home | news l

INDIGENOUS PEOPLES IN THE COMMONWEALTH

Third Dialogue on Indigenous Peoples in the Commonwealth.
Held at the Commonwealth Policy Studies Unit, London, June 7 2002.
Hosted by:

• Commonwealth Association of Indigenous Peoples (CAIP)
• Commonwealth Policy Studies Unit (CPSU)
• European Network for Indigenous Australian Rights (ENIAR)

Agenda

• Welcome - Richard Bourne, Head, Commonwealth Policy Studies Unit (CPSU).
• Opening Statement - The UN Focus on Human Rights and Indigenous Peoples - Johno Scott, Office of UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Secretary to the Working Group on Indigenous Peoples.
• The Commonwealth Focus on Human Rights and Indigenous Peoples
• Examining the Relationship between the Commonwealth and Indigenous Peoples - Helena Whall (Project Officer, Indigenous Rights in the Commonwealth Project, CPSU).
• Participating in the Commonwealth Agenda for Democracy and Human Rights - Les Malezer (Coordinator, Commonwealth Association of Indigenous Peoples, CAIP).
• Self-Determination - Travelling from Colonialism to Equality, Independence & Survival:
  
  • The Australian Experience
  • The Asian Experience
  • The African Experience
    

Speakers included:

• Geoff Clark (Chairman, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission),
• Mr Parshuram Tamang, International Alliance of the Indigenous-Tribal Peoples of the Tropical Forests and Vice-President, Permanent Forum on Indigenous Peoples,
• Mr Nyang'ori Ohenjo, CEMRIDE, Kenya.

A Report of the Dialogue
Prepared by Sue Darling, Rapporteur, European Network for Indigenous Australian Rights (ENIAR) and Dr Helena Whall, Indigenous Rights in the Commonwealth Project, CPSU.

Background
The Third Dialogue on Indigenous Peoples in the Commonwealth took place on 7 June 2002 at the Institute of Commonwealth Studies in London, following the inaugural meeting in July 1999 in London and a meeting in Brisbane, Australia, in October 2001. It was co-hosted by the Commonwealth Association of Indigenous Peoples (CAIP), the Commonwealth Policy Studies Unit (CPSU) and the European Network for Indigenous Australian Rights (ENIAR).

The meeting was attended by over twenty people representing a range of Indigenous and other NGOs and organisations and academic institutions (see Appendix A for a full list of participants). No representatives of Commonwealth Governments accepted the invitation to attend the Dialogue, except the UK.

The purposes of the meeting were to:

• provide an update on Indigenous issues
• present an interim report on the first phase of the Indigenous Rights in the Commonwealth Project, CPSU, and
• look ahead to the CHOGM in Abuja, Nigeria, scheduled for October 2003.

Statements
The meeting was chaired by Mr Richard Bourne, Head of the CPSU. He recalled that the Dialogue on Indigenous Rights in the Commonwealth was initiated to discuss how the Commonwealth could do more for Indigenous peoples. The inaugural 1999 Dialogue led to the establishment of the Commonwealth Association of Indigenous Peoples (CAIP), which received accreditation at the CHOGM, in Durban, South Africa, in 1999 and the CHOGM in Coolum, Australia, in 2002. The Dialogue was also instrumental to the CPSU obtaining funding from the European Commission (EC) and the Department for International Development (DFID) for a three year research and advocacy programme on Indigenous rights in the Commonwealth. The second Dialogue lost its planned lobbying impact due to cancellation of the CHOGM in Brisbane, Australia, in 2001, but some useful business was done.

Mr John Scott (Secretary of the UN Working Group on Indigenous Peoples and representing the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights - OHCHR) tableda statement from Mary Robinson, High Commissioner for Human Rights and reported on three areas of activity.

• The Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues held its first meeting in New York from 13 - 24 May 2002 and made strong recommendations to ECOSOC. The Forum (serviced by the OHCHR) was a significant recognition that Indigenous peoples were an integral part of the UN system. A similar partnership should develop between the Commonwealth and her Indigenous peoples. In addition to remedying current disadvantage, partnership within the Commonwealth would enable Indigenous peoples’ culture and traditions to contribute to solving world problems such as sustainable development and environmental protection.
• The first UN Special Rapporteur on Indigenous Issues has recently been appointed - Rodolfo Stevanhagen of Mexico, assisted by Jong-gil Woo of OHCHR. Unlike the Working Group, which is a standard- setting body, the Rapporteur can receive and consider complaints.
• The current International Decade of the World’s Indigenous People (1995 - 2004) was unlikely to result in adoption of the Draft Declaration, and a second Decade was in prospect.

Information is available on the OHCHR website on www.unhchr.ch on workshops on multiculturalism in Africa and training fellowships for Indigenous people.

