues would give indigenous people, Forum members and Governments a chance to better understand the challenges and opportunities faced by those six United Nations entities and the progress they had made to carry out their respective mandates on indigenous issues.
“I urge you to be critical, but to do this in a very constructive manner so that we can help strengthen each other’s work for the sake of indigenous people,” she said. “Always keep in mind that we are talking here as partners, not as protagonists. The odds we face in getting our rights respected and our self-determined development operationalized are many. So our approach should be geared towards strengthening partnerships so that we can consolidate our strength and gains to confront these odds.”
This year’s Forum would also include a regional focus on indigenous peoples in the Arctic region, with a 21 May discussion on the subject, she continued. Today, there would be a discussion on corporations and indigenous peoples, and next Wednesday there would be a discussion on the serious impact of the global economic and financial crisis on indigenous peoples. The crisis was caused by policies of deregulation, liberalization and privatization -- the main features of the dominant, globalized economic model consistently criticized by indigenous people for breeding further inequalities and being unsustainable. During the International Expert Group Meeting on Extractive Industries, Indigenous Peoples’ Rights and Corporate Social Responsibility, held in March in the Philippines, indigenous representatives from affected communities noted that, although corporations were now more willing to consult with indigenous peoples about their human rights and economic development issues, free, prior and informed consent was still not respected.
She said that the lack of full disclosure of information on environmental, social, cultural and human rights was a major problem. Corporations, in collusion with Government authorities, often selected indigenous individuals or specific communities as negotiation partners without ensuring that they in fact represented their respective communities or the affected area. That divided indigenous peoples within their communities. During the Expert Group Meeting, participants had also expressed frustration that extractive industries often treated benefit-sharing or social programmes as charity, rather than as a human rights issue.
The Indigenous Peoples’ Global Summit on Climate Change, held in April in Alaska, had made several recommendations, such as calling on the decision-making bodies of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change to create formal structures and mechanisms for the full, effective participation of indigenous peoples and to recognize and respect the climate change Declaration in climate change decisions, policies and programmes, she said. The Summit also recommended that the Convention organize technical briefing sessions by indigenous peoples on traditional knowledge and climate change, hire an indigenous focal point for its secretariat, and appoint an indigenous peoples’ representative in funding mechanisms. It also recommended that the Convention provide financial and technical support to bolster those efforts.
She noted that, in April, the General Assembly had adopted a unanimous resolution designating 22 April as International Mother Earth Day. The Forum had conducted a mission from 25 April to 6 May to the Chaco Region of Bolivia and Paraguay to study the situation there of forced labour and semi-slavery of the Guarani and other indigenous peoples. It had met with the victims of forced labour and servitude, members of the Cattle Ranchers Association, various Government officials, representatives of non-governmental organizations and senior United Nations staff. The Forum’s report and recommendations on how to strengthen the capacities of the Governments of Bolivia and Paraguay to comply with their obligations under international human rights law would be presented next week to the relevant Government and intergovernmental bodies.
United Nations Deputy Secretary-General ASHA-ROSE MIGIRO said the Forum’s meeting had arrived at a crucial time: the world was coping with a “swarm of crises”, including intensified hunger, poverty, global warming and security threats. But indigenous peoples had a record of resilience, and the Forum had resulted from a decades-long effort to put their concerns on the global agenda. That drive had culminated in 2007 with the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Today, there was a Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous people, and an Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples at the Human Rights Council, she explained. The Special Rapporteur was making heard the voices of indigenous survivors of human rights violations and, thanks to that work, more Governments had been engaged in dialogue to help improve indigenous people’s lives.
She said the United Nations itself was increasing efforts to be more engaged on indigenous issues. United Nations agencies and other intergovernmental organizations had adopted policies on indigenous issues and were doing more to improve their action on the ground. She looked forward to seeing the vision of a “One UN” become a reality in that work. At the same time, indigenous peoples had used their voices to greatly impact the United Nations work, having contributed to the Forum on Forests and the Commission on Sustainable Development, and States had taken the step of endorsing the Declaration.
She said that, while those were important achievements, they were not enough, as indigenous peoples around the world still suffered from prejudice and marginalization. Indigenous women were brutalized by violence. Powerful forces continued to take land from indigenous peoples, denigrate their cultures and directly attack their lives. Such acts violated every principle enshrined in the Declaration and offended the conscience of humanity.
In that context, she urged delegates to do more than just raise living standards for indigenous peoples. “We must listen to their voices, heed their warnings and seek their contributions to achieving our shared objectives,” she stressed. They had been living up to the principle of sustainable development long before it had become an international buzz word. But too often, their wisdom and traditional knowledge was overlooked or -- worse -- stolen. That must change.
“We ignore indigenous peoples at our peril. But if we listen to them, society as a whole will benefit,” she said. That meant bringing their contributions to the table in international negotiations, notably those leading up to the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen in December.
