While indigenous peoples made
undeniable contributions to
humanity’s cultural diversity,
representatives of aboriginal
and native groups appealed today
for help from the United Nations
Permanent Forum on Indigenous
Issues, saying they still faced
systemic discrimination and
exclusion from political and
economic power, forced ejection
from their ancestral lands, and
depredation from profit-hungry
corporations bent on destroying
their life-giving forests.
The 16-member expert body’s
planned discussion on the agenda
for its tenth anniversary
session next year was
interrupted by passionate pleas
from several speakers for the
Forum to stand by its founding
principles and provide space for
indigenous peoples to express
their opinions free from
intimidation. This followed
interventions by observer
Governments of China and
Bangladesh calling into question
the status or existence of
indigenous groups living,
respectively, in “ Inner
Mongolia”, and the Chittagong
Hill Tracts region.
However, a Youth Caucus delegate
declared that the Forum was
supposed to be for all
indigenous peoples, even those
that were mislabelled as ethnic
minorities, and asked: if
indigenous people did not have a
voice in the Permanent Forum,
under what mechanism could their
concerns be heard? Similarly, a
speaker for the Asia Indigenous
Peoples’ Caucus urged the Forum
to provide an opportunity next
year for a full-day discussion
on human rights. He stressed the
importance of implementing
indigenous peoples’ rights in
the Forum, without Government
intimidation, and added: “It
would be a shame if such
interference was allowed to
continue.”
Several experts took the
opportunity to comment, with
Victoria Tauli-Corpuz of the
Philippines saying that, as an
expert from the Asian region,
she truly appreciated all the
work China had done for the
ethnic minorities in the
country. But, the fact remained
that the Forum had received
reports regarding the arrest of
a Mongolian activist who was
scheduled to participate in the
current session. That matter
needed to be addressed, she
said, adding: “We are not doing
this out of political
motivation. We are concerned
about this person.”
Responding to some of the
comments made by the
representative of Bangladesh,
Hassan Id Balkassm, Forum expert
from Morocco, said it was up to
native and tribal people to
decide for themselves whether
they were indigenous to a
particular region. To that end,
indigenous peoples had been
living in Bangladesh and other
countries for years practising
their own acknowledged cultural
traditions. He urged all States
that supported the Declaration
to acknowledge the rights of
such peoples. If they failed to
do so, large segments of their
populations would remain
marginalized and, in some
regions, conflicts would
continue.
During the discussion on
socio-economic issues, land
rights, funding and political
recognition and participation
were flagged as vital solutions
to the marginalization many
indigenous people faced. The
participants, representing
indigenous communities and
caucuses from the Andes to North
America and Central Europe to
the Pacific, extolled their
stewardship of some of the
world’s most biologically
diverse areas, saying their
traditional knowledge about such
biodiversity was invaluable.
The expert members of the
Permanent Forum repeatedly urged
States to implement the United
Nations Declaration on the
Rights of Indigenous people,
which most speakers declared was
the framework for the protection
and promotion of their rights to
culture, identity, language,
employment, health, and
education, among others. They
also underscored the
Declaration’s importance in
ensuring the rights of
indigenous peoples to maintain
and strengthen their own
institutions, cultures and
traditions.
A representative of Pacto de
Unidad Coordinadora
Organizaciones Indigenas de
Bolivia, said his group sought
to free indigenous lands ?? in
the Andean region and beyond ??
and to regain the right to
define development, as outlined
in the Declaration. He’d had
enough of watching millions of
dollars allocated for the
well-being of forest-dependent
indigenous peoples being
channelled instead to the meet
the overhead of United Nations
and other agencies working in
the field. He demanded that
those funds be used to promote
real development for indigenous
peoples.
Highlighting another aspect of
the intertwined challenges
indigenous peoples faced was a
member of the Flying Eagle
Women’s Fund, who said climate
change was eroding their lands,
traditions and cultures. Making
matters worse was that the
United States Government had
enacted a series of “helpful”
initiatives in the Pacific
North-West, establishing nature
preserves and the like, to save
the land. However, those
projects were often predicated
on the forced removal or
relocation of indigenous peoples
from those lands. They also
routinely violated traditional
and customary practices, such as
fishing and hunting.
She told the Permanent Forum
that the traditional and
inherent rights of indigenous
peoples should be recognized,
and that native peoples should
be granted control over
customary lands. In addition, if
State authorities received
consent to set up wildlife
reserves, indigenous peoples
should make up at least two
thirds of the staff, so that
their traditional knowledge of
the lands could better aid in
their preservation and
conservation.
It was also clear from today’s
discussion that many indigenous
people were wary of “green
growth” and carbon capture
initiatives, such as the
Reducing Emissions from
Deforestation and Forest
Degradation (REDD), which would
allow developing nations to earn
valuable carbon offsets for
projects that preserved or
rehabilitated forests, which
soaked up planet-heating carbon
dioxide as they grew. Under that
scheme, rich nations would buy
the offsets to help them meet
emissions reduction goals at
home.
Supporters believed that REDD
and similar projects would give
a monetary value to forests,
which today only had value when
they were cut down. That would
slow deforestation ?? estimated
to be responsible for nearly a
fifth of the world’s greenhouse
gas emissions ?? provide funds
to forest communities, and
address the contribution of
deforestation to climate change.
Opponents felt that REDD was
just a scheme for creating
profits, rather than conserving
forests. They also contend that
in existing projects, locals had
been overlooked, displaced from
the forests or coerced into
signing away their land.
On that point a representative
of the Asia Indigenous People’s
Pact said that the
sustainability and success of
community-level projects hinged
on indigenous peoples exercising
ownership of, and control over,
their forests. When that was not
the case, such forests remained
in danger of predation by miners
and loggers, among others.
