Realisation of the right of indigenous peoples to natural resources under international law through the emerging right to autonomy

2012 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 73-99 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heather A. Northcott
Keyword(s):  
Natural Resources ◽  
International Law ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
The Right

Sovereignty, Self-Determination, and Natural Resources

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jérémie Gilbert
Keyword(s):  
Natural Resources ◽  
International Law ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Potential Role ◽  
Food Sovereignty ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Ambivalent Relationship ◽  
The Right

The issue of sovereignty over natural resources has been a key element in the development of international law, notably leading to the emergence of the principle of States’ permanent sovereignty over their natural resources. However, concomitant to this focus on States’ sovereignty, international human rights law proclaims the right of peoples to self-determination over their natural resources. This has led to a complex and ambivalent relationship between the principle of States’ sovereignty over natural resources and peoples’ rights to natural resources. This chapter analyses this conflicting relationship and examines the emergence of the right of peoples to freely dispose of their natural resources and evaluates its potential role in contemporary advocacy. It notably explores how indigenous peoples have called for the revival of their right to sovereignty over natural resources, and how the global peasants’ movement has pushed for the recognition of the concept of food sovereignty.

scholarly journals INDIGENOUS PEOPLES’ RIGHTS OVER NATURAL RESOURCES: AN ANALYSIS OF HOST COMMUNITIES RIGHTS IN NIGERIA

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 121-136
Author(s):  
Amah Emmanuel Ibiam ◽  
Hemen Philip Faga
Keyword(s):  
Natural Resources ◽  
International Law ◽  
Federal Government ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Local Community ◽  
Policy Reforms ◽  
Oil Companies ◽  
Natural Oil ◽  
The Many ◽  
The Right

The many States are engulfed in crises over natural resources in the form of claims and counterclaims over who should exercise legal authority over the resources located within the state territory. In Nigeria, the agitation over control of natural resources has led to militancy and rebellion against the federal government and multinational oil companies. The debate on who should control and manage natural oil resources in Nigeria exists at the local community level, the federating states level, and the federal government level. This paper x-rayed the varying contentions of these agitations from an international law perspective. It adopted the doctrinal method to explore international human rights instruments and other legal and non-legal sources to realize the result and arrive at persuasive conclusions. The paper concluded that although international law guarantees states’ exercise of sovereign rights over their natural resources, it safeguards the right of indigenous peoples and communities to manage the natural resources found within their ancestral lands to deepen their economic and social development. It also concluded that the Niger Delta indigenous peoples and oil-producing communities are entitled to exercise some measure of control and management of the processes of exploitation of the natural resources found within their lands. The paper calls on the Nigerian government to fast-track legal and policy reforms to resource rights to indigenous host communities of natural resources in Nigeria.

THE PITFALLS OF UNILATERAL LEGISLATION IN INTERNATIONAL LAW: LESSONS FROM CONFLICT MINERALS LEGISLATION

2020 ◽  
Vol 69 (3) ◽  
pp. 685-717
Author(s):  
Phoebe Okowa
Keyword(s):  
Natural Resources ◽  
International Law ◽  
Civil Disobedience ◽  
The United States ◽  
Conflict Zones ◽  
Human Rights Abuses ◽  
Conflict Minerals ◽  
Meaningful Participation ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

AbstractThis article examines the compatibility of the extraterritorial application of unilateral legislation with the project of international law. Focusing on two instruments, the Dodd-Frank Act passed by the United States Congress and intended to regulate the activities of US listed companies operating in the Congo and the EU conflict minerals legislation, the article challenges their underlying premises that revenues from natural resources perpetuate conflict and resulting human rights abuses. In so far as these instruments make no provision for meaningful participation by the foreign populations which are the objects of legislation, it is argued that there is a tension between these unilateral instruments and the basic premises of law-making in international law as a democratic enterprise centred around governmental representation. By exclusively directing sanctions and other disciplinary measures at rebels, both legislative instruments have the problematic effect of strengthening the exploitation of natural resources by kleptocratic regimes and undermining the right of populations in conflict zones to civil disobedience as an inescapable component of their right of self-determination.

Defining ‘People’ and ‘Indigenous People’ in International Human Rights Law and Its Application in Indonesia

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 373-408
Author(s):  
M. Ya’kub Aiyub Kadir
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Natural Resources ◽  
International Law ◽  
Indigenous People ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
International Human ◽  
The Third World

This article investigates the problem of defining ‘people’ and ‘indigenous people’ under the International Human Rights Covenants and their application in the Indonesian context. Using analyses based on the Third World Approach to International Law (twail), this article shows the problems facing Indonesia in identifying indigenous peoples as traditional peoples, in terms of being isolated peoples (Masyarakat Hukum Adat, hereafter mha), and the non-isolated indigenous peoples who were sovereign before the independence of Indonesia. This interpretation has been confusing in relation to the entitlement to natural resources. Therefore, this article proposes a new understanding of indigenous peoples, in order to arrive at better treatment and recognition and in terms of sharing power and the benefits of natural resources in the Indonesian system.