Looking across the room, she saw a beautiful tapestry of diversity stitched together with a common purpose: protecting our planet and its most vulnerable cultures and peoples. By uniting different strengths to reach common goals, delegates could help address the many threats facing humanity for the sake of present and future generations.
RACHEL MAYANJA, Assistant Secretary-General, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, said significant inputs received for the eighth session included information from 12 Governments -- a record number -- as well as 24 documents from United Nations and other intergovernmental organizations, 12 indigenous peoples’ organizations and papers by Forum experts.
Highlighting various conclusions and recommendations from those reports, she said that, in the area of economic and social development, United Nations agencies had responded well to the Forum’s recommendations. The Forum should explore a methodology to encourage United Nations country teams to participate in the follow-up process. In terms of Governments, the follow-up process was more difficult due to a lack of information from many States, and indigenous peoples’ groups should be encouraged to participate more actively in that process at local, national and international levels. Implementation of the recommendations required a long-term approach, and she recommended that good practices be compiled and disseminated.
Pointing to another insight, she said desk reviews of one regional and nine Human Development Reports conducted this year had shown that, except for one country, there was very little information on the state of human development of indigenous peoples. None of the reports provided disaggregated data in the context of the Millennium Development Goals. In the case of the African countries and one Asian nation, indigenous peoples were not explicitly mentioned, except as part of the collective poor. Extreme poverty and high incidence of infant and maternal mortality were among the most pressing problems, while land rights and land ownership disputes were also a major concern.
She said Human Development Reports should highlight the plight of indigenous peoples, as their inclusion was imperative to, among other reasons, identify development challenges and their role in achieving the Goals. Future reports should include a section on the poorest-performing provinces or subregions and present disaggregated data to identify populations that were clear outliers of human progress.
Turning to the Forum’s recommendations on indigenous women, she said various programmes had been undertaken, but implementation of 46 per cent of relevant recommendations had not been initiated. Since most information received by the Forum addressed situations in Central and South America and the Caribbean, the Forum should encourage reporting regarding other regions to better assess the state of implementation. Indigenous women’s organizations should be invited to engage in their own monitoring of the Forum’s recommendations.
As for the Second International Decade, she said the secretariat had not received enough responses to ascertain all progress made, and she welcomed the General Assembly’s adoption of resolution A/Resolution/61 in December 2008 that requested the Secretary-General to submit a mid-Decade review in 2010. While that review would provide a chance to renew commitment to the Decade, two clear broad outcomes had been catalysed during its first years: an increased awareness of indigenous issues and adoption of the indigenous peoples Declaration.
At this important juncture, she recommended that States, indigenous peoples and the United Nations, among other actors, undertake initiatives inspired by the Decade’s goal, objectives and Programme of Action, particularly in support of the Trust Fund on Indigenous Issues. She also recommended enhanced reporting by all concerned on progress in the Decade’s implementation, including by indigenous peoples and their organizations. It would be through continuous commitment that the progress on indigenous issues would be made.
KIM MORF, great granddaughter of Levi General, Chief Deskaheh of the Haudenosaunee, said that in 1923 her great grandfather had left Canada to seek support from the League of Nations for the aboriginal rights of his people. The Haudenosaunee had refrained from engaging in war because they wanted to rely on peaceful policies, such as those echoed in the League of Nations and United Nations covenants. Chief Deskaheh was determined to preserve the treaty rights of the Haudenosaunee and he believed that the League of Nations was the venue to give voice to the world’s smaller nations. She thanked Estonia, Ireland, Panama, Iran and the Netherlands for supporting her great grandfather’s quest for peace and recognition of indigenous political independence. During his lifetime, Chief Deskaheh had encouraged all indigenous communities to be heard and to teach their sons and daughters to do the same. He believed that Mother Earth had no borders and that everyone was here to protect and respect the land and all its occupants.
Ms. Morf said she wanted to continue her great grandfather’s work by promoting indigenous rights through the United Nations. There were more than 360 million indigenous people worldwide. She expressed hope that indigenous peoples’ groups would continue to respect each other’s differences and unite for the greatest cause on Earth, which was peace. Indigenous people once had no voice. Now they did have a voice. She implored all, as they gathered at the United Nations to discuss such important issues as economic and social development, indigenous women, the Artic, the Declaration, and human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous peoples, to echo their elders’ call and hope for peace.
Presentation, Discussion of Reports
ELISA CANQUI MOLLO, Forum member from Bolivia, presented a paper entitled “Impact of Corporations on the Lives and Territories of Indigenous Peoples” (document E/C.19/2009/CRP.11). She described various policies -- notably in Chile and the Russian Federation -- that discriminated against the entrenched rights of indigenous peoples. Mining operations destroyed cultural sites. Petroleum operations, including well drilling, led to the construction of camps, access roads and railways that cut off natural river courses and interfered with natural animal habitats. They changed cultural aspects and negatively impacted food security. In the Russian Federation, indigenous peoples had only two options: join the companies at the bottom rung or leave their territories.