Implementation of REDD should
not undermine, but strengthen
the control of indigenous
peoples over their forests.
“Forests are not just carbon,”
she said, calling on the
Permanent Forum to urge States
to harmonize national forest
policies with the aims of the
United Nations Declaration on
the Rights of Indigenous
Peoples. Indigenous leaders and
communities must also have the
right to reject REDD and similar
initiatives being carried out on
their lands, if their rights
were not truly guaranteed.
Also speaking today were the
representatives of Assembly of
First Nations of North America;
Confederation of Inter-Cultural
Communities; Federation of
Peasant Workers of Bolivia;
Andean Coordinator of Indigenous
Organizations; Fundacion Ana
Watta Kai; Movement for the
Survival of the Ogoni People;
African Indigenous Women
Organisation; Central African
Network; Indigenous Peoples of
Chile (NTAPUCHE); International
Union for Conservation of Nature
and Natural Resources (IUCN);
Yurta Mira; Asia Indigenous
Women’s Network; Asian Pacific
Indigenous Youth Network;
Regional Organization of Nogay
People in Dagestan Republic;
Oxfam Australia; Naga Peoples’
Movement for Human Rights; Kuki
Organization for Human Rights;
Eco Spirituality Foundation;
Indian Confederation of
Indigenous and Tribal Peoples
North East Zone; Yamasi People
of North America; Africa Caucus;
Global Caucus; Pacific Caucus;
San Carlos Apache Tribe; and
Olaji lo Larusa Integrated
Programme for Agro Pastoralists
Development.
Forum Members from Morocco,
Philippines, Sweden and United
States also spoke.
Participating as an observer was
the Vice-Minister for Indigenous
Affairs of Venezuela and the
representatives of Congo,
Guatemala, Suriname, Botswana
and Bangladesh also spoke as
observers.
Speaking in a point of order was
the representative of China.
The Permanent Forum on
Indigenous Issues will reconvene
at 10 a.m. Friday, 30 April, to
conclude its ninth session.
Background
The Permanent Forum on
Indigenous Issues met today to
continue debate on the future
work of the Permanent Forum,
including issues of the Economic
and Social Council and emerging
issues, and to take up the draft
agenda for its tenth session.
Statements
NGASSEMBO ADOLPHO ( Congo) said
the Congo Basin was an important
reservoir of biodiversity and
contributor to sustainable
development. The indigenous
peoples of Central Africa had
experienced different fates ??
some lived in national
communities, while others
depended on forests. Many in his
country had been recruited by
the forest industry. Indigenous
rights were of the utmost
importance. Central African
countries had held an
international forum to grapple
with the question of indigenous
peoples. At the end,
participants decided to organize
such a meeting every year. An
upcoming meeting would focus on
the sustainable management of
Central African forests and the
adoption of an action plan for
protecting indigenous rights,
with a view to its
implementation by Governments.
For its part, his Government
recently had adopted a law to
protect indigenous peoples and
was ready to improve their
living conditions.
CONNIE TARACENA ( Guatemala)
said her country was one of
“mega diversity”, with many
groups and cultures. However,
poverty had made forest
governance a real challenge. The
Reducing Emissions from
Deforestation and Forest
Degradation (REDD) programme
could help reduce emissions from
deforestation in Guatemala and
resources to prepare for those
efforts should be available and
equitably distributed among
developing countries. Guatemala
had been making strides in
reforestation efforts, but the
challenges were beyond its
domestic efforts. She
recommended that all States
recognize local, traditional
knowledge and preserve local
biodiversity. They should take
into account in public policies
methods for forest care. She
supported the idea of voluntary
financial resources to
facilitate indigenous
participation at regional and
international discussions on
forests.
ROSEANNE VAN SHIE, Assembly of
First Nations of North America,
said the Wolf Lake First Nations
were among those who formed the
Algonquin First Nation. Their
aboriginal title and rights had
been documented through historic
research and it was important to
show those connections in both
historic and contemporary terms.
Wolf Lake
First Nations had evaluated
economic alternatives to
resource-intensive industries
that would restore biodiversity
to the region. Her people had
prevented deforestation of
watersheds on its territories.
REDD initiatives were in keeping
with that work and should not be
limited to developing countries.
Her people had advocated for
indigenous participation in
forming regulatory regimes in
Canada and the United States.
She worried that there was not
enough consultation and that
free, prior and informed consent
was not being obtained in
Government green energy
contracts. Also, a new trade
economy was emerging in which
carbon offsets were being bought
and sold in open markets and it
was important that indigenous
peoples understand such markets.
As currently structured, REDD
was unacceptable to many
peoples.
JUSTINO HUZA MENDOSA,
Confederation of Inter-Cultural
Communities, said indigenous
peoples lived in the world’s
most fragile ecosystems and were
most vulnerable to climate
change. They had constantly
suffered because of the
activities of transnational
corporations and that was a
grave concern to indigenous
peoples in Latin America,
because such activities would
lead to endemic disease, forest
fires, loss of identity, forced
internal and external migration
and famine. Climate change was
caused by the capitalist system,
which had promoted a “society of
waste” and “lavish spending of
all
natural resources”. He
called on States to respect and
guarantee international human
rights standards, particularly
through the Declaration on the
Rights of Indigenous Peoples. He
demanded rights to full and
effective consultation; free,
prior and informed consent; and
participation in designing
climate change measures. In
closing, he supported creation
of a climate court to punish
those responsible for pollution.
