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.

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.

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.

The Right of Nations to Self-Determination in the Context of the Regaining of Independence by Poland — an International-Law Analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol Special Issue ◽  
pp. 7-14
Author(s):  
Małgorzata Andrzejczak-Świątek
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
International Law ◽  
French Revolution ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
World War ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
The People ◽  
The Right

This article aims to show the problem of self-determination of the people in the light of contemporary standards of international law, as well as to compare them with the factual and legal basis of regaining independence by Poland in 1918. The principle of the right of people to self-determination as one of the basic rules of international law was proclaimed only after World War II, however, concepts conferring on the population living in a given territory to decide about themselves appeared before the French Revolution. The issue of the right to self-determination of people is extremely complex — after World War II, there was in this respect the development of treaty guarantees concluded with international agreements for the system of human rights protection, which sanctioned this right as the only subjective collective right. On the other hand, the practice of contemporary states on this issue is not uniform and largely depends on the acceptance of the facts by the international community. From the point of view of developing the right to self-determination of people, and thus the right to independence, the case of Poland is extremely interesting not only because of the historical and political background, but also because it can be treated as a precedent in international law in the context of recognition and acceptance of independence by the state.

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.

Political Participation of Aboriginal People (Orang Asli) in Peninsular Malaysia: Examining the Compatibility of the Aboriginal Peoples Act 1954 with Undrip Standards

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-21
Author(s):  
Muhamad Sayuti Hassan ◽  
Rohaida Nordin
Keyword(s):  
Political Participation ◽  
International Law ◽  
Aboriginal People ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Peninsular Malaysia ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Aboriginal Peoples ◽  
Orang Asli ◽  
The Right

The main objective of this article is to critically evaluate the compatibility of the ‘right to political participation’ of the Orang Asli by looking at international law standards. The present study utilises a qualitative socio-legal approach, which analyses the political participation of the Orang Asli under Malaysian law and determines whether the Aboriginal Peoples Act 1954 (apa) can provide for the protection, well-being, and the advancement of the Orang Asli. Arguably, the existing provisions of the apa are not in conformity with the recognition in undrip and in no way guarantee the Orang Asli’s right to self-determination as recognised by international law. Thus, the current study recommends an amendment to the apa and introduces guidelines to empower political participation of the Orang Asli by incorporating the principles of undrip. The amendment is necessary to ensure that the protection of the right to self-determination of the Orang Asli is compatible with international law standards.

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.

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.

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?

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document