Part II Group Identity, Self-Determination, and Relations with States, Ch.5 Self-Determination of Indigenous Peoples: Articles 3, 4, 5, 18, 23, and 46(1)

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Weller Marc
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Legal Personality ◽  
Significant Step ◽  
United Nations Declaration ◽  
The Right ◽  
International Legal Personality

This chapter studies Articles 3, 4, 5, 18, 23, and 46(1) of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). The debate about the right to self-determination for indigenous peoples, and its provisional conclusion through the adoption of the Declaration, represents a very significant step in the development of concepts of international legal personality. First, the change in terminology from ‘populations’ to ‘people’ marks the emergence of indigenous peoples as subjects, rather than objects of international law. Second, there was the possibility of drawing on existing international legal language in relation to a safeguard clause, which was eventually adopted in line with the General Assembly's vulnerable Friendly Relations resolution. Without the adoption of this clause, it is unlikely that the Declaration could have been adopted with a significant majority, if at all.

Sovereign States and Self-Determining Peoples: Carving Out a Place for Transnational Indigenous Peoples in a World of Sovereign States

2010 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 191-212 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timo Koivurova
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
International Borders ◽  
United Nations Declaration

AbstractEven though self-determination of peoples has an esteemed place in international law, it seems fairly clear that peoples divided by international borders have difficulty in exercising their right to self-determination. It is thus interesting to examine whether general international law places constraints on trans-national peoples’ right to self-determination. Of particular interest in this article is to examine whether indigenous peoples divided by international borders have a right to self-determination, given the recent adoption of the 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The article will also take up cases where transnational indigenous peoples of Sami and Inuit have tried to exercise their joint self-determination and whether we can, in fact, argue that indigenous peoples divided by international borders have a right to exercise their united self-determination.

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.

The Rights Granted to Indigenous Peoples under International Law

2016 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 53-71 ◽  
Author(s):  
Taryn Lee
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Effective Means ◽  
Indigenous Communities ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
The Status ◽  
United Nations Declaration ◽  
The Right ◽  
Political Groups

Indigenous peoples in Australia have been adversely affected by the process of colonisation by the British Crown. Despite Australia’s adoption of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (‘Declaration’), there is little evidence that it is an effective means of redressing the historical wrongs suffered by Indigenous communities in Australia. This essay outlines the experience of Indigenous peoples in Australia and examines the utility of the Declaration in international law. While observing that Indigenous peoples have had limited engagement with the Declaration, there is still potential for the Declaration to affect change through its underpinning principles of the right to self-determination and the status of Indigenous peoples as distinct political groups.

Part II Group Identity, Self-Determination, and Relations with States, Ch.6 The UNDRIP and the Rights of Indigenous Peoples to Existence, Cultural Integrity and Identity, and Non-Assimilation: Articles 7(2), 8, and 43

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hohmann Jessie
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Cultural Survival ◽  
Cultural Integrity ◽  
Indigenous Group ◽  
United Nations Declaration ◽  
Cultural Entities

This chapter focuses on the rights to identity, existence, and non-assimilation in Articles 7(2), 8, and 43, which together enshrine rights to the protection of indigenous peoples' continued survival and existence, both physically as individuals and as cultural entities in accordance with levels of human dignity and well-being. Indigenous peoples pressed for the inclusion of such principles in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) in the recognition that pre-existing international, regional, and national laws had failed to protect their survival as communities with distinct cultures, or recognise them as distinct peoples. The three provisions studied in this chapter reflect this central concern of indigenous group/cultural survival and flourishing as peoples. As such, the final agreed text of Articles 7(2), 8, and 43 must be seen as containing norms aimed at the development of existing international law, which would protect and confirm indigenous collectivities in ways not currently recognised or only now emerging.

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.