FELIX TICONA QUISPE, Federation
of Peasant Workers of Bolivia,
said the rights of indigenous
peoples should not just exist as
words on paper: all States,
native communities and United
Nations entities must work
together to ensure that those
rights were made real. He said
the first step for all
stakeholders was to put a stop
to the man-made activities that
were driving global warming and
weather anomalies that were
destroying native lands and
territories. Forest ranges were
under extreme pressure from the
effects of climate change, he
said, reiterating his call on
all stakeholders to act to
protect forests, which were
vital for the existence of many
indigenous communities.
TOMAS HUANACU TITO, Andean
Coordinator of Indigenous
Organizations, said that from
the very first day that the
Spanish had set foot in the
Andes, that once pristine and
life-giving region had suffered
from massive devastation. The
virgin forests had been felled
to feed foreign livestock and
pristine waters had been fouled
with waste from iron smelting
and other pre-industrial
activities. That had been the
first blow. The second blow was
global warming.
Indeed, the already weakened
Andean forests and mountain
ranges were rapidly
deteriorating; ice caps were
melting, trees were dying and
animals were becoming extinct.
He urged the Permanent Forum to
hold a half-day special dialogue
next year on the impact of
man-made climate change on the
Andean region. The Permanent
Forum must also ask the invaders
to pay reparations for the
damage they had wrought.
ANA DEL CARMEN GONZALEZ PUSHAINA,
Fundacion Ana Watta Kai, said
that her ancestral lands in
Colombia were host to a wind
farm, and that project had
improved the lives of all the
people there. She said that
experience had been successful
because indigenous people had
been consulted and involved in
the planning stages. That was as
it should be in all cases. She
reiterated her invitation to the
Chairman of the Forum to visit
Colombia and report back to the
wider membership on the project.
Next, JUDY WILSON, Flying Eagle
Women’s Fund, said that climate
change was eroding the lands,
tradition and cultures of
indigenous peoples of the
American Western Pacific. Making
matters worse was that the
United States Government had
enacted a series of “helpful”
initiatives, establishing nature
preserves and the like, to save
the land. In reality, however,
those projects were often
predicated on the forced removal
or relocation of indigenous
peoples from those lands. They
also routinely violated
traditional and customary
practices, such as fishing and
hunting.
She told the Permanent Forum
that the traditional and
inherent rights of indigenous
peoples should be recognized,
and that native peoples should
be granted control over
customary lands. In addition, if
State authorities received
consent to set up wildlife
reserves, indigenous peoples
should make up at least two
thirds of the staff, so that
their traditional knowledge of
the lands could better aid in
their preservation and
conservation.
JOAN CARLING, Asia Indigenous
People’s Pact, said that, since
forests were now at the centre
of the global debate on climate
change, indigenous peoples were
once again finding themselves
subjected to processes and
mechanisms that were being
carried out without their
consultation or consent. She was
particularly concerned about
proposals such as the REDD
initiative, by which wealthy
countries would pay to preserve
forests in developing countries
as a way to offset their
climate-changing carbon
emissions at home.
Most of the countries in which
such projects were being pushed
belonged to indigenous peoples,
she continued, adding, however,
that the inherent rights of
those peoples to the lands were
not being recognized, and no
satisfactory remedy had been set
out. It was, therefore,
necessary to examine such
proposals very closely. Even the
so-called “REDD-plus” must be
discussed with indigenous
peoples before being
implemented. The sustainability
and success of community
projects hinged on indigenous
peoples exercising ownership of,
and control over, their forests.
When that was not the case, such
forests remained in danger of
predation by miners and loggers,
among others. Implementation of
REDD should not undermine, but
strengthen the control of
ingenious peoples over their
forests. “Forests are not just
carbon,” she said, calling on
the Permanent Forum to urge
States to harmonize national
forest policies with the aims of
the United Nations Declaration
on the Rights of Indigenous
Peoples. Indigenous leaders and
communities must also have the
right to reject REDD and similar
initiatives being carries out on
their lands if their rights were
not truly guaranteed.
CARLOS SOMERA, Vice-Minister for
Indigenous Affairs of Venezuela,
urged the Permanent Forum to
adopt the People’s Agreement
adopted by the four-day World’s
People’s Conference on Climate
Change and the Rights of Mother
Earth, held in Bolivia last
week. Ensuring life on the
planet was the mission of every
living thing on Earth, from the
mightiest to the smallest. The
objective was to come up with
real solutions to make the Earth
better for all. Venezuela, for
its part, had moved to identify
huge tracts of land to be turned
over to its indigenous peoples.
Those groups were the stewards
and protectors of the country’s
heritage. The strategy to create
“communal indigenous forests”
aimed to ultimately set aside
200 million hectares of land, so
that the voice of indigenous
peoples could be heard for
centuries to come.
HENRY MAC-DONALD ( Suriname)
said the tribal and
forest-dependent population ??
the Maroon people ?? consisted
of six
tribes who were descendents
of slaves. More than 90 per cent
of the land was covered by
tropical Amazonian rain forests.
The country was considered a
“high forest cover” country and
was fostering a culture of
forest sustainability. On the
global level, Suriname had
actively participated in the
United Nations Forum on Forests.
Standing forests contributed to
climate stabilization and
countries like his should be
supported. Suriname also had
participated in discussions on
financial mechanisms, notably
related to the REDD+ programme,
and the Government had provided
for indigenous participation in
such discussions. It also was
working to best address land
rights issues of
forest-dependent communities
and, to that end, had organized
a conference last year with
indigenous peoples. Finally,
Suriname was working on how to
best implement the concept of
free, prior and informed
consent.
