scholarly journals KULTURA I ROZWÓJ JAKO PODSTAWOWE KATEGORIE ODNIESIENIA W TWORZĄCYM SIĘ PRAWIE LUDÓW TUBYLCZYCH

2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 7
Author(s):  
Zbigniew B. Rudnicki
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Minority Groups ◽  
Indigenous Rights ◽  
The United States ◽  
Strict Sense ◽  
National Society ◽  
The United Nations

CULTURE AND DEVELOPMENT AS THE BASIC CATEGORIESOF REFERENCE IN THE EMERGING LAW OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES Summary In contemporary international relations indigenous peoples constitute particular ethnic communities waiting for a long time for the regulation of their status as subjects of international law. Paradoxically, decolonisation, which helped many colonial societies gain national rights, has not only left the issue of indigenous peoples in countries formerly colonised by the White Man unresolved but has also complicated their status. In practice former colonies such as the United States, Canada, Australia or New Zealand have not regulated the legal status of indigenous peoples, relegating them politically and economically to the margins of society. The rights of indigenous peoples as minority groups living in the former Soviet Union, who are not at all colonial peoples officially, have not been defined either. The category of indigenous peoples now extends to many ethnic groups living in nation-states, who are culturally and linguistically distinct with respect to the dominant segments of the national society. However, assigning the attributes of indigenous peoples to them in the strict sense of the term is questionable and is not dealt with in this article. This article traces the process which leads to indigenous peoples acquiring the status of a fully-fledged subject of international law. It describes attempts that have been made to interpret the rights of indigenous peoples on the grounds of the universal instruments of international law. The principal documents are the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples (1960), the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (1966), the United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966), and finally the Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation Among States in Accordance with the Charter of the United Nations (1992). Despite the progress made in granting indigenous peoples their rights with the adoption of the UN Declaration on Indigenous Rights (2007), it is still difficult to talk of full success, i.e. the recognition of the international identity and rights of indigenous peoples on a par with other sovereign nations.

The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

2018 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
Collective Rights ◽  
Substantive Content ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
United Nations Declaration ◽  
The Individual

The rights of indigenous peoples under international law have seen significant change in recent years, as various international bodies have attempted to address the question of how best to protect and enforce their rights. The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) is the strongest statement thus far by the international community on this issue. The Declaration was adopted by the United Nations on 13 September 2007, and sets out the individual and collective rights of indigenous peoples, as well as their rights to culture, identity, language, employment, health, education, and other issues. While it is not a legally binding instrument under international law, it represents the development of international legal norms designed to eliminate human rights violations against indigenous peoples, and to help them in combating discrimination and marginalisation. This commentary on the Declaration analyses both the substantive content of the Declaration and the position of the Declaration within existing international law. It considers the background to the text of every Article of the Declaration, including the travaux préparatoire, the relevant drafting history, and the context in which the provision came to be included in the Declaration. It sets out each provision's content, interpretation, its relationship with other principles of international law, and its legal status, and also discusses the significance and outlook for each of the rights analysed. The book assesses the practice of relevant regional and international bodies in enforcing the rights of indigenous peoples, providing an understanding of the practical application of the Declaration's principles.

scholarly journals Indigenous Rights

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Sargent
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Native American ◽  
United Nations ◽  
American Indian ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Indigenous Rights ◽  
The United States ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Impact