She said the use and exploitation of traditional knowledge was seen by pharmaceutical and cosmetic companies that dared to patent products as if they were their own. Most worrisome was that Governments said indigenous peoples were being recognized in public policies -- but for indigenous peoples, such relationships meant an end to their working life; presence of disease, including cancer; lack of a fair wage; and loss of hunting and fishing corridors. Those were only some of the consequences. Indigenous peoples were victims of development, more so than beneficiaries, and the Forum must be a space for finding long-term solutions. Many negotiations had taken place behind the backs of indigenous peoples and traditional knowledge was exploited, which was why international cooperation was so needed. “Never again” should a corporation start operations in indigenous territories without the consent of indigenous peoples.
CARLOS MAMANI CONDORI, an Aymara activist and historian from Bolivia and a Professor of Anthropology and Archaeology of the Universidad Mayor de San Andrés (UMSA) in La Paz, Bolivia, said indigenous peoples in the Andean region were grappling with the presence of extractive industries on their land. Multinational companies were working within the framework of a long-standing colonial relationship with Governments. Many States in the region were signatories to International Labour Organization Convention No. 169 and supported the Declaration. But States were ill-informed about the rights of indigenous people enshrined in that Declaration. In the Andes, there was no Government presence to protect indigenous peoples. The impact of international corporations operating in the extractive industries was a new form of genocide. It had led to a deterioration of indigenous peoples’ living conditions because it limited their economic livelihood without providing any alternative.
He said that international companies competed with indigenous people for natural resources. Mining companies either interfered with or simply cut off indigenous peoples’ access to grazing land, drinking water and irrigation supply. They used such tactics as intimidation, torture, kidnapping, forced disappearances and even murder. Anti-activism laws existed to silence indigenous peoples. All of that led to the deterioration of indigenous peoples’ traditions, values, culture and language. The corporations’ activities had resulted in the removal of sacred lands, religious sites and cemeteries, leading to violence, alcoholism, and destruction of the family. Corporations also exploited internal divisions among indigenous communities and organizations to further their own interests. With some exceptions, corporate social responsibility was merely a public relations exercise. Corporations set up funds that were managed by so-called corporate social responsibility foundations. Those foundations were set up by the corporations; they were never managed by indigenous peoples’ organizations. There was a lack of standards for protecting indigenous peoples’ rights, or the standards were not truly applied or applied across the board. He called for a regulatory overhaul, in order to monitor transnational corporations’ activities.
PAVEL SULYANDZIGA, Forum member from the Russian Federation, underscored the interrelationship between indigenous peoples and natural resource companies, particularly in oil and gas, gold and diamonds. The Russian Federation was working on standards between indigenous peoples and corporations. Some companies had even signed agreements to respect indigenous peoples’ rights, in line with national and international standards. Also, global financial corporations had pushed companies to work with indigenous peoples. For example, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development’s policy included a provision on free, prior and informed consent whose language was lifted from the indigenous peoples’ Declaration. Natural resource companies that came to the Russian Federation had Western management, allowing indigenous peoples to hold negotiations in a dignified manner.
At the same time, he said, many corporations that acknowledged indigenous rights in one region behaved differently in others. Without pressure, they would not move towards protecting indigenous peoples’ rights. Private fishing and hunting companies were edging indigenous peoples off their traditional areas. In Kamchatka, for example, a village’s river had been given over to a fishing entity, and its community was being asked to fish in another river. Clearly, people would not move away from their lands, but they were being compelled to act against the law. He hoped the Forum would develop recommendations that addressed such issues.
Ms. TAULI-CORPUZ then introduced the Report of the international expert group meeting on extractive industries, indigenous peoples’ rights and corporate responsibility (document E/C.19/2009/CRP.8), highlighting its major themes, findings, contributors and recommendations. The report noted that, according to the Declaration, extractive industries must not operate on indigenous lands or territories without obtaining the free, prior and informed consent of relevant and indigenous communities. That consent was a right, and not an obligation. It was, therefore, up to indigenous communities themselves to determine whether they would engage in discussions or not. Participants of that meeting had expressed concern that although corporations were now more flexible in terms of benefit-sharing, they had not shown any increased interest in acknowledging the sovereignty or traditional decision-making of indigenous peoples, their rights to their territories or redressing past human rights abuses.
