Group-Differentiated Rights and Informed Consent for Indigenous Group-Based Genetic Research

2005 ◽  
Vol 2 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Eduardo A. Rueda
Keyword(s):  
Informed Consent ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Latin American ◽  
Genetic Research ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Indigenous Groups ◽  
Indigenous Group ◽  
Constitutional Jurisprudence ◽  
Latin American Countries

AbstractIntroductionIndigenous Peoples’ struggle to be acknowledged as autonomous groups has found international legal support in the ILO Convention 169, which many Latin American countries have ratified. The way by which regional constitutional jurisprudence has reconstructed the foundations and scope of this right to self-determination seems, however, quite controversial. Firstly, taking Colombian constitutional jurisprudence as an example, I discuss both the acceptability of the restrictions the Constitutional Court has fixed to groups’ self-determination and the acceptability of defining them as collective subjects. Having in mind a better understanding of group-differentiated rights, I examine, secondly, how the conditions of the ILO Convention regarding the informed consent from indigenous groups should be satisfied when group-based genetic research is to be developed.

Mobilising Free, Prior and Informed Consent (fpic) from Below: A Typology of Indigenous Peoples’ Agency

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 291-313 ◽  
Author(s):  
Almut Schilling-Vacaflor ◽  
Riccarda Flemmer
Keyword(s):  
Informed Consent ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Latin American ◽  
Indigenous Rights ◽  
Legal Interpretation ◽  
Resource Governance ◽  
Natural Resource Governance ◽  
Indigenous Participation ◽  
Latin American Countries ◽  
Public Decision

Based on rich empirical data from Bolivia, Colombia, and Peru – the three Latin American countries where the implementation of prior consultation processes is most advanced – we present a typology of indigenous peoples’ agency surrounding prior consultation processes and the principle of free, prior and informed consent (fpic). The typology distinguishes between indigenous actors (1) mobilising for a strong legal interpretation of fpic, (2) mobilising for meaningful and influential fpic processes, (3) mobilising against prior consultation processes, and (4) blockading prior consultation processes for discussing broader grievances. We identify the most prominent indigenous strategies related to those four types, based on emblematic cases. Finally, we critically discuss the inherent shortcomings of the consultation approach as a model for indigenous participation in public decision-making and discuss the broader implications of our findings with regard to indigenous rights and natural resource governance.

scholarly journals Evolving Legal Protections for Indigenous Peoples in Africa: Some Post-UNDRIP Reflections

2018 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 339-365
Author(s):  
Derek Inman ◽  
Dorothée Cambou ◽  
Stefaan Smis
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Informed Consent ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Regional Level ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
African Continent ◽  
African Context ◽  
United Nations Declaration ◽  
Human Rights Norms ◽  
The Right

Prior to the adoption of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) many African states held a unified and seemingly hostile position towards the UNDRIP exemplified by the concerns outlined in the African Group's Draft Aide Memoire. In order to gain a better understanding of the protections offered to indigenous peoples on the African continent, it is necessary to examine the concerns raised in the aforementioned Draft Aide Memoire and highlight how these concerns have been addressed at the regional level, effectively changing how the human rights norms contained within the UNDRIP are seen, understood and interpreted in the African context. The purpose of this article is to do just that: to examine in particular how the issue of defining indigenous peoples has been tackled on the African continent, how the right to self-determination has unfolded for indigenous peoples in Africa and how indigenous peoples' right to free, prior and informed consent has been interpreted at the regional level.

scholarly journals Ecological research should consider Indigenous peoples and stewardship

FACETS ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 534-537
Author(s):  
Kyle A. Schang ◽  
Andrew J. Trant ◽  
Sara A. Bohnert ◽  
Alana M. Closs ◽  
Megan Humchitt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
South America ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Terrestrial Ecosystems ◽  
Ecological Research ◽  
Indigenous Groups ◽  
Indigenous Group ◽  
Indigenous Territories ◽  
America South ◽  
The Relationship

The relationship between Indigenous peoples and the functioning of terrestrial ecosystems has received increased attention in recent years. As a result, it is becoming more critical for researchers focusing on terrestrial ecosystems to work with Indigenous groups to gain a better understanding of how past and current stewardship of these lands may influence results. As a case study to explore these ideas, we systematically reviewed articles from 2008 to 2018 where research was conducted in North America, South America, and Oceania. Of the 159 articles included, 11 included acknowledgement of Indigenous stewardship, acknowledged the Indigenous Territories or lands, or named the Indigenous group on whose Territory the research was conducted. Within the scope of this case study, our results demonstrate an overall lack of Indigenous acknowledgement or consideration within the scope of our review. Given the recent advancements in our understanding of how Indigenous groups have shaped their lands, we implore researchers to consider collaboration among local Indigenous groups as to better cultivate relationships and foster a greater understanding of their ecosystems.