LEGBROSI PYAGBARA, Movement for
the Survival of the Ogoni
People, said forests would be
under increasing focus as people
grappled with how to address
climate change. Last year,
Nigeria had proposed building a
military facility in one
particular area, but nothing had
been discussed with the Ogoni
people. Their free, prior and
informed consent had not been
sought. The Government announced
plans to move into that area and
destroy forests, in flagrant
violation of the Declaration on
the Rights of Indigenous
Peoples. Such behaviour had vast
implications on food, job and
economic security. Similarly,
the area was home to the world’s
largest mango forests, many of
which were located in the Niger
Delta. Mango forest depletion,
especially as a result of
massive oil pollution,
threatened his people’s cultural
survival. In light of that, he
recommended that the Forum urge
the Government to stop building
the military facility and
develop a policy for protecting
mango forests, in line with the
Declaration. He proposed that
the Forum hold a half-day
discussion on business and
indigenous peoples.
FREDY CONDO, Pacto de Unidad
Coordinadora Organizaciones
Indigenas de Bolivia (COINCABOL),
presented a flag which was a
symbol of his people in the
Andes. “We live as worthy
peoples, as children of Mother
Earth,” he said. “Mother Earth
does not belong to us, we belong
to her.” Indigenous peoples
could not turn into beggars,
depending on the handouts of
those who oppressed them.
Indigenous leaders and
organizations were being
persecuted. He sought to free
indigenous lands and regain the
right to define development, as
outlined in the Declaration. He
had had enough of seeing
millions of dollars allocated
for the indigenous peoples of
the forests channelled instead
to the overhead of the United
Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF)
and United Nations Development
Programme (UNDP), which had
sometimes used such funds to
prosecute indigenous leaders.
Those funds had to be used to
promote real development. The “
Cochabamba” conference reflected
the voice of over 100 countries.
A band aid was not enough to
solve climate change problems.
HAWE HAMMAN BOUBA, African
Indigenous Women Organisation,
Central African Network,
supported the following
proposals for the Forum’s future
work: that a half-day discussion
be held on African indigenous
peoples and business human
rights violations; that water be
chosen as the theme of the
Forum’s tenth session; that the
Forum organize a workshop on
good practices for protecting
indigenous peoples’ rights in
Africa; and that a craft
exhibition be organized during
the tenth session. She also
thanked the Forum for hearing
indigenous students, who had
struggled to have their voices
heard.
CARLOS EDEN, Indigenous Peoples
of Chile (NTAPUCHE), said he
spoke on behalf of the Colaska
people, who were maritime
nomads. For 13 centuries his
people had lived, but today they
only had their memories. Words
like “free, prior and informed
consent” were not part of his
people’s knowledge; they used
different words. In December
2007, mechanisms had been
created without indigenous
participation, violating their
free, prior and informed consent
and setting aside their sacred
right to say no. The World Bank
had used interventionist
policies to deal with indigenous
peoples. Natural wealth was
disappearing, but transnational
companies continued to polish
off the last of his peoples’
forests. The Western idea of
development was incompatible
with his peoples’ culture and
identity. Documents had been
drafted on behalf of 3 million
indigenous peoples, but the
drafters did not share their
“cosmo vision”.
KAIA BOE, International Union
for Conservation of Nature and
Natural Resources (IUCN), said
the challenges and opportunities
presented by forest management
showed the need for an
integrated approach.
Conservation and management of
protected areas had not
protected indigenous peoples.
Full recognition of indigenous
peoples’ rights and their
genuine participation in
developing, implementing and
monitoring conservation
initiatives was necessary to
establishing visions for
environmental sustainability.
There was systematic
consideration of indigenous
peoples and forest-dependent
communities in IUCN’s
conservation programme. Her
organization recognized that
indigenous peoples and
forest-dependent communities had
strong incentives to preserve
forests and, thus, were logical
allies for initiatives to
protect ecosystems and reduce
emissions from deforestation. In
support of articles 32 and 23 of
the Declaration, IUCN stressed
the need for the free, prior and
informed consent of indigenous
peoples in the development of
commercial enterprises or other
uses of their lands. Its REDD
activities explicitly included
women.
HASSAN ID BALKASSM, Forum member
from Morocco, said that before
colonialism, indigenous peoples
managed forest regions based on
their laws and customs. Forests
in the Atlas Mountains in
Morocco and forests in Lebanon
?? before French colonialists
arrived in the Magreb ?? had
been managed by the Amazigh.
They protected trees from being
uprooted and sold. Later, France
implemented laws that had
dispossessed those peoples of
their forests. After
independence, many national
Governments considered
themselves successors to
colonial laws and, rather than
return to indigenous laws,
developed policies that led to
the deterioration of those
forests. Today, Governments were
giving forests to investors. The
Forum could establish a dialogue
between indigenous peoples and
the United Nations Forum on
Forests. He also asked that a
cooperation mechanism be created
for indigenous peoples and
Governments.
VICTORIA TAULI-CORPUZ, Forum
member from the Philippines,
reiterated that forest-dependent
peoples ?? whether in the
Arctic, the Andes, tundras or
mangrove forests ?? were saying
that they had protected their
forests as the main sources of
identity, culture, food
security, water and air. That
had come through strongly. In
tropical rain forests
especially, there had been
conflicts caused by colonialist
forest policies. Also, it was
clear there was renewed interest
in forests because of climate
change. Indigenous peoples had
known for years that forests
sequestered carbon.
The right thing, as far as
indigenous peoples were
concerned, was to ensure their
rights were respected,
especially to self-determination
in protecting their forests.
Noting that the World Bank’s
Forest Carbon Partnership
Facility covered 37 countries,
she urged that the Bank’s
safeguard policies be
implemented in such work. She
also said the Declaration be
respected in the REDD
collaborative programme. Those
principles should be the
foundation of forest policies
and programmes. If they were
not, forests would continue to
deteriorate.