She said participants had also stressed the need for transparency on the part of extractive industries. The Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative focused on financial transparency, but it did not focus on environmental, social, cultural and economic impacts of extractive industries on indigenous peoples. The report also found that extractive industries generally failed to comply with national laws that protected indigenous peoples’ rights and were often seen as complicit in formulating policies and laws that diminished indigenous peoples’ rights. There was a misconception that indigenous peoples in developed States shared in the wealth of those States. Further, United Nations agencies generally offered technical assistance to Governments and rarely to indigenous communities and organizations. The report recommended that United Nations agencies expand their technical aid to indigenous groups and that the United Nations set up a mechanism to support indigenous communities in their negotiations.
Noting that indigenous peoples often lacked access to domestic courts, participants also called for a new formal process, such as an ombudsman or an international court system specifically focused on that issue, she said. Further, the report recommended that extractive industries’ corporations set insurance levels and establish insurance funds in agreement with indigenous peoples and at a level appropriate for the risks involved. It also called on corporations to be accountable to indigenous peoples for damages resulting from past extractive industries that affected indigenous lands and livelihoods and to provide compensation and restitution. It called on corporations to ensure respect for free, prior and informed consent, including full transparency in all aspects of their operations, and to stop dividing communities to obtain that consent.
MIKI’ALA CATALFANO, Global Indigenous Peoples’ Caucus, discussing the follow-up to the Forum’s recommendations on economic and social development, said she supported reducing the number of recommendations. Regarding agenda item 3, on the Second International Decade of World’s Indigenous Peoples, she urged the Forum to support the Global Indigenous STOP TB Strategic Plan. The rights affirmed in the Declaration should be applied as the operative framework for carrying out the Programme of Action for the Second International Decade. She also urged the Forum to call on the General Assembly to declare 2010 the Year of Food Sovereignty.
In the area of human rights, she urged the Forum to call on States parties to the Convention on the Rights of the Child to apply that instrument’s general comment 11 (2009). The Human Rights Council should authorize and request the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples to conduct a study on indigenous peoples’ right to health. Also, she called on the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous peoples to investigate the human rights impacts of development projects. Strongly endorsing recommendations made to the fifteenth conference of States parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), she also asked the Forum to urge States to present their plans of action for the Declaration’s full implementation, its monitoring and evaluation.
MARCIO AUGUSTO FREITAS DE MEIRA, President of the Brazilian National Foundation for Indigenous Issues, recalled that, in 2003, Brazil’s President had announced that the goal of the Foundation was to strengthen dialogue between the State and indigenous peoples concerning matters related to ILO Convention No. 169 and the Declaration. The March 2009 decision of the Brazilian Supreme Court concluded that the issue of compatibility of sovereign responsibility and indigenous peoples’ right to land was a priority. Two years earlier, Brazil’s President had set up a National Commission on Indigenous Issues. Brazil’s Constitution stated that indigenous people had the right to go to court to create associations for indigenous people, to set up their own business relationships and to run for public office. Protection of indigenous people was a duty of the State because indigenous people were culturally different. Their rights must be protected, but that did not mean that the State should guide indigenous peoples in an authoritative manner.
He said that Brazil’s Constitution also gave indigenous people the right to education in their native tongue. The question now was how to define criteria for distributing social benefits to indigenous people to ensure that they received social allowances. Indigenous people by nature were not poor. Rather, outside factors had put them in economically difficult circumstances. It was also necessary to promote social inclusion of indigenous people. But it was also important to remember that indigenous people had their own way of socially organizing themselves, in accordance with nature. The important thing was to make sure that the new social forms were based on indigenous peoples’ customs, which were different from those of non-indigenous peoples. Also, citizenship programmes for indigenous peoples must be expanded.
DOUGLAS NAKASHIMA, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), discussed the annual meeting of the United Nations Inter-Agency Support Group on Indigenous Peoples’ Issues, held at UNESCO headquarters in September 2008. Some 23 agencies and programmes had participated in the event. Pairing the support group meeting with an official visit of the Forum to the host agency reinforced ties between the agencies in their pursuit of joint work.
Noting that the theme “Indigenous Peoples: Development with Culture and Identity” would be the focus at the Forum’s ninth session, he said the support group recognized that the concept of “development with culture and identity” called for a major rethinking of mainstream development paradigms. There was a need for a deeper understanding of local realities by all stakeholders, and indigenous peoples needed to assume an active role that moved beyond participation to direct representation in decision-making mechanisms. The group had also agreed to work on a joint reflection paper to be presented at the ninth Forum in 2010.
He said the support group reaffirmed its commitment to implement the general plan of action for the rollout of United Nations development guidelines on indigenous peoples’ issues, and agreed to reinforce capacity-building measures at the country level. It also agreed to explore establishing support groups at the regional level to enhance coordination of United Nations agencies in their promotion of indigenous issues. Regarding the Second International Decade, the support group suggested using the Declaration’s adoption as an opportunity to rejuvenate the Decade, take stock of United Nations agencies’ progress and examine institutional change at the country level.