The attention given to indigenous rights has increased since the approval of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) in 2007. Although it is a soft law declaration and technically not binding, it serves as the cornerstone of much of the contemporary research on indigenous rights. Four states that initially voted in opposition to the UNDRIP—Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States—have now endorsed it. Despite the attention it garners, the UNDRIP is not the only international instrument that has been utilized to establish and protect indigenous rights and interests. The regional inter-American human rights system has also been key in the development and protection of indigenous rights. Another important facet of the UNDRIP is that it took twenty-two years of drafting effort before it was approved by the United Nations General Assembly. During those twenty-two years, many discussions, debates, and analyses were undertaken over the meaning of rights and principles included in the drafts of the declaration. Research and scholarship from the era before passage of the declaration is helpful in understanding the content of the document. But the approval of the declaration did not end the controversies over indigenous rights. Debate and examination of the evolving body of indigenous rights continues during the period after passage of the declaration. As well, indigenous rights are not simply “human rights”; rather, they are a complex set of rights that can impact a broad swath of other legal doctrines. Intersections of indigenous rights with laws regarding economic development, the environment, and land claims can give rise to new interpretations and understandings of the impact of indigenous rights. While the four “no states” might be what most readily comes to mind when thinking about where many indigenous peoples live, indigenous peoples are, in fact, scattered throughout the world, including Europe. Research on indigenous rights is not carried out only from a legal perspective. Indigenous rights cover many different kinds of rights. Some have an emphasis in international law doctrines, such as the right to self-determination and issues about indigenous and tribal sovereignty. Other rights emphasize the importance of culture and heritage, and it can be useful to consider research in other disciplines, including history, political science, and anthropology. This article includes research and resources in related disciplines as well as legal research and law-based resources. (A note about language: American references to indigenous peoples are inclusive of the words “American Indian” or “Indian.” “Indian” is a legal term of art used in federal and state statutes. Indigenous peoples in the United States refer to themselves as “Indians” rather than Native Americans. For these reasons, where appropriate, the article makes use of the terms American Indian and Indian in preference to Native American. This usage may be confusing to non-American readers and so a clarification is offered).

International Law, US Foreign Policy and Post-9/11 Islamic Fundamentalism: The Legal Status of the 'War on Terror'

2008 ◽  
Vol 77 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 87-103
Author(s):  
Javaid Rehman ◽  
Saptarshi Ghosh
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
War On Terror ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Government ◽  
Significant Activity ◽  
The United Nations

AbstractThe days immediately after 11 September 2001 saw considerable tension, anger and anxiety. These politically charged days witnessed significant activity within the United Nations and various agencies of international law. The world community rightly condemned the 9/11 attacks as cowardly actions and an unforgivable crime against humanity. The entire global public opinion expressed sympathy for the victims of 9/11 and empathised with the people of the United States. The show of human solidarity as well as the Resolutions within the United Nations were the responses from the international community and international law to the terrorist attacks on the United States. It becomes, therefore, quite ironic that the enormity of the 9/11 human tragedy was used by the United States government to undermine the established norms, practices, principles and framework of international law. Over the past six years, the United States foreign policy has continued to violate international law and brutalise human dignity. This paper critically examines the systematic violation of international norms under the banner of 'war on terror'. It takes the view that the 'war on terror' has had exactly the effect which it proclaimed to prevent-namely the growth of radicalisation, terrorism and Islamic extremism.

scholarly journals Indigenous Nations’ Rights in the Balance

2014 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-3
Author(s):  
Marcelle Burns
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Indigenous Rights ◽  
Indigenous Nations ◽  
White Face ◽  
Indigenous Human Rights ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
United Nations Declaration

The United Nations’ Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2007) received a mixed reception. Some commentators viewed it as setting important normative standards for the recognition of Indigenous human rights within the international law framework, whilst others have been critical of the declaration for unduly limiting the nature and scope of Indigenous rights (Anaya 2004; Churchill 2011; Davis 2008; Moreton-Robinson 2011; Pitty 2001; Watson and Venne 2012). Indigenous Nations’ Rights in the Balance: An Analysis of the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples by Charmaine White Face (2013) makes an important contribution to this debate by methodically charting the key changes made during the passage of the declaration through the United Nations process and highlighting the significance of these changes for the recognition and realisation of Indigenous rights.

Convention on the Legal Status of the Caspian Sea

2019 ◽  
Vol 58 (2) ◽  
pp. 399-413
Author(s):  
Rizal Abdul Kadir
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Caspian Sea ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
The Caspian Sea ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The United Nations

After twenty-two years of negotiations, in Aktau on August 12, 2018, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Iran, Russia, and Turkmenistan signed the Convention on the Legal Status of the Caspian Sea. The preamble of the Convention stipulates, among other things, that the Convention, made up of twenty-four articles, was agreed on by the five states based on principles and norms of the Charter of the United Nations and International Law. The enclosed Caspian Sea is bordered by Iran, Russia, and three states that were established following dissolution of the Soviet Union, namely Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, and Turkmenistan.

Realising Ainu indigenous rights: a commentary on Hiroshi Maruyama's ‘Japan's post-war Ainu policy. Why the Japanese Government has not recognised Ainu indigenous rights?’