19. Indigenous Peoples’ Human Rights

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Havemann
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
State Sovereignty ◽  
Group Rights ◽  
Indigenous Group ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Impact

This chapter examines issues surrounding the human rights of Indigenous peoples. The conceptual framework for this chapter is informed by three broad, interrelated, and interdependent types of human rights: the right to existence, the right to self-determination, and individual human rights. After describing who Indigenous peoples are according to international law, the chapter considers the centuries of ambivalence about the recognition of Indigenous peoples. It then discusses the United Nations's establishment of a regime for Indigenous group rights and presents a case study of the impact of climate change on Indigenous peoples. It concludes with a reflection on the possibility of accommodating Indigenous peoples' self-determination with state sovereignty.

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.

From Individual to Collective Consent: The Case of Indigenous Peoples and undrip

2019 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 251-269
Author(s):  
Richard Healey
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Informed Consent ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Indigenous Communities ◽  
The State ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Sexual Ethics ◽  
The Third ◽  
Collective Decisions

Much of the debate around requirements for the free, prior, and informed consent of indigenous peoples has focused on enabling indigenous communities to participate in various forms of democratic decision-making alongside the state and other actors. Against this backdrop, this article sets out to defend three claims. The first two of these claims are conceptual in nature: (i) Giving (collective) consent and participating in the making of (collective) decisions are distinct activities; (ii) Despite some scepticism, there is a coherent conception of collective consent available to us, continuous with the notion of individual consent familiar from discussions in medical and sexual ethics. The third claim is normative: (iii) Participants in debates about free, prior, and informed consent must keep this distinction in view. That is because a group’s ability to give or withhold consent, and not only participate in making decisions, will play an important role in realising that collectives’ right to self-determination.

Part II Group Identity, Self-Determination, and Relations with States, Ch.9 Free, Prior, and Informed Consent in the UNDRIP: Articles 10, 19, 29(2), and 32(2)

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barelli Mauro
Keyword(s):  
Informed Consent ◽  
Indigenous People ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Group Identity ◽  
Good Faith ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Fundamental Aspect ◽  
Cultural Group ◽  
Effective Protection ◽  
The Right

This chapter addresses the norm of free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) found in Articles 10, 19, 29(2), and 32(2). The rights to participation and consultation are crucial to guarantee the effective protection of the rights and interests of any ethno-cultural group, and represent a fundamental aspect of modern democratic societies. Accordingly, FPIC reinforces significantly the provisions of the Declaration dealing with participatory rights, and specifically those concerning the right of indigenous peoples to be consulted with regard to matters affecting them. At a minimum, FPIC requires that the relevant consultations should not be a mere formality, but, rather, should be conducted in good faith and with the objective of finding a common agreement. However, FPIC may also be understood in a more radical manner, namely one requesting that certain measures or projects should not be implemented in the absence of the consent of the indigenous people concerned.

Rhetoric and Reality: The World Bank Development Policies, Mining Corporations, and Indigenous Communities in Latin America

2008 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 431-443 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerardo Munarriz
Keyword(s):  
World Bank ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Latin American ◽  
Indigenous Communities ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Legal Reforms ◽  
The World Bank ◽  
Development Policies ◽  
The World ◽  
Latin American Countries

AbstractRelying on critical legal approaches, in particular TWAIL and the work of Indigenous scholars, this paper analyzes the extent to which the World Bank's notion of "development" and its promotion of the expansion of market-based legal reforms in Latin American countries have benefited transnational corporations (TNCs) to the detriment of Indigenous Peoples. It argues that the World Bank's policy-based lending programmes and market-oriented legal framework since 1980 have contributed to an expansion of corporate mining activities, which have caused not only forced displacement and further impoverishment of numerous Indigenous communities but have also directly contributed to the destruction of their cultures and the environment they inhabit. Furthermore, the World Bank's normative operational policies and practices on issues affecting Indigenous Peoples have provided a legal framework and mechanisms that "manage" affected Indigenous communities in ways that further the dispossession of their lands and natural resources.

From proclamation to denial

2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 49-81 ◽  
Author(s):  
Catherine Alès
Keyword(s):  
Political Participation ◽  
Indigenous People ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Latin American ◽  
Indigenous Rights ◽  
American States ◽  
Participation Politique ◽  
America Latina ◽  
Latin American Countries ◽  
Peuples Autochtones