Arctic indigenous peoples' internationalism: in search of a legal justification

Polar Record ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-58 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natalia Loukacheva
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
National Policy ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Legal Personality ◽  
Evolution And Development ◽  
Legal Justification ◽  
The Right ◽  
International Representation

ABSTRACTThis paper focuses on the evolution and development of the legal scope of governance and the right to autonomy in the Arctic context by considering contemporary indigenous internationalism through a legal lens and by employing examples from the Arctic indigenous peoples of Greenland and Nunavut. It argues that depending on national policy, partnerships, and relations, there are possibilities for considering direct international representation, and the participation of autonomous sub-national units or indigenous peoples, as a part of the right to autonomy/self-government or internal self-determination. Since indigenous peoples have a limited legal personality and capacity in international law, the states of which they are a part can take special measures to accommodate their needs.

scholarly journals From High Hopes to Disillusionment: Indigenous Peoples' Struggle to (re)Gain Their Right to Self-determination

2008 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timo Koivurova
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Draft Convention ◽  
Un General Assembly ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
The Right

AbstractThis article will examine three international processes wherein the right to self-determination of indigenous peoples has been taken up: the process whereby the United Nations (UN) General Assembly adopted the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UN Declaration), the intention to negotiate a Nordic Saami Convention (Draft Convention) and the practice of the Human Rights Committee (HRC) in monitoring the observance of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Covenant). All of these processes have enunciated indigenous peoples' right to self-determination, but any claim to such a right has met with resistance from the states, with the reasons for such resistance examined here. The aim is to study why it is so difficult to insert indigenous peoples into international law as category and, in particular, to have states accept their right to self-determination. In the conclusions, it is useful to ask whether the problems experienced in promoting the right to self-determination of indigenous peoples are mere setbacks or whether they contain elements that might inform the international movement of indigenous peoples more generally.

International law and indigenous peoples

1995 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephan Marquardt
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Indigenous People ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Positive Answer ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
New Developments ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
The Right

AbstractIndigenous people- international law - self-determination. In recent years, indigenous people have become increasingly active at the international level. Recent developments, in particular the drafting of a UN declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples, indicate that new rules of international law may be emerging from this process. The new developments raise the question of the legal status of indigenous peoples. This question has essentially two elements: whether indigenous peoples may claim sovereign rights and whether the right to self-determination of peoples is applicable to them. A number of arguments suggest that a positive answer may be given to these two questions. An important aspect in this context is that indigenous peoples should be distinguished from minorities.

scholarly journals To The Question of the Right of Indigenous Peoples to Self-Determination and Its Interpretation in International Law

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 5127-5129
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Government Officials ◽  
The Public ◽  
Wide Circle ◽  
New Interpretation ◽  
The Right

It is well known that the right of indigenous peoples to self-determination today, as well as in the past, continues to be one of the most complex and difficult to solve issues for both national and international law as a whole. It certainly arouses great interest in itself and attracts attention from a wide circle of the public, excites the minds, and at the same time engenders the broadest discussions. Those discussions often provoke an aggravation of the already not benevolent relationship between indigenous peoples and government officials in their countries of residence. Along with this, those relationships continue to be defined and considered by most indigenous peoples of the world as the “foundation” on which their rights rest, as well as their survival and preservation as separate and independent peoples. Given this circumstance, the team of authors of this paper made an attempt to consider this controversial issue from a somewhat alternative point of view in relation to traditional concepts of self-determination of peoples, namely, from the standpoint of human rights and development policy. Thus, the authors bring a new interpretation to the discussion and study of this issue, which needs to be specified and defined.

The Right of Secession in Public International Law

1983 ◽  
Vol 20 ◽  
pp. 24-78 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Turp
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Community ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Public International Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
United Nations Charter ◽  
Right Of Self Determination

SummaryIn light of the numerous secessionist claims witnessed by the international community, it is of great interest to ascertain if international law provides for a right of secessionist self-determination. An analysis of treaty provisions encompassing the right of self-determination of peoples, namely the United Nations Charter and the Human Rights Covenants, suggests that the latter treaties consecrate an authentic right to secede. Such a right appears to be unhindered by any customary norm which would prohibit secession as a means of implementation of the right of self-determination of peoples, seeing that the practice of States is clearly divided on the issue of secession. It is submitted, however, that there is a need for more detached criteria with respect to the right of secession, its beneficiaries and its conditions of exercise and, consequently, for an acknowledgement, to the benefit of the international community as a whole, of the legitimacy of national affirmations and secessionist claims.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document