Mr Parshuram Tamang (International Alliance of the Indigenous-Tribal Peoples of the Tropical Forest and Vice-President of the Permanent Forum) said that the Permanent Forum’s first meeting had been very encouraging. The Forum had a number of strengths:

• Indigenous and Government representatives can talk face to face
• it has access to ECOSOC, the second most important body in the UN system
• it can discuss all economic and social issues affecting Indigenous peoples and review the activities of the entire UN system, a mandate shared only with the General Assembly
• it can disseminate information on Indigenous issues throughout the UN system, BUT the Forum can only recommend, not decide, and it has no separate funding, office or Secretariat.

The Alliance sponsored a Conference on Indigenous Views of Development and EU Policy on Indigenous Peoples from 18-20 June in Brussels, in association with the Rainforest Foundation and the EC.

Dr Helena Whall (Project Officer, CPSU) reported on progress on the EC- and DFID-funded research and advocacy programme ‘Indigenous Rights in the Commonwealth’.

Mr Les Malezer (Coordinator, CAIP) said that the focus should be political. There was progress on Commonwealth recognition of Indigenous issues, but CAIP access was limited. Britain’s divestment of Empire had failed to deal with Indigenous issues and the Commonwealth itself remained a colonial structure. One third of the Commonwealth’s 54 members were very small or Indigenous and did not have the resources to participate effectively on global environment or human rights issues.

Imposition of foreign structures on Indigenous peoples was at the root of current problems. In relation to Australia, and possibly elsewhere, the UK Government retained responsibility for the status of Indigenous peoples because of their failure to make appropriate provision at independence, eg in Constitutions or treaties. Guarantees for the economic and cultural survival of Indigenous peoples must exist, and the Commonwealth should provide them.

There had been positive developments in Canada and New Zealand, and encouraging remarks by Tony Blair and Jack Straw, but Australian policies remained negative and underhand.

He proposed:

• a further Dialogue in March/April 2003 in Nigeria to look at infrastructure and resources
• more Commonwealth support for CAIP in the form of offices in London and Nigeria
• increased publicity and awareness through Commonwealth networks and the net.
• that due account be taken of differing Indigenous experiences worldwide.

Information on CAIP is available on the CPSU website: www.cpsu.org.uk and the FAIRA website www.faira.org.au

Mr Nyang’ori Ohenjo of the Kenyan Centre for Minority Rights Development (CEMRIDE) said that poverty was a major issue in Kenya. Half of Kenya’s population is under the official poverty line of $US1 per day, and 90% of the 15m poor were Indigenous. Post-colonial constitutions, on the Westminster model, had failed to recognise indigenous peoples as entities with their own cultures. Land and resource ownership had become individual or corporate, rather than collective and African Governments were reluctant to recognise Indigenous peoples because of the implications in terms of land and resources.

Traditional Indigenous activities such as pastoralism and honey gathering were not recognised as economic activities, and were adversely affected by competing development. Indigenous peoples were not benefiting from tourism on their lands. They were too poor to access health care and were blocked from traditional lands which provided traditional cures. Pressure was needed on African Governments to respond to Indigenous rights.

Mr Geoff Clark (Chairman, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission, ATSIC) tabled his presentation to be given at the Summer School on Indigenous Peoples, at the Irish Centre for Human Rights, National University of Ireland, Galway, 8-15 June 2002, on CERD and Indigenous Peoples.

Encouraging progress had been made, such as return of human remains and access to CHOGM, and he acknowledged the contribution of groups such as the Dialogue. But globally, commodification was more of a force than culture and belief systems, and anything exploitable continued to be stripped from Indigenous peoples. Many of the Commonwealth countries had black indigenous leaders, but Commonwealth policies had not changed.

Economic measures were key to ending the exploitation of Indigenous peoples, including full participation in the national economy. A conscious Commonwealth campaign was needed to promote real free trade, to return resources and to open market opportunities for Indigenous peoples. Grass roots organisations and consumer activities had an important role.

General Discussion
The following issues were raised in discussion:

• Gathering of statistics could itself be disempowering, if it was a substitute for action. It was noted that while in some regions there were too many studies (notably Aboriginal Australia) in others a dearth of even the most basic population and health statistics was a serious problem.
• Focus on the cash economy prevented recognition of cultural and spiritual identity.
• The current emphasis on good governance and participation was helpful to Indigenous peoples, although it was important to separate Indigenous rights from minority rights.
• The Commonwealth Secretariat represented its member States, and staff members might pursue national agendas in their attitude to Indigenous issues.
• It was time for the Dialogue to bring together its numerous recommendations into an action plan, as suggested by the Commonwealth Secretary General in his meeting with CAIP in May 1999. This might be the focus of the next Dialogue meeting.
• The Commonwealth Policy Studies Unit, in consultation with CAIP and other interested parties, should support such a programme of action to ensure Indigenous rights were placed firmly on the Secretariat’s agenda.
• Use should be made of Commonwealth bodies such as the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association (CPA) to promote awareness of Indigenous issues and gain support for more active policies.
• Awareness of the existence and extent of Indigenous peoples was still lacking among some Governments and officials; more action was needed to identify issues and methods of safeguarding Indigenous rights. (Survival International monthly bulletin is now on www.)
• The fact that developed Commonwealth members saw Indigenous rights as a problem or threat affected the attitude of other member states.
• While recognising the diversity of Indigenous issues, guidelines were needed to help regional institutions promote Indigenous rights.
• Action within the Commonwealth should focus on constitutional and legal issues of special Commonwealth concern, such as good governance, models of Government, fiduciary responsibility for Indigenous peoples and equity in trade.
• Some countries adopted different domestic and international stances on indigenous issues. This duality should be exposed.
• Disparate judgements affecting Indigenous rights were being made on a common law basis in different jurisdictions. Developments should be watched and reported.
• There was considerable goodwill among non Indigenous people and organisations for Indigenous rights. It would be useful for non-Indigenous NGOs who wished to promote Indigenous rights and awareness of Indigenous issues to have guidance.

Conclusions
The meeting agreed:

• That Indigenous peoples were among the poorest and most disadvantaged sectors of the population in most Commonwealth countries. The Commonwealth was lagging behind other international bodies, and Commonwealth Governments needed to show political will to promote and protect Indigenous rights.
• That a further Dialogue meeting be held in early 2003 to consider an action plan to promote Indigenous rights in the Commonwealth, including CAIP infrastructure and resources
• That there was a need for increased publicity and awareness of Indigenous issues
• That activity should take account of the diversity of Indigenous experience in different regions.

List of participants
Helena Whall, Project Officer, CPSU
Richard Bourne, Head, CPSU
Les Malezer, Coordinator, CAIP
Geoff Clarke, Chairman, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission (ATSIC)
John Scott, Indigenous Human Rights Officer, Office of UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, and Secretary to the Working Group on Indigenous Peoples
Tim Shaw, Director, Institute of Commonwealth Studies (ICS)
Lyndon Ormond-Parker, European Network for Indigenous Australian Rights (ENIAR)
Sue Darling, European Network for Indigenous Australian Rights (ENIAR)
Sue Storry, European Network for Indigenous Australian Rights (ENIAR)
Paul Canning, European Network for Indigenous Australian Rights (ENIAR)
Harriet Cross, Head of Europe Section, Human Rights Policy Department, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, UK
Prabhat Krishna, MA Student, Institute of Commonwealth Studies (ICS)
Mr Parshu Ram Tamang, International Alliance of the Indigenous-Tribal Peoples of the Tropical Forests and Vice-President, Permanent Forum on Indigenous Peoples
Mr Nyang’ori Ohenjo, Centre for Minority Rights Development, Kenya
Corrine Lennox, Advocacy Officer, Minority Rights Group
Virginia Luling, Africa Campaigns Officer, Survival International
Tim S-Hall, Department of Archeology, UCL
Bill Sillar, Department of Archeology, UCL
Damien Short, University of Essex Human Rights Centre
Rhiannon Morgan, University of Essex Human Rights Centre
Christine Mullindwa Matovu, MA Student, Institute of Commonwealth Studies (ICS)
Lillian N Matovu, Mill Hill School

related links:

• Statement on Behalf of the High Commission for Human Rights
  Johno Scott, Indigenous Human Rights Officer, Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights
• A background note on Indigenous Rights in the Commonwealth Project
  by Dr Helena Whall, Project Officer, CPSU
• CERD and Indigenous peoples: A case study in Australia
  A presentation by Geoff Clark, Chairman, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission

• Commonwealth Policy Studies Unit (CPSU)
  • CPSU Memorandum to the Commonwealth Heads of Government attending CHOGM, Brisbane, Australia, 6-9 October 2001
    Addendum, Coolum, Australia, 2-5th March, 2002
• Indigenous groups accuse Govt of conspiracy at CHOGM
  Indigenous groups from Commonwealth countries claim the Australian Government has conspired to keep their issues from being discussed at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM).
• More Commonwealth information and links
  
• United Nations Draft Declaration on Rights of Indigenous People (An Analysis of the United Nations Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples can be found at ATSIC)
• International Decade of the World's Indigenous Peoples 1994-2003
• The Permanent Forum for Indigenous Peoples
• The Special Rapporteur on Indigenous issues
• The Voluntary Fund for the International Decade of the World's Indigenous People.

Further information: human rights issues page - includes news index and external links