ALEXANDRA GRIGORIEVA, Yurta
Mira, said her organization
supported efforts to promote
sports as a way to promote
development of indigenous
peoples and to enhance the
dialogue among cultures and
civilization. Her group, which
represented the Sakha indigenous
peoples of Yakutia, in the
Eastern Siberian Arctic region,
planned to actively participate
in the First World Indigenous
Games, to be held in Winnipeg,
Canada, in 2010. She went on
to say that her group was
launching an effort to establish
a series of museums around the
world to raise awareness about
the situation of indigenous
peoples and the work of the
Permanent Forum.
Of course, the group was having
trouble raising the money to get
the projects off the ground, and
she, therefore, asked the
Permanent Forum to provide
assistance in that regard. She
also called on the United
Nations Educational, Scientific
and Cultural Organization
(UNESCO) to support the project.
The museums would play a vital
role, because such recognition
was the common goal of all
peoples and only through unity
would all people gain strength.
She went on to say that her
people were under pressure to
maintain the culture, especially
to preserve their traditional
languages.
She, therefore, called on
countries that had abstained in
the vote on the Declaration,
especially the Russian
Federation, Ukraine, Azerbaijan,
and Georgia, to reconsider their
positions. Their support for the
Declaration would pave the way
for the indigenous peoples of
Yakutia to protect their culture
and exercise their rights.
LARS ANDERS BAER, Forum member
from Sweden, said climate change
was impacting reindeer grazing
lands. That was bound to
escalate conflicts between
forestry initiatives and
reindeer herding in the Arctic
and other regions. He noted that
the Geneva-based Human Rights
Committee had called on Finland
to halt logging activities in
areas that might affect reindeer
herding and related activities
in Saami territories.
Summing up the discussion on
forests, CARLOS MAMANI CONDORI,
Chairman of the Permanent Forum
and expert from Bolivia, said
that it was clear from the
statements that had been made
over the past two days that the
true owners of the world’s
forest and related territories
were indeed indigenous peoples.
That was why the principle of
free, prior and informed consent
must be followed, including by
the World Bank and United
Nations agencies supporting
proposals such as REDD. He said
that forests had been
deteriorating for years, and
compensation, in the form of
reparations and restoration,
must be provided. Indigenous
peoples were the “custodians of
humanity,” and they must play an
active role in any decisions
being made that concerned their
ancestral lands.
ELLEN BANG-OA, Asia Indigenous
Women’s Network, cited a raft of
abuses that were being
perpetrated by the agents,
emissaries and Armed Forces of
the respective Governments of
Malaysia, “ Burma”, Bangladesh,
India and Indonesia against the
indigenous women in those
countries. Those women were
subjected to rapes, humiliation
and all forms of abuse. For
example, in Malaysia, the homes
and villages of indigenous
peoples were routinely burned to
the ground and their inhabitants
either killed or forcibly
ejected. In Indonesia, sexual
abuse by logging workers had
been reported. In many cases,
women human rights defenders
were harassed and attacked.
She said that justice remained
elusive in most of those cases,
sadly, in most instances, due to
the disappearance of, or lack of
cooperation from, the victims.
Those were but a few of the
urgent cases that needed to be
addressed. They were emblematic
of the region’s intolerance and
attitudes that perpetuated
violence against, and
non-recognition of, indigenous
women. Such acts also fed a
perverted sense of empowerment
by State authorities over
indigenous women. She,
therefore, urged the Permanent
Forum to increase its
participation with local
indigenous networks to raise
awareness about those abuses and
bolster protection for women.
She also called on the Special
Rapporteur on the rights of
indigenous peoples, as well as
the Special Rapporteur on the
rights of women, to visit those
countries. Those officials and
the members of the Permanent
Forum should call on States and
federal Governments in the Asian
region to honour their
obligations under international
law and to engage in the process
of
healing and reconciliation.
JACOB PANGKHUA, Asian Pacific
Indigenous Youth Network, said
that Tripuri people were the
original inhabitants of the
Kingdom of Tripura in North-East
India and Bangladesh. That
Kingdom had never been subdued
by Mongols, nor had it signed a
treaty with British Government.
The Tripuri and Borok people had
a well-defined social and
economic tradition and lengthy
cultural history. But,
aggressive acts that began after
India’s independence culminated
in India’s annexation of the
Kingdom in 1949. Since then, the
Tripuri people have been reduced
to a minority in Tripura due to
the large scale migration of the
Bengali ?? from a majority of 80
per cent of the population in
the 1901 census to just 30 per
cent in 2001 according to the
census carried out by India.
The misery and human rights
violations had been routine
since the annexation, with
innocent girls and women
dishonoured and raped, houses
torched and young boys being
sent to detention centres and
subjected to inhumane treatment
and torture at the hands of the
Indian Armed Forces. Those Armed
Forces continued to harass the
people of the region. He called
for the complete restoration of
the Tripuri peoples’ territory.
It was an historical fact that
the region had never been a part
of India. “We are not concerned
with might, but what is right,”
he said, calling on the United
Nations, European Union, Amnesty
International and others to
prevail on the Indian Government
to withdraw its Armed Forces
from the region.
YANGUIRCHI ADZHIEV, Regional
Organization of Nogay People in
Dagestan Republic, said those
steppe-dwelling people had never
been granted constitutional
rights. Artificial borders had
been drawn through their lands
and laws had been enacted during
the Soviet era, preventing
forever the establishment of a
wholly autonomous region. He
called on the Permanent Forum to
raise awareness of that dire
situation.
TAMMY SOLONEC, Oxfam Australia,
was grateful for the Special
Rapporteur’s visit to the
northern area of Australia. She
also noted Australia’s revised
policy position in inviting
all special mechanisms,
including Special Rapporteurs.