English Abstract:The indigenous people of Venezuela, long excluded from political participation, registered a whole set of rights within the new constitution in 1999. However, the proclamation of these rights did not ensure their full implementation and, a fortiori, their purpose to protect the survival of indigenous peoples. This article presents an analysis of the processes through which indigenous rights have been allocated but poorly implemented and even substantially withdrawn. In many Latin American states, the rights that promote autonomy and self-government are actively abandoned notwithstanding cultural, political, and economic contexts be they progressive or conservative. Through this analysis, this article proposes the concept of “proclamation-denial”. While this concept is relevant for numerous Latin American countries, this article highlights the specificities of the Venezuelan case.Spanish Abstract: Los pueblos indígenas de Venezuela, históricamente excluidos de la participación política, lograron que se registrara todo un conjunto de derechos particulares dentro de la nueva constitución en 1999. Sin embargo, la proclamación de estos derechos no garantizó su plena aplicación y, a fortiori, su propósito de proteger la supervivencia de los pueblos indígenas. Este artículo analiza los procesos por los cuales los derechos indígenas han sido legalmente asignados pero débilmente implementados, y hasta desconocidos sustancialmente. En muchos estados latinoamericanos, los derechos que promueven la autonomía y el autogobierno son activamente abandonados, y esto que el contexto cultural, político y económico sea progresista o conservador. A través de este análisis, este artículo propone el concepto de «proclamación-negación». Si bien este concepto es relevante para numerosos países de América Latina, el texto destaca las especificidades del caso venezolano.French Abstract:Longtemps exclus de la participation politique, les autochtones du Venezuela ont su inscrire tout un ensemble de droits particuliers au sein de la nouvelle constitution en 1999. La proclamation de ces droits n’a cependant pas garanti leur pleine application ni, a fortiori, son objectif de protéger la survivance des peuples autochtones. Cet article présente une analyse des processus par lesquels les droits autochtones ont été attribués mais faiblement implémentés, et ont même substantiellement régressé. Dans plusieurs Etats d’Amérique latine, les droits qui promeuvent l’autonomie et l’auto-gouvernement sont activement abandonnés, indépendamment du fait que le contexte culturel, politique et économique soit progressiste ou conservateur. A travers cette analyse, l’article propose le concept de «proclamation-dénégation». Tandis que ce concept est pertinent pour de nombreux pays d’Amérique latine, le texte illustre les spécificités du cas vénézuélien.

scholarly journals A Comparative Analysis of Indigenous Research Guidelines to Inform Genomic Research in Indigenous Communities

2012 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicole K Taniguchi ◽  
Maile Taualii ◽  
Jay Maddock
Keyword(s):  
Best Practices ◽  
Indigenous People ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Biological Samples ◽  
Genetic Research ◽  
Indigenous Communities ◽  
Genomic Research ◽  
Indigenous Research ◽  
Research Guidelines ◽  
Indigenous Groups

BACKGROUND: Genetic research has potential benefits for improving health, such as identifying molecular characteristics of a disease, understanding disease prevalence and treatment, and developing treatments tailored to patients based on individual genetic characteristics of their disease. Indigenous people are often targeted for genetic research because genes are easier to study in communities that practice endogamy. Therefore, populations perceived to be more homogenous, such as Indigenous peoples, are ideal for genetic studies. While Indigenous communities remain the focal point of many genomic studies, some result in harm and unethical practice. Unfortunately, the harms of poorly formulated and unethical research involving Indigenous people have created barriers to participation that prevent critical and lifesaving research. These harms have led a number of Indigenous communities to develop guidelines for engaging with researchers to assist in safely bridging the gap between genetic research and Indigenous peoples. SPECIFIC AIMS: The specific aims of this study were: (1) to conduct an international review and comparison of Indigenous research guidelines that highlight topics regarding genetics and use of biological samples and identify commonalities and differences among ethical principles of concern to Indigenous peoples; and (2) develop policy recommendations for Indigenous populations interested in creating formal policies around the use of genetic information and protection of biological samples using data from specific aim 1. METHODS: A comparative analysis was performed to identify best research practices and recommendations for Indigenous groups from four countries: Canada, New Zealand, Australia, and the United States. The analysis examined commonalities in political relationships, which support self-determination among these Indigenous communities to control their data. Current international Indigenous guidelines were analyzed to review processes of how genetic research is conducted and the use of biological samples is handled with Indigenous peoples. RESULTS: Results suggest the need for genetic and genomic research policies for the world’s Indigenous people. Indigenous groups are most vulnerable to research exploitation and harm; therefore, identifying principles that work for Indigenous people will lead to best practices for all populations. CONCLUSIONS: Development and implementation of best practices informed by research guidelines in Canada, New Zealand, Australia, and the U.S. may be helpful to advise Indigenous leaders, policy makers, and researchers to the proper conduction of genetic research within Indigenous communities. Comparative analyses are a useful tool for identifying areas for further work in developing genetic research policy for Indigenous communities. OUTCOME: The outcomes of this analysis are relevant and useful to Indigenous communities and inform the development of community-based genetic research guidelines. The recommendations can be used in designing appropriate policies for future genomic research with Indigenous peoples.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document