Update from Permanent Forum on World Conference on Indigenous Peoples

In 2010, the United Nations General Assembly resolved to hold a high-level plenary meeting, to be known as the World Conference on Indigenous Peoples (WCIP), in 2014 (Resolution 65/198). Currently, the WCIP is scheduled to take place on 22-23 September 2014 (official web link). In 2012, the UN General Assembly adopted Resolution 66/296, commonly known as the "modalities resolution," which among other things provides that discussions during the WCIP would be "co-chaired by one Member State and one representative of indigenous peoples." 

Despite the modalities resolution, however, establishing the exact procedure for the WCIP has been fraught with conflict, with disagreement regarding the manner in which Indigenous peoples would participate in the process. Indeed, the North American Indigenous Peoples' Caucus has called for the cancellation of the WCIP and withdrawn from the Indigenous Global Coordinating Group (GCG) formed to lobby for the full and effective participation of Indigenous peoples in WCIP processes. Although great effort was expended by Indigenous peoples and states to reach consensus, the exact details of the process for the WCIP remained unknown heading into this year's UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (Forum) beginning 12 May.

The WCIP was part of the Forum's official Agenda this year, and discussion took place on Monday, 19 May. Ambassador Crispin Gregoire, (former Permanent Representative of the Commonwealth of Dominica) and now the UN General Assembly President's (UNGA President) focal point on the WCIP, addressed the Forum plenary to give an update on the way forward. He relayed the UNGA President's proposal, which involved holding consultations, presided over by the UNGA President, to develop a "zero draft" of the WCIP's outcome document. At these consultations, the UNGA President would be assisted by four "Advisers": on the state side, a representative from Costa Rica and a representative from Slovenia, and on the Indigenous peoples' side, Myrna Cunningham Kain and Les Malezer were proposed. Full details of the proposal are available here in the written statement of Ambassador Gregoire.

On 23 May, during the last session of the Forum's last day, the issue of the WCIP was addressed again. Ambassador Gregoire reported that some states opposed the UNGA President's proposal put forth on 19 May at the Forum, and as a result the UNGA President decided to postpone any decision until the following week (the week of May 26) pending further dialogue with states and Indigenous peoples to decide on a way forward.

The Forum Chair allowed almost an hour of interventions on the WCIP during the final session (link to detailed documentation). Ambassador Gregoire said that the position of the opposing states was based on their desire to uphold the "sanctity of the intergovernmental process." He was unequivocal in saying that "we totally disagree with that," noting that the UNGA President had been clear that the zero draft would be taken up by states for review after the consultation process was completed. Mexico, Norway, Denmark, Guatemala, Finland, Bolivia, Australia, Nicaragua, Sweden, Panama, and the United States all made statements expressing support for the UNGA President's proposal (although some noted that it was an unsatisfactory compromise). The interventions from states overall were unanimous in expressing profound disappointment that a consensus could not be reached.

Interventions made by Indigenous peoples' groups expressed profound disappointment as well, and a representative for the GCG noted that this development represented a serious setback for the relationship between Indigenous peoples and states,. Accepting the UNGA President’s proposal had already been difficult, and for many Indigenous groups, the fact that after consultations the zero draft would be taken up by states before the final outcome document was completed undermined the spirit of co-chairing and relied on the good faith of governments. Both states and Indigenous peoples made repeated reference to upholding the provisions of the modalities resolution and called on the UNGA President to show leadership and decide a way forward.

Unfortunately, the Permanent Forum closed on Friday 23 May without any agreement on next steps for the WCIP. It remains to be seen how the UNGA President will decide to proceed.

Community Protocols and Fracking - NJ Holds Another Meeting with Nelspoort Community Members

Following on from an initial meeting with community members in Nelspoort in March, Stephanie Booker and Marisa Choy of Natural Justice held a further meeting with a range of community members from Nelspoort, Western Cape, on the potential impacts (positive and negative) of fracking in the area.