BARTOLOME CLAVERO SALVADOR, a human rights and administration of justice activist from Spain, said in the case of the presence of extractive industries in Brazil, indigenous people there did not have the right to own their property. Rather, they had the right to the land as a resource. The current status of the rights for indigenous people in Brazil was at loggerheads with the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and ILO Convention No. 169. All indigenous peoples, not just certain representatives, should be consulted. There was a perception that Brazil’s Government had changed laws in order to defend major industry landholdings. Peru’s Government was subjecting indigenous areas to military occupation in order to silence indigenous community opponents of extractive industries. There were some areas in the region that raised serious concern.
MARTIN NEY ( Germany) said respect for indigenous peoples’ rights ranked among his country’s major goals. The German Development Corporation reinforced indigenous peoples’ networks at national and cross-border levels. Moreover, Germany would contribute $50,000 to the Indigenous Trust Fund. In 2006, the Government had adopted a strategy paper on cooperation with indigenous peoples in Latin America and the Caribbean, adopting a two-pronged approach to strengthening rights of peoples in Guatemala, for example. Respect for the rights and needs of indigenous peoples was mainstreamed into all development activities in Latin America.
Turning to climate change, he said traditional territories were vital for all indigenous peoples, and those were threatened by climate change. Germany strongly supported Latin American indigenous peoples’ participation in 2008 in the Convention on Biodiversity meeting and in the Framework Convention on Climate Change. On the preservation and revival of indigenous languages, Germany supported the Development Fund for Indigenous Peoples. He described one programme involving the creation of indigenous intercultural universities, the goal of which was to train Governments on intercultural issues. On indigenous women’s rights, he said gender equality and women’s empowerment were among Germany’s goals.
Mr. FREITAS ( Brazil) said his Government was working to address the demarcation of indigenous peoples’ territories in Brazil. He was open to discussing the points that had been raised in today’s discussion. The Brazilian Government was concerned about issues of indigenous people in the Amazon and it had made efforts to cooperate with the Government of Peru in that regard. Indigenous peoples’ territories incorporated 25 per cent of the Amazon. Protecting their rights was very important.
MARY SIMAT of the African Caucus described human rights abuses in the United Republic of Tanzania, Gabon and the Congo, much of which resulted in the loss of livestock by peoples evicted from their lands. Land and resources were recurring themes in indigenous peoples’ marginalization, including for the Batwa peoples. Exploration of uranium in some countries had resulted in conflicts. In Gabon, indigenous groups had been moved to villages where they lacked access to jobs and health care. As such, she urged African Governments to adopt domestic laws in line with the Declaration, and the Forum to study the effects of conflict on African indigenous peoples. Climate change endangered the natural environment and adaptation strategies were not being prioritized. She urged United Nations agencies to prioritize adaptation over mitigation.
ALVARO MARIFIN ( Chile) said that Chile passed an indigenous rights law in 1993. It had also ratified ILO Convention No. 169, and since its publication, the Government had taken the necessary measures to adapt national legislation accordingly. Since June 2008, it had created an indigenous affairs unit in each Government Ministry. It had also created strategies to include indigenous peoples’ issues into programme planning and policies, earmarked budgetary allowances for those plans, and set up an informational and consulting mechanism to address legislative and administrative concerns of indigenous peoples. Regional indigenous round tables had been set up, as well as a Parliament for Indigenous Peoples’ Participation and a National Council for Indigenous Communities.
In terms of socio-economic development for indigenous peoples, the Government was creating a rural connectivity programme; a programme for housing, potable water and rural electrification infrastructure development; and a programme for innovative rural development, he said. All those programmes involved the participation of indigenous peoples’ organizations. Under the 1993 indigenous rights law, the Government had created a precise mechanism to address land and water reclamation rights. By March, it had allowed indigenous communities to acquire and reclaim 588,483 hectares of land.
RACHEL DAVIS, who spoke on behalf of John Ruggie, the Secretary-General’s Special Representative on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, said that in 2008, the Special Representative had proposed a policy framework to advance the business and human rights agenda. It rested on three pillars, the first of which was the State duty to protect -- a principle grounded in international human rights law. While most States had adopted human rights standards, there was still considerable legal and policy incoherence at the domestic and international levels. The Special Representative had urged Governments to drive the business and human rights agenda into those areas.
She said the second pillar -- the corporate responsibility to respect rights -- was based on the near-universal recognition that companies should not infringe on the rights of others. Companies should put in place a process of ongoing “human rights due diligence” to prevent and mitigate adverse human rights impacts. The third pillar -- the rights of affected individuals and communities -- would be meaningless without access to effective remedy. For States, that meant enforcing corporate compliance with laws and standards. For companies, that meant enacting operational-level grievance mechanisms.
