The Rights of Indigenous Peoples in Lands Once Part of the Old Dominions of the Crown

1997 ◽  
Vol 46 (4) ◽  
pp. 812-830 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony Mason

Of all the rights of indigenous people, none is more central to the survival of their culture than the claim to their ancestral lands. The resolution of their claims to ancestral lands is one of the fundamental issues of our time—indeed of all time. Often called a human rights issue—a description apt to reinforce the strong moral foundations of the claims of the indigenous peoples—it is an issue which we cannot ignore. Throughout the world people of all races and all colours have a powerful emotional attachment to their ancestral lands. That attachment is the very core of a people's culture and is vital to the survival of the culture. As the UN Human Rights Committee has recognised, in the context of the exercise of cultural rights protected by Article 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, “culture manifests itself in many forms, including a particular way of life associated with the use of land resources”.

Author(s):  
Henry F. Carey

Economic, social, and cultural rights (ESCRs) emerged in the twentieth century as the set of “second-generation” rights after civil and political rights (CPRs). ESCRs represent the “equality” phase of human rights after the “liberty” aspect of CPRs. Despite having achieved legal respect and parity with all other CPRs, ESCRs are often perceived as having less legal clarity and required compliance in practice. ESCRs, however, have a substantial doctrine for many rights of progressive development or realization. In addition to progressive development of all the rights in the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), the Economic, Social and Cultural Rights Committee, which explains and monitors that treaty, has established a set of core obligations of states. Despite the problems inherent in the process of monitoring ESCRs, there are three major institutions which review the state of ESCRs in the world today: the United Nations (UN), states parties, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs). Additionally, the general direction of the literature on ESCRs is geared towards implementation and promotion of these rights. However, there is a tendency to examine ESCR violations that have a link to CPRs or to UN peace projects. There have also been various initiatives affecting second- and especially third-generation rights, such as the protection of indigenous peoples.


Half a century ago, on 16 December 1966, the UN General Assembly adopted the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). While the adoption of the twin Covenants was celebrated all over the world, their fiftieth anniversary has received very little attention from the international community. This book marks this anniversary by taking stock of the first half-century of the existence of what are probably the world’s two most important human rights treaties. It does so by reflecting on what the Covenants have achieved (or failed to achieve) in the years that have passed, determining and comparing their current influence in the various regions of the world, and assessing their potential roles in the future. The book contains papers presented during a symposium held in Zurich in 2016, which brought together experts and stakeholders from a range of disciplines and world regions. Some fundamental issues addressed by the contributors are as old as the two Covenants themselves. They concern, for example, the division of human rights into first- and second-generation rights, and the question of whether there should be one central monitoring body—possibly a world court—or more than just one. Other important questions dealt with are how the Covenants should be interpreted and who is bound by them. However, the contributors go beyond such questions, which have been explored before; they develop new answers to old questions and point to new challenges.


2008 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 295-318 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kamrul Hossain

AbstractTwo International Covenants (the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights) in common Article 1 highlighted that 'all peoples' have the right to self-determination to freely determine their 'political status' and freely dispose of their 'natural wealth and resources'. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, in Article 27 provides protection of the rights belonging to minority cultures, religion and language. The idea of 'indigenous peoples' was apparently an underdeveloped area at the time of the adoption of the Covenants. The concept of indigenous peoples' rights has developed relatively recently. Thus, whether indigenous peoples are 'peoples' within the meaning of the Covenant, and thereby may be capable of enjoying the right to self-determination has been an unsettled case. When in many countries indigenous peoples form a minority, they are, however, identical as distinct from other minority groups in those countries because of their own way of livelihood and preservation of traditional culture and knowledge. Recent normative development pronounced by the Human Rights Committee suggests that indigenous peoples should be treated as 'peoples' within the meaning of Article 1 of the Covenant and as 'people' they have right to enjoy their traditional way of livelihood including right to enjoy their culture. Thus, the main focus of the article is to examine whether a human rights approach to indigenous peoples' rights has evolved to challenge the international regulatory approach currently applicable to the management of Whale and Polar Bear regime and their traditional hunt by the indigenous peoples.