The Status of Indigenous Peoples under International Law: Greenland and the Right to Self-Determination

1995 ◽  
Vol 32 ◽  
pp. 243-257
Author(s):  
Frederik Harhoff
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
De Se ◽  
The Status ◽  
Droit International ◽  
The Right ◽  
Peuples Autochtones

SommaireL'autodétermination des peuples autochtones suscite la controverse en droit international contemporain depuis que le processus de décolonisation s'est achevé, à la fin des années 1960. Parce qu’ils craignaient avant tout des désordres nationaux, de nombreux pays ont refusé de reconnaître que les peuples autochtones ont le droit de se séparer du territoire national et d'obtenir leur indépendance. Cependant, même la reconnaissance d'un droit moins vaste, soit un droit de recevoir un statut spécial et d'obtenir l'autonomie politique dans le cadre des frontières étatiques existantes, demeure une question litigieuse, car aucune définition claire des bénéficiaires et de la substance de ces droits ne peut être établie. De toute façon, la disparité des conditions politiques, économiques, sociales et climatiques dans lesquelles vivent les peuples autochtones du monde entier rend futile la création d'un seul et unique concept d'autodétermination qui s'appliquerait au monde entier. Pour sortir de cette impasse, on propose d'adopter une approche procédurale, au lieu d'essayer de fixer ces questions dans des termes juridiques stricts.Le fait de qualifier le concept d'autodétermination de processus, au lieu de le décrire comme étant une série de règles exactes et préétablies, a pour avantage d'apporter un élément de flexibilité, car il permet aux deux parties, c'est-à-dire les États et les peuples autochtones, de trouver des appuis pour défendre leurs intérêts et d'imaginer une solution viable qui tienne compte des circonstances particulières de chaque cas. Mais toutes les parties concernées devraient tout d'abord accepter trois conditions préalables:(1) Le droit de sécession immédiate et d'indépendance complète, en tant qu'aspect du droit à l'autodétermination, devrait être réservé aux peuples autochtones des territoires d'outre-mer.(2) Les États ont le devoir de favoriser l'autonomie de leurs peuples autochtones et le fardeau de prouver qu 'ih offrent la plus grande autonomie possible aux peuples autochtones vivant sur leurs territoires.(3) Une fois que des ententes relatives à l'autonomie ont été conclues, les États ne peuvent pas les révoquer, les abréger ou les modifier unilatéralement.L'auteur de cette note examine ensuite le régime d'autonomie du Groenland et conclut que ce régime semble satisfaire aux critères énoncés, bien que la question du statut actuel du Groenland (et des îles Faroe) au sein du royaume danois demeure incertaine sur le plan constitutionnel. Le régime d'autonomie implique un transfert irrévocable des pouvoirs législatifs et administratifs des autorités danoùes aux autorités du Groenland, ce qui a pour effet de créer un régime juridique indépendant au Groenland. Par ailleurs, il est entendu que le régime d'autonomie du Groenland permet d'établir un système judiciaire indépendant, si les tribunaux danois du Groenland ne reconnaissent pas la validité de la Loi d'autonomie du Groenland.

Part VI International Assistance, Reparations, and Redress, Ch.18 Legal Implementation and International Cooperation and Assistance: Articles 37–42

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
van Genugten Willem ◽  
Lenzerini Federico
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Cooperation ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Indigenous Communities ◽  
Indigenous Populations ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Political Commitments ◽  
United Nations Declaration ◽  
The Right

This chapter discusses Articles 37–42, considering legal implementation and international cooperation and assistance. Article 37 recognizes that treaties, agreements, and other constructive arrangements between States and indigenous populations reflect legally important entitlements that have to be honoured by applying the standards of modern treaty law, while taking into consideration the facts of cases at hand and later developments, and including the interests of other parties than the original ones. In addition, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) might be a declaration ‘only’, but it cannot be simply considered as ‘just another’ non-binding argument. Large parts of Articles 37–42 — particularly Article 37, relating to the right that treaties concluded with indigenous peoples are honoured and respected by States, and Article 40, proclaiming the right of indigenous communities to access to justice and to remedies — do have customary international law character, while other parts also reflect more than moral or political commitments ‘only’.

Right to Self-Determination in International Law: Towards Theorisation of the Concept of Indigenous Peoples/National Minority?