Polar Record ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 50 (2) ◽  
pp. 209-211 ◽  
Author(s):  
Naohiro Nakamura
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Indigenous Rights ◽  
Japanese Government ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Government ◽  
Post War ◽  
Legal Frameworks ◽  
United Nations Declaration

ABSTRACTThis commentary reviews Maruyama's article ‘Japan's post-war Ainu policy: why the Japanese Government has not recognised Ainu indigenous rights?’ (Maruyama 2013a), published in this journal. Maruyama criticises the government for its reluctance to enact a new Ainu law to guarantee indigenous rights, even after Japan's ratification of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). However, in actuality, the government is searching for the foundation of new Ainu policies in the existing legal frameworks and trying to guarantee some elements of indigenous rights. Japan's case suggests the possibility of realising indigenous rights without the enactment of a specific law.

scholarly journals 9/11 as False Flag: Why International Law Must Dare to Care

2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 371-392 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy Baker Benjamin
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Twentieth Century ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
September 11 ◽  
African History ◽  
The Us ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
International War

At the heart of contemporary international law lies a paradox: the attacks on the United States of September 11, 2001 have justified 16 years of international war, yet the official international community, embodied principally in the United Nations, has failed to question or even scrutinise the US government's account of those attacks. Despite the emergence of an impressive and serious body of literature that impugns the official account and even suggests that 9/11 may have been a classic (if unprecedentedly monstrous) false-flag attack, international statesmen, following the lead of scholars, have been reluctant to wade into what appears to be a very real controversy. African nations are no strangers to the concept of the false flag tactic, and to its use historically in the pursuit of illegitimate geopolitical aims and interests. This article draws on recent African history in this regard, as well as on deeper twentieth-century European and American history, to lay a foundation for entertaining the possibility of 9/11-as-false-flag. This article then argues that the United Nations should seek to fulfil its core and incontrovertible ‘jury’ function of determining the existence of inter-state aggression in order to exercise a long-overdue oversight of the official 9/11 narrative.

Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law

1993 ◽  
Vol 87 (1) ◽  
pp. 103-111
Author(s):  
Marian Nash
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
United States ◽  
New York ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
George Bush ◽  
Environment And Development ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Contemporary Practice

On September 8, 1992, President George Bush transmitted to the Senate for advice and consent to ratification the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, adopted at New York on May 9, 1992, by the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee for a Framework Convention on Climate Change and signed on behalf of the United States at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio de Janeiro on June 12, 1992.

A Lack of Language – Waging War or Combatting Crime? The Blurred Rule of International Law in the Face of the Attacks of September 11, 2001

2001 ◽  
Vol 2 (17) ◽  
Author(s):  
Claus Binder
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
September 11 ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
The Public ◽  
Self Defense ◽  
The Face ◽  
The United Nations

After the terrorists' attacks of September 11, 2001, a lot of war rhetoric came out of the public and private sphere within the United States of America. On October 7, 2001, however, the rhetoric turned into reality as President George W. Bush countered the terrorist attacks and the threat of future terrorism with military means. While waging that new war U.S. governmental officials constantly make one important point, and that is that the United States are just exercising their right of self-defense. Moreover, on the day after the attacks, the Security Council of the United Nations unanimously reaffirmed the inherent right of self-defense as recognized by the Charter of the United Nations. Does that mean that international law is just that clear?

Recent Books on Human Rights and Groups Review Essays International Law and the Evolution of Indigenous Rights

2008 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 117-131
Author(s):  
Stephen Allen
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Indigenous Rights ◽  
Land Rights ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Critical Stage ◽  
Conditions Of Possibility ◽  
Supranational Level

AbstractThe recent adoption of the United Nations (UN) Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples has reinvigorated the discourse on indigenous rights. This essay reviews three books – Xanthaki's Indigenous Rights and United Nations Standards: Self-Determination, Culture and Land; Gilbert's Indigenous Peoples' Land Rights Under International Law: From Victims to Actors; and Rodriguez-Pinero's Indigenous Peoples, Postcolonialism and International Law: The ILO Regime (1919–1989) – that illustrate the way in which indigenous rights have evolved at the supranational level. Moreover, in their different ways, these important books highlight the conditions of possibility for indigenous peoples at a critical stage in the development of indigenous rights in international law.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document