Supported by Southern Cape Land Committee, the meeting was an opportunity to share, discuss and interrogate information currently being circulated, as well as ideas within the community of the benefits and disadvantages of fracking activities in the town. It was also an opportunity for communities to discuss the information that they need to better understand how fracking can impact on their lives and livelihoods.

ASEAN Social Forestry Network Conference and CSO Forum held in Sabah

Member states, civil society organisations (CSOs), and community representatives from across the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) region have come together in Kota Kinabalu, Malaysia, for a series of meetings under the ASEAN Social Forestry Network and the theme "Enhancing Livelihood and Conservation Benefits from Social Forestry towards a Green ASEAN Community".

From 21-23 May, Holly Jonas (Natural Justice) joined more than 50 ASEAN-based organisations in the 3rd Annual CSO Forum, which was hosted by the Non-Timber Forest Products Exchange Programme (NTFP-EP), Jaringan Orang Asal SeMalaysia (JOAS), and Asia Indigenous Peoples Pact (AIPP), with support from the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation. The CSO Forum reviewed implementation of country-level roadmaps, shared support strategies, and developed working papers (on community economies and livelihoods, forest tenure and access rights, safeguards, and governance mechanisms) as the basis of CSO engagement in the 5th ASEAN Social Forestry Network Conference that followed on 24-25 May. The CSO Forum underscored that Indigenous peoples and forest-dependent communities are "partners, not threats" in forest conservation and that secure land and resource tenure are essential prerequisites to conservation and livelihoods alike.

The 5th Conference began with welcoming remarks from a range of dignitaries from the ASEAN Secretariat and Sabahan and Malaysian governments and opening presentations on perspectives on cooperation in ASEAN forestry, a situation analysis of ASEAN social forestry (based on a new report by the Center for People and Forests), challenges in promoting and realising social forestry goals in ASEAN. It also included parallel sessions on the following topics: 

1. Local Engagement in Social Forestry for Forest Conservation and Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation; and
2. Social Forestry for Food Security, Community Economy and Partnerships.

Under the first topic, Holly Jonas presented alongside Samson Pedragosa (Philippine Association for Intercultural Development) on Indigenous Peoples' and Community Conserved Territories and Areas (ICCAs) in a session on "Equity in Forest Management and Biodiversity Conservation".

From 27-28 May, government officials from ASEAN member states will convene for the 8th ASEAN Social Forestry Network meeting, which is expected to endorse a number of recommendations that emerged from the CSO Forum and Conference.

Participants in the CSO Forum. Photo courtesy of  Atama Kitama/JOAS.

Convening Stakeholders: An Inspiring Solution for Protected Areas Governance in Southern Africa

Protected areas can and do contribute to both improved livelihoods and improved conservation, but biodiversity continues to decline across most the Southern African region. A new strategy for protected areas for this region is therefore urgently needed. 

This is one of the most important messages highlighted by the participants at the High Level Dialogue on Improving Protected Area Governance for Livelihood Security and Biodiversity in Southern Africa (21-22 May 2014, Windhoek, Namibia). A report of the dialogue is available here. More on the Dialogue.

Natural Justice Contributes Chapter to New Book on Indigenous Peoples' Access to Justice

On 19 May 2014, the Columbia University Institute for the Study of Human Rights held a side event during the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues to launch a new book, "Indigenous Peoples' Access to Justice, Including Truth and Reconciliation Processes." The book arises out of an Expert Seminar on the same subject, held at Columbia University  from 27 February to 1 March 2013 that was co-hosted by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, the International Center for Transitional Justice and Columbia University.

Natural Justice contributed a chapter to the book, entitled "Introducing the Living Convention and a Landscape Approach to Legal Empowerment." The chapter discusses the Living Convention  a resource that serves as a first step in addressing a fundamental barrier to obtaining access to justice, which is a lack of knowledge of legal rights. It then discusses landscape approaches to legal empowerment, and calls on legal practitioners to take a holistic view of rights and the law by recognizing the interrelationships among different laws and different options for implementation. This is what Natural Justice seeks to do in its own work, including with the Living Convention as well as support for community protocols.