To operationalize the framework, the Special Representative urged a better understanding of indigenous peoples’ experiences, she said. States had duties to protect indigenous rights under regional and international human rights treaties, and he had noted guidance provided by relevant human rights bodies on how State duties could operate in the context of corporate-related abuse. Regarding the corporate responsibility to respect, he had consistently said that in projects affecting indigenous peoples, companies should consider additional standards specific to those communities. Throughout his mandate, he had sought to adopt an evidence-based consultative approach. The global community was in the early phases of adapting the human rights regime to provide more effective protection to people against corporate-related harm. The proposed framework provided a common platform for advancing the business and human rights agenda.
MARIA FERNANDA ESPINOSA ( Ecuador ) said Ecuador was committed to recognizing the rights of indigenous peoples through various policies. The September 2008 Constitution was a step forward in that regard, promoting the creation of a fair, democratic and multicultural society. Constitutionally, Ecuador was a pluri-national State. It recognized the rights of indigenous peoples in line with the Declaration and ILO Convention No. 169. National policies had recognized indigenous peoples’ territories in order to protect their ancestral homelands and biodiversity of those lands. The Government had also established 21 collective sacred rights in its new Charter. The Government was promoting the rights of indigenous peoples in the National Development Plan with the aim of strengthening equality, social cohesion and integration, as well as diverse cultural practices.
In terms of indigenous peoples’ voluntary exclusion as they related to the Yasuni-ITT project, the Sate had decided not to exploit the 920 million barrels of oil reserves in Yasuni National Park, which was one of the richest and most biologically diverse regions in the world, she said. By not exploiting that oil reserve, it was protecting the habitat and territory of the area’s indigenous people. The Government had also created a national policy and plan to protect people in voluntary isolation, investing more than $500,000 in 2008 and approximately $700,000 in 2009 to protect their lives, rights, territories and biodiversity. Efforts to ensure the well-being of indigenous people must be combated by measures to erase social exclusion. In 2007-2008, Ecuador’s social spending, including funds for indigenous communities, was higher than external debt for the first time in history.
PATRICIA LAURIE, of the New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council, said Governments had not followed the leadership of United Nations agencies. Past and current employment and enterprise development strategies did not engage indigenous Australians. They were based around mainstream ideologies for Australians, and the assumption that employment strategies were transferable to the indigenous context was misleading. It compounded indigenous peoples’ right to access parity with the rest of Australia.
She said Government policy must recognize indigenous peoples’ primary roles, particularly in wealth creation. Australian governments continued to disregard people-driven approaches to addressing indigenous disadvantage. The push for practical outcomes disrupted and undermined the exercise and enjoyment of human rights by indigenous Australians. Government policy must address social justice and reconciliation. Many States such as Australia had a history of “assimilationist” policies. She urged the Forum to encourage the Inter-Agency Support Group on Indigenous Peoples’ Issues to develop a research agenda that examined the economic and health impacts of assimilation policies. The Forum also should encourage States to recognize the need for health investment.
FRED CARON, Assistant Deputy Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs of Canada, said Canada was committed to an integrated, strategic and targeted approach to address the unacceptable socio-economic gaps of indigenous peoples there. That approach was founded on the protection and promotion of aboriginal and treaty rights in an atmosphere of reconciliation and renewed relationship. It focused on economic development; education; empowering First Nations citizens and protecting the vulnerable; resolution of land claims; and reconciliation, governance and self-government. In January, the Government had launched the Economic Action Plan of Canada, which included strategies to provide indigenous people with employment and training assistance, as well as $1.4 billion over the next two years for aboriginal-specific projects in housing, educational facilities, skills and training, health, water and wastewater systems, and child and family services.
He said Canada was helping to create conditions for responsible and sustainable developing affecting indigenous peoples in other countries. In March, the Government had announced its Corporate Social Responsibility Strategy for the Canadian extractive sector operating abroad. Economic and social development required that indigenous people had the land, resources and tools for effective governance and self-determination. The Tsawwassen First Nation treaty, the first urban treaty in British Columbia’s history, took effect on 3 April. On 18 June, the Specific Claims Tribunal Act created an independent tribunal with binding power to resolve specific land claims. Since the Government launched the Plan of Action for Drinking Water in First Nation Communities in 2006, the number of First Nation communities with high-risk water systems had been reduced by two thirds. In June 2008, Canada’s efforts to address the socio-economic needs of aboriginal Canadians had been reinforced when the Prime Minister issued an apology to the survivors of Indian Residential Schools.
CLAUDIA BLOOM ( Colombia) said her country was proud of its ethnic, linguistic and cultural diversity, and there was an institutional framework that developed policies for ethnic groups. Among various strategies, her Government continued to advance recognition of land property titles for indigenous communities, which were inalienable and not subjected to embargo. They comprised 710 indigenous reservations that covered about 32 million hectares, or almost 29 per cent of national territory.