The Special Rapporteur had
provided an important
observation on the Northern
Territory Emergency Response
intervention. The Racial
Discrimination Act of 1975 was
suspended in 2007 to implement
the intervention. Community
consultations were conducted in
2009 and the Government
redesigned various measures of
the Act. Those changes had been
subject to inquiry.
Unfortunately, Parliament had
given little attention to the
Special Rapporteur’s concerns.
She voiced concern at
Australia’s disregard of the
issue and sought a formal
response to the Special
Rapporteur’s report. She
recommended that the Forum urge
States to commit to a process of
responding to reports, and both
develop and publicly promote a
strategy to implement a response
to recommendations. The Forum
should also present a draft
resolution to the Economic and
Social Council urging indigenous
peoples to review legislation to
ensure they were in line with
the Declaration.
ATHILI SAPRIINA, Naga Peoples’
Movement for Human Rights,
recommended that India honour
the Declaration and take steps
to settle with the Naga people.
Moreover, India’s
counter-insurgency operations
must stop and interference in
reconciliation efforts must end.
India and Myanmar must halt
their joint military exercises.
Meanwhile, the International
Fund for Agricultural
Development (IFAD) and UNDP,
among others in the Naga area,
must protect indigenous peoples’
rights and ensure that their
work was not confined to those
peoples who had been co-opted by
the State. Finally, the Forum’s
agenda item 4 should be allotted
more time for discussion in
every session.
T. LUNKIM, Kuki Organization for
Human Rights, spoke about the
plight and aspirations of the
Kuki people, who lived in
contiguous areas in India,
Bangladesh and Myanmar. His
people numbered maybe 10
million, all of whom spoke the
same language. Describing their
history, he said the Kuki had
been loosely organized into
chiefdoms. A monarchy then arose
to control the chiefs, many of
whom were spread around the
settlement. The Kuki people had
felt the brunt of colonialist
policies, with battles for
administrative control lasting
from the 1600s to the 1800s.
Later on, the Kuki people fought
with the Indian army against the
Japanese. After that, they had
been left fragmented and
isolated, their aspirations
brushed aside. The north-east
India region was among the most
volatile in the world, with many
armed groups operating in the
area. He asked that a rapporteur
come view the mass graves. He
urged an end to violence against
the Kuki people, including by
removing all landmines in the
area.
ROSALSA NATERO, Eco Spirituality
Foundation, speaking on behalf
of several groups, said
spiritual rights were being
violated. She denounced the
destruction of a mountain used
by the Bantou people of Cameroon
by the Catholic Church, which
had placed a large cross on its
top. Also, in Europe, the Breton
community needed help in Carnac,
a megalithic site which the
French Government intended to
turn into a museum. In Piedmont,
Italy, the identity of
communities that preserved
ancient pre-Christian traditions
was not being protected. She
urged UNESCO to designate such
places as world heritage sites.
She also urged European States
to return cultural objects to
the Wemba Wemba nation. Native
peoples’
identity was based on
traditional knowledge.
RAJIB BORA, Indian Confederation
of Indigenous and Tribal Peoples
North East Zone, said colonial
policies and changes in
demographic patterns had
contributed to the
ethno-political movements of the
Assami people. India had created
a situation where laws were in
conflict; many related to
migration and were aimed to
discourage immigration from
Bangladesh and the destruction
of the Assami people’s distinct
character. The major concern was
that India must respect the
rights of ethnic communities, as
well as their aspirations and
needs. It was imperative to
confer regional autonomy to the
Assami people. He also urged the
Forum to impress upon
India the importance of
fully implementing the
Declaration.
PHOLOGO GAUMAKWE ( Botswana)
responded to issues raised in
paragraph 65 of the report on
boarding schools, which stated
that, to address geographic
isolation, San/Basarwa children
had been moved to hostels. In
that way, children received
basic schooling, though not in
their native languages. Those
hostels were unsympathetic
places.
He said there was a
misconception. On use of native
languages, he said the official
languages were Tswana and
English. It would not be
feasible to use all mother
tongues, especially as some had
many sub-languages. It would be
almost impossible to develop
instructional materials to cover
all languages. Regarding the
separation of children from
their parents, he said it was
the Government’s responsibility
to achieve education for all.
The provision of boarding
facilities was one way Botswana
was providing access to
education. Parents were free to
visit children at any time. The
Government had created a task
force to address challenges
posed by the hostels. The task
force had visited the hostels in
2010 and would produce a report
at year’s end. It was the right
of every citizen to participate
in opportunities for
self-empowerment, particularly
educational opportunities.
LAURIE JOHNSON, Yamasi People of
North America, again asked the
Human Rights Council when it
would investigate rape and
genocide as crimes against
aboriginal title holders.
The Forum should pursue dialogue
with the Human Rights Council on
war crimes committed in wars of
aggression to exterminate title
holders. That campaign must
stop. The United States must
stop raping peoples, lands and
cultures. She asked the United
States to enter into dialogue
with indigenous peoples and stop
hindering their efforts to
obtain food, housing, health
care and education. She urged
the Forum to advise the Economic
and Social Council on ways to
recognize governments that had
existed before the European
holocaust, and to find ways to
recognize indigenous
governments, so that colonial
Governments could not violently
create fake authorities that
they controlled.
MICK DODSON, Forum member from
Australia, launched the
discussion on item 8, reminding
members that next year was a
review year, which would focus
on development and
environment. The proposed
organization of work was similar
to that for this year. There
would be a half-day discussion
on water next year, included
under item 7. For 2012, the
Forum’s special theme would be
“the Doctrine of Discovery, and
its impact on the rights of
indigenous peoples”. He was
unable to say when the Expert
Group meeting would be held;
however, its theme would be
announced tomorrow. Under item
3, there would be a report
presented by the Inter-Agency
Support Group and dialogue with
the agencies. Next year’s
regional discussion would be
held with Latin America and the
Caribbean. Under item 7, there
would be a discussion on various
studies on topics to which
Special Rapporteurs had been
assigned.
