Indigenous peoples’ human rights, self-determination and local governance – Part 2

Part 1 of this article explored the relevance of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples of Australia, particularly the key principles of self-determination and free, prior and informed consent; how the international human rights framework applies in Australia; and Australia’s lack of compliance with it. Part One concluded by discussing the Uluru Statement from the Heart, presented to all the people of Australia in 2017, and how it marked a turning point in the struggle for recognition by Australia’s Indigenous peoples. Part 2 explores recent developments since the release of the Uluru Statement, especially at sub-national levels, in relation to treaty and truth-telling. It draws some comparisons with Canada and New Zealand, discusses the concept of coexistence, and presents a set of Foundational Principles for Parity and Coexistence between two culturally distinct systems of land ownership, use and tenure.

People, Animals, Protected Places, and Archaeology: A Complex Collaboration in Belize

The authors of this chapter direct the Stann Creek Regional Archaeology Project (SCRAP), featuring a multi-year, multi-site, multidisciplinary program of archaeological research along the south-eastern margins of the Maya Mountains, Stann Creek District, Belize. While we and our team members most frequently direct our academic efforts in an attempt to reconstruct and understand the complicated suite of developmental processes, experiences, and life histories of the inhabitants of this region more than 1000 years ago, this ancient past represents only one of the two dominant spatio-temporal and socio-political contexts with which we engage on a regular basis. In this chapter, we shift our focus to the interactions with present-day individuals, communities, and institutions that structure our archaeological work. For some perspective, we will discuss the history of the development of the Cockscomb Basin Wildlife Sanctuary and connected forest reserves—totaling some 1011 km2 of nominally ‘protected’ space—and ongoing co-management organization and use relationships with adjacent Indigenous Maya communities. We frame this development within the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and supplement historical records with informally gathered impressions from local rights-holders and stakeholders, as well as through our own experiences and observations. We conclude by returning to the subject of our own operations within the region to highlight how SCRAP has attempted to learn from this history—particularly with respect to co-management and community engagement—and to propose areas for improvement.

Indigenous Influence and Engagement in Mining Permitting in British Columbia, Canada: Lessons for Sweden and Norway?

Mine developments in Indigenous territories risk disrupting Indigenous cultures and their economies, including spiraling already high levels of conflict. This is the situation in Canada, Sweden, and Norway, as elsewhere, and is fostered by current state legal framework that reflect historical trajectories, although circumstances are gradually changing. Promising institutional changes have taken place in British Columbia (BC), Canada, with respect to new legislative reforms. Notably, new legislation from 2019 intends to implement the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) in the province, by promoting consent-based and collaborative decision-making mechanisms. New environmental assessment legislation is another example; this legislation includes early engagement, collaborative decision-making, and Indigenous-led assessments. The article’s aim is, first, to analyze how Indigenous communities can influence and engage in the mining permitting system of BC, and, secondly, to highlight the positive features of the BC system using a comparative lens to identify opportunities for Sweden and Norway regarding mining permitting and Indigenous rights. Applying a legal-scientific and comparative analysis, the article analyzes traditional legal sources. The article concludes that the strong points that the BC regime could offer the two Nordic countries are: the concept of reconciliation, incorporation of UNDRIP, the spectrum of consultation and engagement approaches, and the structure of environmental assessments. All three jurisdictions, however, struggle with balancing mine developments and securing Indigenous authority and influence over land uses in their traditional territories.

From Community Autonomy in Hungary to Indigenous Self-Determination in the Outback of Australia: Can Non-Territorial Autonomy Find Traction Down Under?

Hungary has, during the past three decades, developed what could arguably be described as one of the most advanced institutional systems of non-territorial autonomy in the world. Being so advanced does not of course mean the system is perfect or beyond criticism. But it does provide potentially useful insights into how non-territorial autonomy can or cannot work in practice. This article reflects on the institutional design of Hungary and asks whether principles can be identified that may be employed by indigenous groups in Australia and beyond in their search for a form of self-government. The theory and practice of non-territorial autonomy has so far been the focus of experts predominately from Central and Eastern Europe and the Russian Federation. This article considers whether any insight can be gained to apply the principles of non-territorial autonomy to other jurisdictions. The institutional design in place in Hungary may offer useful insight into how indigenous communities, particular some Aboriginal communities in Australia, may be bestowed with legal powers as a community to make decisions of a cultural and linguistic nature and to cooperate via the legal entity with local and state authorities. The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples refers to selfdetermination and autonomy without placing those terms into a specific set of institutional arrangements. Whereas non-territorial autonomy may not be suitable for all communities, this article contends that non-territorial arrangements may offer an opportunity for self-government to indigenous (and other) communities that share a strong sense of identity; that do not have a geographical base where they constitute the majority; and where a communal desire for a form of self-government in public law exists.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights: an archival commentary*

On 10 December 1948 the Third General Assembly of the United Nations adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: a universal declaration, not a United Nations declaration. The Preamble of the Declaration begins by proclaiming that “recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world”. As archivists know, the nexus between human rights and archives is strong and complex, because records are essential both to protecting these rights and to obtaining recourse when these rights are violated. This essay illuminates some of the relationships of records to rights, looking at each of the 30 Articles in turn.