2014 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 121-134
Author(s):  
Alexandre Peñalver i Cabré

Human Right to Environment is one the most relevant Third Generation Human Rights which includes new universal needs arisen from the last third of 20th century. These new human rights add as an additional layer to the First Generation Human Rights (civil and political rights from the end of 18th century) and to the Second Generation Human Rights (economic, social and cultural rights from 19th century).


Author(s):  
Rhona K. M. Smith

This chapter analyses the history and principles of the International Bill of Human Rights, which is the ethical and legal basis for all the human rights work of the United Nations. The Bill consists of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, two Optional Protocols annexed thereto, and the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights and Protocol. The chapter also assesses whether the Bill of Human Rights has lived up to the expectations of the original proponents.


2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 249-269
Author(s):  
Sarah Joseph

Abstract States have duties under Article 12(2)(c) of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to prevent, control and treat covid-19. Implementation of these three obligations is analysed, taking account of countervailing human rights considerations. Regarding prevention, lockdowns designed to stop the spread of the virus are examined. Control measures are then discussed, namely transparency measures, quarantine, testing and tracing. The human rights compatibility of treatment measures, namely the provision of adequate medical and hospital care (or the failure to do so), are then examined. Finally, derogations from human rights treaties in times of pubic emergency are discussed.


2018 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 95-124
Author(s):  
Tine Destrooper

This article builds on theories about the expressive function of law and uses Structural Topic Modelling to examine how the prioritisation of civil and political rights (CPR) issues by the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC) has affected the agendas of Cambodian human rights NGOs with an international profile. It asks whether these NGOs’ focus on CPR issues can be traced back to the near-exclusive focus on CPR issues by the court, and whether this has implications for the creation of a “thick” kind of human rights accountability. It argues that, considering the nature of the Khmer Rouge's genocidal policy, it would have been within the mandate and capacity of the court to pay more attention to actions that also constituted violations of economic, social, and cultural rights (ESCR). The fact that the court did not do this and instead almost completely obscured ESCR rhetorically has triggered a similar blind spot for ESCR issues on the part of human rights NGOs, which could have otherwise played an important role in creating a culture of accountability around this category of human rights. Does this mean that violators of ESCR are more likely to escape prosecution going forward?


1968 ◽  
Vol 62 (4) ◽  
pp. 889-908 ◽  
Author(s):  
José A. Cabranes

On December 16, 1966, the General Assembly approved three agreements designed to establish a global system of enforceable treaty obligations with respect to fundamental human rights. These agreements are the second part of the “international bill of rights” proposed at the San Francisco Conference. Eighteen years separated the adoption of these agreements—the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights—and the approval in 1948 of the first part of the projected United Nations program for the protection of human rights, the non-binding Universal declaration of Human Rights.


Obiter ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Aliyu Ibrahim

While most of the United Nations (UN) treaties have committees to monitor the implementation of their provisions among their States parties, one of the major challenges they encounter is their inability to independently verify the information provided by the States parties, on the level of fulfilling their obligations to the treaties. However, the establishment of National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs) by the majority of UN member states was meant to not only promote and protect human rights within the territories of States parties, but also to monitor the implementation of the provisions of treaties at the domestic level. This resulted in treaty bodies to encourage NHRIs, in monitoring and providing it with information on the level of implementation of the provisions of these treaties within the territories of respective States parties. This article examines whether these institutions in Africa have been able to discharge their mandates concerning the implementation of two treaties, namely, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) which is monitored by the Human Rights Committee (HRC) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) which is overseen by the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR). The NHRIs of South Africa, Morocco and Nigeria have been selected to test the effectiveness of these institutions. The study ultimately shows that the majority of these institutions are still far off from achieving their potential.


Author(s):  
Hurst Hannum

This chapter focuses on human rights in Asia and the Pacific. On the level of purely legal commitments, the great majority of Asian and Pacific states have ratified both of the two major UN human rights treaties, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) is the most developed of the sub-regional organizations with respect to human rights, although that development has been fairly recent and, to date, relatively minimal. However, attempts to characterize or distinguish different approaches to human rights in Asia frequently include reference to a number of arguments put forward to justify Asian exceptionalism in this field. Perhaps the most widely asserted argument contends that ‘Asian values’ are different from the Western values that animate today’s international human rights norms.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document