FARMARK HLAWNCHING, Asia
Indigenous Peoples Caucus,
noting the arrest of a Mongol
leader in China, urged the Forum
to request his release. China
should take immediate measures.
He also asked that people be
allowed to attend future
sessions of the Forum without
interference.
Interrupting those remarks in a
point of order, China’s
representative reminded the
speaker of the so-called Asian
Caucus that item 7 was currently
being discussed. That speaker
had mentioned “southern
Mongolia” ?? that was a complete
mistake. The Inner Mongolia
region was established on 1 May
1945 and was among the earliest
autonomous regions. He expressed
hope that, in the future, the
speaker would avoid using
incorrect concepts such as
“southern Mongolia”, which
violated the United Nations
Charter. China categorically
opposed mentioning that concept.
He reminded the speaker that an
organization called “South
Mongolian Human Rights Centre”,
headquartered outside China,
could in no way represent anyone
from Inner Mongolia and was not
qualified to be part of the Asia
Indigenous Peoples Caucus, nor
the Forum’s discussions. From
2007, that organization had
condemned the Chinese
Government, using hackneyed
phrases that were not based in
reality.
After the founding of new China,
the Inner Mongolian economy had
undergone rapid development and
there had been harmonious
development among the various
ethnic peoples, he said. Rumours
spread by a few organizations
could not negate that reality.
He reiterated that China had
been founded by all ethnic
groups ?? it was a unified
country. The Han, Mongolian and
54 other ethnic groups from
ancient times had lived on that
land. China attached great
importance to the social and
economic development of areas
inhabited by ethnic peoples, in
line with the Constitution and a
law on the economy of minority
areas.
Resuming his remarks, Mr.
HLAWNCHING said it was vital
that the Forum provide
opportunities for a full-day
discussion on human rights.
Expressing gratitude for the
idea to hold a half-day
discussion on indigenous peoples
in Asia, he said indigenous
peoples’ rights over land,
territories and resources
continued to be denied by
landlords. In line with the Year
on Forests, he proposed that an
expert seminar be held to study
the impact of such laws on
indigenous peoples’ rights. The
Asia Caucus stressed the
importance of implementing
indigenous peoples’ rights in
the Forum, without the
intimidation of Governments. “It
would be a shame if such
interference was allowed to
continue,” he stressed.
SANDRA NELSON ZONGO, Africa
Caucus, said her group would
appreciate if the Permanent
Forum would sincerely consider
the myriad challenges facing the
indigenous people of Africa.
“Those challenges are immense”,
and she was concerned that
indigenous communities were not
helping each other. Indeed,
there was a whiff of racism
around the issue, as the needs
of Africa’s indigenous people,
especially women, were routinely
ignored or overlooked. As a
first step towards rectifying
such slights, the Forum could,
during its next session, hold a
half-day session on Africa.
Meanwhile, indigenous groups and
caucuses from different parts of
the world should try harder to
listen to each other and work
together.
WILTON LITTLECHILD, Global
Caucus, recognized the
“tremendous efforts” that had
been undertaken during the
Permanent Forum’s session,
including by the support staff,
United Nations officials,
experts and participating
nongovernmental groups. He
offered the Caucus’s ongoing
support in efforts to achieve
the goals of the Declaration. At
the same time, he was concerned
that implementation of the
Declaration was lagging and
called for broader and more
comprehensive support.
As for the Permanent Forum’s
upcoming session, he supported
proposals that the Forum
organize an Expert Group Meeting
on reproductive and
environmental
health, including the rights
of indigenous women. He also
supported calls for convening an
Expert Group Meeting on the
impact of the “Doctrine of
Discovery”. In addition, water
should be chosen as a special
theme of the next session,
including matters regarding the
right to water and the impact of
the construction of
hydroelectric dams. He also
supported the convening of a
round table or expert group
meeting on truth and
reconciliation commissions.
KEALIIOLUOLU GORA Pacific
Caucus, said his delegation was
looking forward to the Permanent
Forum’s tenth session. He
recommended that the expert body
rotate its sessions between
regions annually to allow fair
and equitable access to its
work. He requested that the
Asia-Pacific be considered a
priority venue for the next
session. He also recommended
that the tenth session be
broadcast by an indigenous media
outlet, as well as for that
session to provide space for
discussion of the Forum’s six
mandated areas.
Ms. TAULI-CORPUZ, Forum member
from the Philippines, said that,
as an expert from the Asian
region, she truly appreciated
all the work China had carried
out for the ethnic minorities in
China. But, the fact remained
that the report the Forum had
received regarding the arrest of
the person that was supposed to
attend the current session
needed to be addressed. That
person’s travel had been covered
by the Voluntary Fund. She
appealed to the Chinese
delegation to address the
matter. “We are not doing this
out of political motivation. We
are concerned about this
person,” she said.
IQBAL AHMED ( Bangladesh) said
his country did not have any
indigenous people, but some
tribal people and peoples of
different ethnic minorities
lived in various districts,
including in the Chittagong Hill
Tract. That region had been
restive over the years. The
Government had taken steps to
ensure that tribal and
non-tribal people there lived in
harmony, side by side. To that
end, many military camps had
been withdrawn and the
Chittagong Land Commission was
surveying the region to help end
disputes. Further, the
Government had initiated special
and targeted development
programmes for all ethnic
groups, to bring them into
Bangladeshi society while
preserving their unique cultures
and traditions.