Decolonizing Self-Determination: Haudenosaunee Passports and Negotiated Sovereignty

The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) recognises both Indigenous peoples’ right to self-determination and simultaneously offers protections in regard to states’ right to sovereignty and territorial integrity vis-à-vis Indigenous peoples’ claims. Often, this is considered an internal inconsistency of the UNDRIP, and another common critique is that Indigenous peoples were only recognised as having a diminished right to self-determination, which is less than what everyone else enjoys. This article stands in contrast to these two lines of critique, arguing that the UNDRIP’s articulation of self-determination is potentially ushering in a broadening, and possible reshaping, of self-determination, which has been increasingly decoupled from singular Westphalian notions of ‘sovereignty’ and ‘territoriality’ in ways that require ongoing negotiation between peoples and states. This case study of the Haudenosaunee Confederacy’s issuance and use of their passports, based on original fieldwork including a set of qualitative interviews with key informants, demonstrates how the Haudenosaunee Confederacy is pushing the practice and understanding of self-determination in multiple, new directions to include plural sovereignties in deeply significant ways concerning International Relations in both theory and in practice.

Environmental Justice and Indigeneity

Indigenous environmental justice (IEJ) is distinct from the broader EJ field, which has been found to exhibit certain limitations when applied to Indigenous contexts. Indigenous scholars have observed, for example, that EJ scholarship generally does not consider Indigenous sovereignty, laws, and governance. Attempts to ensure the relevance and applicability of EJ to Indigenous contexts and realities have resulted in what can be thought of as an “Indigenizing” of the EJ scholarship. Recent scholarship thus recognizes that Indigenous peoples occupy a unique position in terms of historical, political, and legal context, and that this requires specific recognition of their goals and aspirations, such as those outlined in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UN General Assembly [UNGA] 2007). Achieving IEJ will require more than simply incorporating Indigenous perspectives into existing EJ theoretical and methodological frameworks, as valuable as these are for diagnosing injustice. IEJ offers a theoretical and analytical framework that goes beyond “Indigenizing” and “decolonizing” existing EJ scholarship and extends to frameworks informed by Indigenous intellectual traditions, knowledge systems, and laws. Indigenous nations and societies are diverse and no single IEJ framework will serve all contexts and situations. There are, however, commonalities among suggested frameworks as evidenced through various international environmental declarations prepared by Indigenous peoples over the past three decades that convey key concepts relating to IEJ. First, Indigenous knowledge systems should be utilized as a theoretical framework for analysis. In this frame, justice applies to all “relatives” in Creation, not just people. EJ is not just about rights to a safe environment, but it includes the duties and responsibilities of people to all beings and, conversely, their responsibilities to people. IEJ is regarded as a question of balance and harmony, of reciprocity and respect, among all beings in Creation; not just between humans, but among all “relatives,” as LaDuke 1999 and Kanngieser and Todd 2020 show. Second, Indigenous legal traditions should form the basis for achieving justice. Scholars have noted how Western legal systems continue to fail Indigenous peoples and the environment. In this sense, grounding conceptions of justice and injustice in Indigenous intellectual and legal traditions opens up possibilities for achieving justice. Finally, IEJ must acknowledge the historical and ongoing role colonialism has played in perpetuating injustices.

Minorities Rights in Islamic Laws and United Nations Convention of Minorties (A Comparative Study)

Islam seeks to establish such a society where all citizens of the state enjoy equal rights and religion does not become the basis for any discrimination. Islamic law holds both Muslims and non-Muslims equal and no superiority or privilege is given to the Muslims on any ground. It is the fundamental principle of Islamic law that it enjoins the similar rights and duties on both Muslim and non-Muslimcitizens without any discrimination. Islam ordains people to worship Allah Almighty but it does not coerce followers of other religions to accept Islam and change their creed. The United Nations recognize that minority rights are essential to protect those who wish to preserve and develop values and practices which they share with other members of their community. The United Nations has gradually developed a number of norms, procedures and mechanisms concerned with minority issues, and the 1992 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Persons belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities was approved as the fundamental instrument that guides nations twrods minrties rights. In this article the effort were mad to compare the UN charter of minority rights. The comparative and analytical research methodology was adopted in this research. It is perceived from the study that the UN charter and Islamic law has some similarities about minority rights because it seems basic teachings of this charter of Minorities has been driven from Islamic Law. It is recommended that laws are good but there is need to improve and set practical actions to ensure minorities rights in member countries.