news | action | information | events | contact | search | news | action | information | events | contact | search |
key indigenous australian issues
| home | news lUN: On the rights of Indigenous peoplesBy Stephanie Hedgecoke and Mahtowin Munro 30 September 2007 - After a decades-long struggle, the United Nations General Assembly on Sept. 13 approved the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Among other points, the non-binding Declaration states that Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain their cultures and remain on their land. Only four countries in the UN General Assembly—the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, all settler states—voted against the Declaration. Reaction from Indigenous peoples and their organizations around the world was mixed, but most recognized it as a partial victory resulting from a long struggle. A selection is reported on below: The International Indian Treaty Council stated: “This is the first time that Indigenous Peoples have been recognized as ‘Peoples’ without qualification in an international instrument. [It] recognizes Indigenous Peoples’ inherent rights to self-determination, traditional lands, territories and natural resources, cultures and sacred sites, means of subsistence, languages, identities as well as their traditional life ways and concepts of development based on free, prior and informed consent, among others.” The IITC noted that Indigenous representatives were not allowed to participate in the most recent negotiating process between representatives of the co-sponsoring states—in particular, Mexico, Peru, Guatemala and African states—during which there were nine negotiated text changes in the Declaration language. But, according to the IITC, the modifications “did not include any changes to key provisions upholding self-determination, land and natural resources, free prior informed consent, Treaties, and others. On that basis, and to protect those essential provisions from being undermined, most Indigenous Peoples either expressed their support for adoption of the modified text, or stated, as did IITC, that they would not oppose it under the circumstances.” IPS news service reported criticism from Indigenous leaders Manuel Castro of Ecuador and Luis Andrade of Colombia. “Twenty years of debate to produce this document, and we end up with a non-binding declaration that does not force governments to do anything; this is a disgrace,” said Castro, spokesperson for the Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities of Ecuador. “Very few Indigenous people are even aware of the existence of this document.” Andrade, president of the National Indigenous Organisation of Colombia, said that “the level of representation of most Indigenous peoples was extremely low.” He criticized Colombia’s abstention, the only one in Latin America. “The administration [of right-wing President Álvaro Uribe] threatens the right of Indigenous people and is their enemy.” Rigoberta Menchú Foundation spokesperson Elmer Erazo said the Declaration is an advance “to the extent that Indigenous people make use of it. It’s nothing to jump up and down about.” He said it is “a weapon to be used by the people.” In recent years, Indigenous struggles in the countries of Latin America have gained substantial ground, especially in Ecuador and Bolivia. Indigenous movements played a role in removing President Jamil Mahuad in Ecuador in January 2000 and President Gonzalo Sánchez de Lozada in Bolivia in October 2003. Bolivia’s first Indigenous President, Evo Morales, said he welcomed the vote. “These standards will help ensure that everyone has the same rights and that we will stop being marginalized.” Settler states vote against the Declaration All four countries that voted against the Declaration are founded on the historic and ongoing dispossession of their Indigenous peoples. Indigenous populations in these countries are the most impoverished segments of the population and are in the poorest health. CBC News widely reported First Nations condemnation of Canada’s refusal to support the Declaration. Mary Simon, president of the Inuit organization Tapiriit Kanatami, worked with other Indigenous groups at the United Nations to draft the declaration during the mid-1980s and early 1990s. She described Sept. 13 as a proud day for Inuit and Indigenous peoples around the world, but said the negative votes reflects badly on Canada and the other three dissenting governments. Western Arctic Member of Parliament Dennis Bevington accused Canada of selling out to multinational businesses that want access to resources on aboriginal lands around the world. Native Women’s Association of Canada President Beverley Jacobs said, “I think they’re afraid of Indigenous people having some measure of control of our own processes, of our own institutions, and dealing with our own laws within our own territories.” An IITC statement also criticized Canada’s vote. “This day will be a red-letter day for Indigenous peoples of Aotearoa and the globe,” said New Zealand’s Maori Party co-leader Tariana Turia. “How can this government oppose a declaration which promotes and protects what is meant to be merely a minimum standard of human rights for Maori?” The Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner, Tom Calma, welcomed the Declaration as a “milestone for the world’s Indigenous peoples” and said it was “a matter of great regret” that it was opposed by the Australian government. Robert “Tim” Coulter, director of the Indian Law Resource Center in Helena, Mont., was at the United Nations in New York City for the vote and was quoted in The Spokesman Review newspaper (Spokane, Wash.) as saying, “It was not a good day for the United States, but it was a good day for Indigenous peoples.” Coulter referred to recent U.S. attempts to legalize torture and said, “The Bush administration in particular is contemptuous of human rights rulings.” At a recent United Nations news conference about the vote, Joseph Ole Simel, Coordinator of the African Regional Indigenous Caucus, recalled why the text of the Declaration had not been adopted in 2006. “The developed nations, in particular Canada, New Zealand, Australia and the United States, had been dictating to African countries and developing countries in general about human rights, accountability, democracy and transparency. “However, Third World countries have now taken a very progressive step in terms of human rights and demonstrated a lot of goodwill and commitment to the rights of Indigenous peoples, leaving the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand behind.” -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Source: Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011
|
its one year on from the Australian Governments controversial intervention into NT Indigenous communities
action Roll back, listen to Indigenous community voices speaking about the intervention |
|
