scholarly journals Creating a space for indigenous rights: the Universal Periodic Review as a mechanism for promoting the rights of indigenous peoples

2020 ◽  
pp. 124-147
Author(s):  
Noelle Higgins
Keyword(s):  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Indigenous Rights ◽  
Periodic Review ◽  
Universal Periodic Review

Methodological considerations

2021 ◽  
pp. 102-106
Author(s):  
William A. Schabas
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Universal Declaration ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Customary Law ◽  
Periodic Review ◽  
Treaty Ratification ◽  
Cultural Rights ◽  
Universal Periodic Review ◽  
Methodological Considerations

Evidence for the existence of customary law is compiled, using the rights in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as a template. The pattern of treaty ratification is examined along with materials from the Universal Periodic Review, especially concerning States that are not parties to relevant treaties. The list is supplemented with rights omitted from the Declaration, such as the rights of minorities and indigenous peoples, as well as with so-called peoples’ rights, to development, peace, and self-determination. Particular attention is directed to the customary nature of economic, social, and cultural rights.

scholarly journals Indigenous Rights and Trade Obligations: How Does CUSMA’s Indigenous General Exception Apply to Canada?

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-47
Author(s):  
J. ANTHONY VANDUZER ◽  
MELANIE MALLET
Keyword(s):  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Indigenous Rights ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Legal Obligations ◽  
United States Mexico ◽  
Trade And Investment ◽  
Ongoing Concern ◽  
Party State

Abstract Canadian commitments under trade and investment treaties have been an ongoing concern for Indigenous peoples. The Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) is the first Canadian treaty to include a general exception for measures that a party state “deems necessary to fulfill its legal obligations to [I]ndigenous peoples.” This exception is likely to afford Canada broad, but not unlimited, discretion to determine what its legal obligations to Indigenous peoples require. There is a residual risk that Canada’s reliance on the exception could be challenged through the CUSMA dispute settlement process. A CUSMA panel would not have the expertise necessary to decide inevitably complex questions related to what Canada’s legal obligations to Indigenous peoples require. While state-to-state cases under the North American Free Trade Agreement have been rare, a CUSMA panel adjudication regarding the Indigenous general exception risks damaging consequences for Canada’s relationship with Indigenous peoples.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document