Responding to some of the
comments made, Mr. BALKASSM,
Forum member from Morocco, said
the United Nations definition of
indigenous people was not
precise. Those peoples could
decide for themselves whether
they were indigenous to a
particular region. So, in line
with the Declaration, and in the
spirit of promoting and
protection human rights,
everyone must respect the
freedom of expression and
“freedom of belonging” of
indigenous peoples.
He said that indigenous and
tribal peoples lived in areas
surrounded by dominant
societies, so those peoples had
the right to express themselves
as they wished. As for the
representative of Bangladesh’s
intimation that there were no
indigenous people in that
country, that view contravened
decisions taken by the United
Nations, which had recognized
such groups and allowed their
caucuses to participate in its
work. Tribal and indigenous
peoples had been living in
Bangladesh and other countries
for years practising their own
cultural traditions. He urged
all States that supported the
Declaration to acknowledge the
rights of indigenous peoples. If
they failed to do so, large
segments of their populations
would remain marginalized and,
in some regions, conflicts would
continue.
LEROY MOBLEY, Youth Caucus, said
his delegation was concerned
about the state of the world’s
indigenous peoples. The
Permanent Forum was supposed to
be “for and from” indigenous
peoples, including those that
were mislabelled as ethnic
minorities. He asked: if
indigenous people did not have a
voice in the Permanent Forum,
under what mechanism could their
concerns be heard? He
recommended that, in future
sessions, the expert body
exercise every effort to ensure
that representatives travelling
to participate in the Forum’s
work were not detained,
harassed, or threatened.
Mr. DODSON, Forum member from
Australia, following up on
“something that has bugged me
for six years”, said it was
important to think about how the
Forum administered its two-week
sessions. He referred to the way
in which the speakers’ list was
managed. Perhaps that should be
placed on the agenda, because
the practice of giving
preference to regional group and
caucus statements, over
individual statements, was
possibly having a negative or
biased impact. That was clear
when delegations were called out
of sequence, a practice that
undermined the integrity of the
speakers’ list and could erode
confidence among delegations
about the Forum’s process of
engagement.
Delegations ought to be able to
rely on regularity, he said,
especially as some had come from
the “remotest parts of the
planet” to have their voices
heard. He was not suggesting
there had been any favouritism,
or external
legal interference with the
list, but the point was that
people who had waited for two
weeks to speak sometimes were
never heard. That issue should
be placed on the Forum’s agenda.
It had a duty to maximize the
number of voices heard. People
had to have absolute confidence
in the Forum’s processes of
engagement.
VERMELDA GRANT, San Carlos
Apache Tribe, said her people
were opposed to the Southern
Arizona Land Exchange. Such
activities harmed Apaches and
indigenous peoples who used
those sacred spaces for
expressing their identities and
ways of life. Land exchange
would overturn public land
withdrawal for 760 acres of
Tonto forest land. The
resolution Copper Mining Company
sought land exchange through
Bill 409, which would allow it
to violate indigenous and human
rights laws and extract metals
from known holy sites for the
Apache people. An additional
bill ?? HR-4880 ?? was also
meant to provide for that
company’s operations. She
demanded full protection of her
people’s holy lands under
existing federal legislation.
The resolution’s parent
companies, Rio Tinto and BHP-Billiton,
must adhere to international
law. Indigenous peoples needed
access to such ecosystems,
whether through prayer, song or
ceremony. Damage to them
weakened their power and showed
great disrespect to holy beings.
ARNOLD LAISSER, Olaji lo Larusa
Integrated Programme for Agro
Pastoralists Development, spoke
about the impacts of climate
change on the Larusa people, and
the impacts of deforestation and
other big projects undertaken by
Government and private
individuals. Because of those
activities, Larusa women and
children were forced to walk
long distances for water. Girls
were denied access to schools
and their right to education.
Life had no meaning. Animals
were dying. He underscored the
importance of protecting human
sanctity, especially through the
protection of forests and water.
He also urgently drew attention
to the need for equal
educational opportunities for
boys and girls.
TONYA GONNELLA FRICHNER, Forum
member from the United States,
acknowledged comments made by
the Pacific Caucus, which
suggested that the Forum meet in
various regions. That idea had
been discussed early in the
Forum’s
history and would be a way
to engage all regions. More
interactive and constructive
dialogue between States and
indigenous delegates was
something to move towards. Part
of the meeting could be held in
a traditional setting that
included States. That could help
bring down the barriers that
placed speakers on different
sides of the room. She strongly
supported use of the Internet to
keep engaged. Also, the
speakers’ list had to be
modernized to meet the Forum’s
evolving needs.
MYRIAM SANCHEZ, Global Caucus,
supported the idea to organize
an international round table on
truth and reconciliation to
discuss the forced displacement
of children. Also, an expert
group meeting could be organized
on carbon markets that would
include such issues as the Clean
Development Mechanism. She also
urged that a half day be
dedicated to discussing
human rights violations.
Ms. TAULI-CORPUZ, Forum member
from the Philippines, reminded
the African Caucus that the
Forum had already held a
half-day discussion on Africa.
To another comment that all
peoples of Bangladesh were
considered indigenous, she said
she had visited Bangladesh many
times. There were laws
recognizing the term
“indigenous”, including in
Chittagong Hill Tribe
regulation, which referred to
indigenous people.
Tags: United Nations UNPFII land politics
Read more about
Indigenous Peoples Excluded From
Political Power, Ejected From
Lands, Faced Corporations Bent
On Destroying Life-Giving
Forests: 9th Session Of The
United Nations Permanent Forum
On Indigenous Issues -
Indigenous Peoples Issues and
Resources