In other areas, she said several affirmative actions had contributed to indigenous peoples’ enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights. Indigenous communities had been integrated into programmes led by the Presidential Agency for Social Action. The integrated plan to support indigenous communities living under high-risk conditions had been implemented in 12 departments. The Ministry of Education continued to promote ethnic-education policy, while the Ministry of Culture’s efforts included indigenous radio stations and cultural broadcasting on a public television channel. She reiterated Colombia’s unilateral support for the indigenous peoples Declaration and adherence to the concepts of equality, respect and diversity. She reaffirmed its commitment to deepen dialogue between State institutions and indigenous communities.
FLORINA LOPEZ, a representative of the Global Indigenous Women’s Caucus, said women were the human embodiment of Mother Earth. She reiterated women’s fundamental role in seed conservation, food production and preservation, and expressed alarm over the ongoing expropriations by seed and pharmaceutical corporations, with Government complicity, to patent seeds, genetic materials and processes to genetically manipulate plants. Indigenous women were deeply concerned that the parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity had not recognized indigenous peoples’ rights to their traditional territories, lands and waters during negotiations of an international regime of access and benefit-sharing, due to be completed by 2010. She also expressed concern over the parties’ assertion of their national sovereignty over genetic resources. Genetic modification and the potential contamination of land by genetically engineered technology was a continuation of genocide of indigenous peoples.
She recommended that all United Nations bodies and Member States report on implementation of articles 26 and 31 of the Declaration related to the protection of indigenous peoples’ rights to their land and territories. She supported the Anchorage Declaration (agreed at the Indigenous Peoples’ Global Summit on Climate Change) on 24 April, which called for phasing out fossil fuel development and a moratorium on new development on or near indigenous lands and territories. She called on all relevant United Nations bodies and agencies to end the mining and marketing of water and to recognize free access to water as a basic human right in order to preserve indigenous peoples’ cultural heritage, way of life and self-development. She requested an investigation by January on the negative impacts and effects of water appropriation on indigenous communities by multinational corporations. She strongly recommended the full and effective participation of indigenous peoples in planning and implementing all strategies and agreements related to climate change.
- - -
Widespread abuse against indigenous peoples persists, warns Migiro
18 May 2009 – Indigenous peoples around the world continue to suffer from prejudice and marginalization, Deputy Secretary-General Asha Rose-Migiro told the opening session today of the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues.
“Powerful forces continue to take land from indigenous peoples, denigrate their cultures, suppress their languages and even directly attack their very lives,” warned Ms. Migiro.
“These acts violate every principle enshrined in the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples,” she added.
Some 2,000 participants from around the world converged on UN Headquarters in New York to discuss furthering the implementation of the landmark 2007 Declaration, which gained momentum last month when Australia officially endorsed the document after being one of four countries to vote against it along with Canada, New Zealand and the United States.
The non-binding text sets out the individual and collective rights of the world’s almost 400 million indigenous peoples, as well as their rights to culture, identity, language, employment, health, education and other issues.
It also prohibits discrimination against indigenous peoples and promotes their full and effective participation in all matters that concern them, and their right to remain distinct and to pursue their own visions of economic and social development.
“The General Assembly solemnly proclaimed that the Declaration is a standard of achievement to be pursued in spirit of partnership and mutual respect,” said Ms. Migiro.
The Deputy Secretary-General stressed that just raising living standards for indigenous peoples is not enough. “Protecting indigenous communities and their wealth of wisdom will not only enhance their lives, it will serve the interest of all people concerned about a healthy future for our planet.”
She warned that the world ignores “indigenous peoples at our peril but if we listen to them society as a whole will benefit.”
Discussions at the two-week gathering will focus on the relationship between indigenous peoples and industrial corporations and the need to promote corporate social responsibility, in particular a report noting that mining for minerals, oil and gas disproportionately impacts indigenous peoples.
Other issues on the Forum’s agenda, which concludes on 29 May, include climate change, the Arctic region and land tenure.
- - -
Opening Statement by the Participants at the Global Indigenous Peoples’ Caucus meeting from May 16-17, 2009
Presented by Miki’ala Catalfano, Native Hawaiian, 7th Generation Fund
Indigenous Peoples and Nations from all regions of the world who participated in the Global Indigenous Peoples Caucus meeting for the Permanent Forum 8th session reflected on a range of serious considerations and situations presented in our meeting.
This years’ Permanent Forum session places special emphasis on implementation and detailed review of the Permanent Forum’s previous recommendations. In this regard, we urge the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues 8th Session to take note of the following critical concerns of Indigenous Peoples of the world.
Agenda Item 3. Follow-Up to the Recommendations of the Permanent Forum on (a) Economic and Social Development
1. We reaffirm support for the call to reduce the number of recommendations (E/C.19/2009/7 paragraph 56).
2. We urge the development of a mechanism to support indigenous peoples’ incorporation of distinct indicators of human development that would include legally recognized access to land and territory.
