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 The Right of Self-Determination: Its Emergence, Development, and Controversy

2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Munafrizal Manan
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Right ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
International Human ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Self Determination

This paper discusses the right of self-determinationfrom  international  law  and international human rights law perspective. It traces the emergence and development of self-determination from political principle to human right. It also explores the controversy of the right of self-determination. There have been different and even contradictory interpretations of the right of self-determination. Besides, there is no consensus on the mechanism to apply the right of self-determination. Both international law and international human rights law are vague about this.

Examining the Suitability of the International Minority Rights Regime as an Avenue for Advancing Self-Determination Claims

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 675-727
Author(s):  
Rhys Carvosso
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Minority Groups ◽  
Minority Rights ◽  
Negotiation Process ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
International Human ◽  
The Right

The international legal right of all ‘peoples’ to self-determination applies indeterminately to minority groups. The limited jurisprudence tends toward an ‘internal’ dimension of the right being available to minorities, to be exercised and negotiated domestically. However, where a state-minority negotiation process fails, the international law of self-determination is inadequate to resolve the ensuing deadlock. Accordingly, this article examines the suitability of minority protections under international human rights law (‘minority rights’) as a supplementary set of rules by which disputes concerning the self-determination of minorities might be resolved. It argues that owing to the strong conceptual and doctrinal overlap between the two areas, the enforcement of minority rights is a suitable strategy for advancing a self-determination claim. However, two bars within existing international human rights enforcement procedures – the non-justiciability of self-determination, and the requirement that complainants must be “victims of a violation” – substantially reduce the utility of this strategy at present.

Part II Group Identity, Self-Determination, and Relations with States, Ch.7 Equality and Non-Discrimination in the UNDRIP: Articles 2, 6, and 7(1)

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gover Kirsty
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Full Spectrum ◽  
International Human ◽  
United Nations Declaration

This chapter analyses the rights to equality and non-discrimination in Articles 2, 6, and 7(1). The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) covers the full spectrum of rights contained in international and regional instruments, adapted to the circumstances of indigenous peoples. Because the UNDRIP has an exceptionally wide substantive scope, debates about equality and non-discrimination were a central part of the negotiations leading to its adoption. Where provisions of the UNDRIP were thought to deviate from rights already expressed in international law, they were perceived in some states to compromise the fundamental principles of equality and non-discrimination that underpin existing human rights' instruments. In this way, the extensive discussions about equality and indigeneity that characterized the development of UNDRIP are also debates about the continuity and coherency of international human rights' law.

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 Rescuing Asylum-Seeker Stranded at Sea: Malaysia’s Duty under International Law

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (3.30) ◽  
pp. 182
Author(s):  
Syafiq Sulaiman ◽  
Salawati Mat Basir ◽  
Mohd Zamre Mohd Zahir
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
International Human ◽  
The Right

The protection of the right to life and the duty to rescue persons in distress at sea are the fundamental obligations under two specialized international law regimes which are the international human rights law and the law of the sea. These rules when read together form a strong protection of the human rights of the asylum-seekers stranded at sea. However, often states failed to honour this obligation for various reasons ranging from national security to economic reasons. This article will analyse Malaysia’s responsibilities as regards the right to life and the duty to rescue of these asylum-seekers. It will also identify the existing international and domestic legal framework relevant to the application of these obligations upon Malaysia and whether it has acted in breach of such obligations. The article then proceeded with suggestions for further improvement that Malaysia can adopt in order to better perform its obligations. This study is a pure doctrinal legal research which is qualitative in nature. The data used in this research is collected from library-based resources. These data were then analyzed by using methods of content analysis as well as critical analysis. The article found that Malaysia has a duty to protect the right to life under international human rights law. Additionally, Malaysia is also bound under the law of the sea to perform its duty to rescue. In view of Malaysia’s failure to perform these duties in two occasions in the past consequently had resulted in a violation of international law. Therefore, it is suggested that Malaysia should initiate a revision of its national laws and policies regarding treatment of asylum-seekers stranded at sea to be in line with Malaysia’s duty under international law. Besides, the Malaysian Maritime Enforcement Agency is call upon to comply with the international standards of treatment of persons in distress at sea which includes the asylum-seekers.  

18. The right to self-determination

2019 ◽  
pp. 330-347
Author(s):  
Rhona K. M. Smith
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Current Debate ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Territorial Integrity ◽  
The Future ◽  
International Human ◽  
The Right

This chapter examines the right to self-determination in international human rights law. It traces the origins of this right and considers issues characterizing the current debate on the future of self-determination. The chapter suggests that while self-determination is acceptable for divesting States of colonial powers, problems can arise when groups that are not the sole occupants of a State territory choose to exercise self-determination. The right to self-determination may sit uneasily with respect for territorial integrity of States. Various forms of modern self-determination, including partial or full autonomy within States are emerging.

17. The right to self-determination

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rhona K. M. Smith
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Current Debate ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Territorial Integrity ◽  
The Future ◽  
International Human ◽  
The Right

This chapter examines the right to self-determination in international human rights law. It traces the origins of this right and considers issues characterizing the current debate on the future of self-determination. The chapter suggests that while self-determination is acceptable for divesting States of colonial powers, problems can arise when groups that are not the sole occupants of a State territory choose to exercise self-determination. The right to self-determination may sit uneasily with respect for territorial integrity of States. Various forms of modern self-determination, including partial or full autonomy within States are emerging.

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 IV The Right to Reparation/Guarantees of Non-Recurrence, A The Right to Reparation, Principle 32 Reparation Procedures

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
d’Argent Pierre ◽  
de Ghellinck Isabelle
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Theoretical Framework ◽  
Historical Background ◽  
International Level ◽  
Human Right ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Human Rights Treaties ◽  
International Human ◽  
The Right ◽  
Procedural Aspect

Principle 32 deals with the procedural aspect of the right to reparation, that is, the right for victims of human right violations to access remedial procedures. It addresses three issues: the right to access remedial procedures, procedural requirements of national reparation programmes, and regional and international procedures. While the obligation of states to provide effective remedies is enshrined in most of, if not all, the key international human rights treaties, Principle 32 provides for a right to all victims to access remedies. ‘Reparation’ and ‘remedies’ are both envisioned as victims’ rights, but the distinction between them is vague. After providing a contextual and historical background on Principle 32, this chapter discusses its theoretical framework and how the reparation procedure, judicial or administrative, dealing with gross violations of human rights at national or international level has been implemented.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document