2012 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 481-532 ◽  
Author(s):  
Prosper Nobirabo Musafiri
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Minority Groups ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
National Minority ◽  
International Level ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Indigenous Minority ◽  
International Human ◽  
The Right

The problem of the concept of the right to self-determination under international human rights is that it is vague and imprecise. It has, at the same time, generated controversy as it leaves space for multiple interpretations in relevant international legal instruments. This paper examines if indigenous people and minority groups are eligible to the right to self-determination. If so, what is the appropriate interpretation of such right, in light of indigenous/minority groups at national as well as the international level?

scholarly journals Shaping Indigenous Self-Determination: Promising or Unsatisfactory Solutions?

2011 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 413-436 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mauro Barelli
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Straightforward Manner ◽  
History Of ◽  
United Nations Declaration ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Self Determination ◽  
Do So

AbstractThe right of peoples to self-determination represents one of the most controversial norms of international law. In particular, two questions connected with the meaning and scope of this right have been traditionally contentious: first, who constitutes a ‘people’ for the purposes of self-determination, and, secondly, what does the right of self-determination actually imply for its legitimate holders. Against this unsettled background, the 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) affirmed, in a straightforward manner, that indigenous peoples have the right to self-determination. In light of the uncertainties that were mentioned above, it becomes necessary to clarify the actual implications of this important recognition. This article will seek to do so by discussing the drafting history of the provision on self-determination contained in the UNDRIP and positioning it within the broader normative framework of the instrument.

scholarly journals GERAKAN MASYARAKAT ADAT SAMI DAN KONTESTASI SUMBER DAYA ALAM

2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 125
Author(s):  
Manggala Ismanto
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Identity ◽  
Natural Resources ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Natural Resource ◽  
Cultural Practices ◽  
Minority Rights ◽  
Minority Communities ◽  
Cultural Rights ◽  
Indigenous Movement ◽  
The Right

The main agenda of the indigenous movement is fighting for political and cultural rights of ethnic minority communities in accordance with unique historical and cultural practices that they have. As Kymlicka said, minority rights must also be fought because they are on a system that is governed by the majority who pretend to produce injustice. Sami Indigenous Movement in Norway is a form of a long struggle to obtain the right independently to manage natural resources. Currently Sami struggling to maintain the uniqueness of the cultural identity and living practices that have been owned for generations. This paper would like to see the establishment of indigenous peoples' movement Sami in Norway as well as the practice of social movements committed to demanding social change related to self-governance and autonomy of management of natural resources.Keywords: Indigenous Movement, Sami People, Identity,  Otonomy,Natural Resource ManagementAbstrakAgenda utama dalam gerakan adat atau indigenous movement adalah memperjuangkan hak politik dan budaya komunitas etnis yang menjadi minoritas sesuai dengan keunikan historis serta praktik budaya yang mereka miliki. Seperti yang dikatakan oleh Kymlicka, bahwa hak-hak minoritas juga harus diperjuangkan karena mereka berada pada sistem yang diatur oleh mayoritas yang berpretensi menghasilkan ketidakadilan. Gerakan Masyarakat Adat Sami di Norwegia merupakan bentuk perjuangan panjang untuk memperoleh hak secara mandiri untuk mengelola sumber daya alam. Saat ini masyarakat Sami berjuang untuk mempertahankan keunikan identitas budaya dan praktik hidup yang telah dimiliki secara turun temurun. Tulisan ini ingin melihat pembentukan gerakan masyarakat adat Sami di Norwegia serta praktik gerakan sosial yang dilakukan untuk menuntut perubahan sosial terkait dengan self-governancedan otonomi pengelolaan sumber daya alam.Kata kunci: Gerakan Masyarakat Adat, Sami, Identitas, Otonomi, Pengelolaan Sumber DayaAlam 

Part I The UNDRIP’s Relationship to Existing International Law, Ch.1 Who Are ‘Indigenous Peoples’?: An Examination of Concepts Concerning Group Membership in the UNDRIP

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Castellino Joshua ◽  
Doyle Cathal
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Group Membership ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
The People ◽  
The Status ◽  
United Nations Declaration ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Continuum

This chapter assesses the question of the people and peoples to whom the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) applies, tracking the concepts of person, persons, groups, people, and peoples in international law, and the UNDRIP's contribution to these concepts. The opening section of the chapter illustrates that the status of indigenous peoples in customary international law stands closer to peoples in the continuum between minorities and peoples. Minorities, while gaining the right to protection and promotion of their group identity, do not automatically gain the right to self-determination. Indigenous peoples ought to, but their rights towards this are constrained by state interests.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document