Agenda Item 3(c) Second International Decade of World’s Indigenous Peoples
1. We propose that the Permanent Forum call upon the Economic and Social Council to present to the United Nations General Assembly that the title, which currently reads “2nd International Decade of World’s Indigenous People,” be corrected to read “2nd International Decade of World’s Indigenous Peoples.”
2. We urge the Permanent Forum to join the “Global Stop TB Partnership” and to support the Global Indigenous STOP TB Strategic Plan to address the tuberculosis crisis in Indigenous communities.
3. We reiterate that the rights affirmed in the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples be applied as the operative framework and criteria for carrying out the Programme of Action for the 2nd International Decade of the World’s Indigenous Peoples, in particular its objective calling for Free, Prior and Informed consent by indigenous peoples.
4. We recommend that the Permanent Forum carry out a study assessing the implementation of the Millennium Development Goals recognizing and respecting the principles of Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, notwithstanding the global economic crisis, to be presented at its 9th session in 2010.
5. We urge the Permanent Forum to call upon the United Nations General Assembly to declare 2010 the year of Food Sovereignty with the full and effective participation of indigenous peoples.
6. We urge member states that any and all Free Trade Agreements must recognize, respect and implement mechanisms for the protection of the rights contained in the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
7. We recognize and commend Colombia and Australia for changing their positions by endorsing the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. We call upon the three remaining states that oppose, as well as those abstaining, to reverse their positions and move to endorse the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples for full consensus.
8. We urge the Permanent Forum to call upon the member states to respect the rights to land and territory for nomadic, uncontacted, and displaced indigenous peoples, as well as those indigenous peoples in voluntary isolation and those facing extinction.
9. We reiterate our call to the United Nations to create an official United Nations archive of treaties, agreements and constructive arrangements between indigenous peoples and nation states. We also urge indigenous peoples to bring all treaties to the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Peoples 9th session to begin the process of compiling the archives.
Agenda Item 4. Human Rights
1. We call upon the Permanent Forum 8th session to urge all state parties to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, as well as Indigenous Peoples, to apply the CRC General Comment #11 (2009) as a guide in implementing their obligations.
2. We call upon the Permanent Forum 8th session to endorse and adopt the attached proposed resolution that we respectfully submit [Annex 1] on the rights of the indigenous child to health and education pursuant to the resolution adopted by the UN General Assembly 63rd session March 13, 2009 [A/Res/63/241].
3. We request that the Permanent Forum 8th session recommend the United Nations Human Rights Council authorize and request the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples to conduct a study on the right to health of indigenous peoples, to be initiated at its 2nd session in August 2009.
4. Recognizing the Independent Expert on the issue of human rights obligations related to access to safe drinking water and sanitation, we urge the Permanent Forum to call upon the Human Rights Council to expand the mandate to work with the United Nations Environmental Program for an international study on water that extends beyond drinking water to include spiritual sustenance and cultural livelihoods.
5. We call upon the Special Rapporteur on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of indigenous peoples to conduct an investigation on Human Rights impacts of mega/development projects, including the desecration of sacred sites and militarization, upon the request of the affected indigenous peoples.
6. That the chewing of coca leaf be removed from the United Nations Vienna Convention against Illicit Drug Trafficking, because this is an integral part of the culture of various Indigenous Peoples and serves positive therapeutic, sacred and social functions.
7. We recommend that the Permanent Forum urge the Human Rights Council to address the Human Rights violations of Indigenous Peoples impacted by international borders and immigration laws and enforcement policies.
8. We strongly endorse the recommendations made to the upcoming United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change COP 15 and the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization in the Anchorage Declaration of April 24, 2009, along with the recommendations submitted on May 8, 2009 to the high level Stockholm Convention COP 4 by the Indigenous Peoples Caucus to increase and ensure Indigenous Peoples’ formal participation in those processes.
9. We recommend that the Permanent Forum urge member states to present their plans of action for the full implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples at each session of the UNPFII.
10. We commend the General Assembly on their declaration of April 22, 2009 as the International Day of Mother Earth. We call upon member States to begin negotiations on a Convention on the Rights of Mother Earth with the full participation of indigenous peoples.
11. We urge the Permanent Forum to call upon member States to decriminalize indigenous peoples struggling for their rights and justice and to discontinue labeling them as terrorists.
12. Finally, we endorse the Declaration and Plan of Action from the Third Indigenous Leaders Summit of the Americas held in Panama April 14 – 15, 2009, and call for their implementation. .
Madame Chair, in conclusion, we affirm that the adoption of the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples establishes a new framework of evaluation for the work of the Permanent Forum and all initiatives of the United Nations system. It is a necessary instrument to address the global crisis as a mechanism of world peace. Thank you.