At the side event, several of the authors were invited to speak, including Jael Makagon, as well as Valmaine Toki on ways that the New Zealand criminal justice system is incorporating indigenous traditions, Marcia Esparza on the relationship between the Guatemalan army and indigenous peoples, and Erika Sasson on indigenous approaches to justice in the US state court system. Elsa Stamatopoulou, Director of the Ιndigenous Peoples' Rights Program at Columbia University and co-edtior of the book, also discussed her chapter on the challenge of time and responses of international human rights law.

For information on obtaining copies of the book, please contact Jael at jael.eli(at)naturaljustice.org.

UNPFII 13th Session: Report by Mr. Cecil le Fleur, the Chairperson of the National Khoi & San Council (NKC)

Dus die interim Verenigde Nasies se Permanente Forum rondom Inheemse Mense se Kwessies verslag van die Nationale Voorsitter, Mr. Cecil le Fleur, van die Nationale Khoi & San Raad gedateer 

19 May 2014.

Geagte Raadslede

Groete hier uit New York.

Ek het reeds ons voorlegging in die VN Permanente FORUM gelees. Dit was goed ontvang deur meeste inheemse verteenwoordigers hier. As ek dit so stel, bedoel ek diegene wat persoonlik by my so aangedui het.

Ek het aanvanklik probleme ondervind om akkreditasie te kry om die forum byeenkoms te kon bywoon. Dit was agv n misverstand wat ontstaan het tussen die DTA en die SA Permanente Missie hier in New York. Ek het toe wel die volgende dag akkreditasie deur my eie kontakte hier verkry.

Die DTA, oftewel, die SA Regering, het egter toe reeds die vorige dag hul voorlegging gedoen. Ek het n harde kopie van die voorlegging. Nadat ek die dag daarna ons voorlegging gedoen het, het hulle onmiddellik weer n spreekbeurt gevra om hulle te verdedig op die stellings wat ons gemaak het. Hierdie insette het ek nog nie van hulle gekry nie. Soos ek verwag het, het die voorsitter van die UNPFII onmiddellik na my voorlegging gevra dat regerings en Inheemse afvaardigings asb moet probeer om meer te doen om voor hul koms na die Forum eers tuis met mekaar konsensus te bereik.

Die Permanente forum het egter deeglik kennis geneem van ons posisie en ek hoop regtig dat daar nou spoedig n proses sal ontwikkel waar ons, in samewerking met ons regering, ernstig sal begin om die wetlike erkenning van die Khoi en San in Suid Afrika tot n suksesvolle einde te dryf. Daar is n sterk moontlikheid dat ek nog vanaand met die DG en ander lede van die regerings afvaardiging, in gesprek sal tree om die pad vorentoe te bespreek.

Intussen het ek ook aktief deelgeneem aan gesprekke en vergaderings met afvaardigings van Inheemse volke van ander Afrika lande en organisasies om gemeenskaplike sake aan te spreek. Van die ernstigste algemene sake is beslis die Wêreld Konferensie oor Inheemse Volke ( WCIP ) wat later vanjaar in September sal plaasvind. Meeste Afrika regerings, sowel as Rusland en China, is ernstig gekant teen die besluit dat inheemse volke die reg sal hê om op gelyke voet met staatshoofde aan die konferensie deel te neem. M.a.w. dat daar vol, gelyke en effektiewe deelname van  Inheemse Volke in die konferensie sal wees. Verteenwoordigers sal, soos dit voorgestel is, kan reageer op wat Staatshoofde in die konferensie rapporteur. Die oorspronklike reeling, soos in die Algemene Vergadering van die Verenigde Nasies geneem was, het voortgegaan om te bepaal dat daar twee mede voorsitters vir die konferensie sal wees. Een van die regerings/nasiestate en een van die Inheemse Volke. Hierdie reëling is natuurlik heeltemal onaanvaarbaar vir die meeste Afrika State, Rusland en China. Inheemse Volke kan volgens hulle nie direk met Staatshoofde interaksie hê nie. In die Permanente Forum is dit mos anders. Hier word die State slegs deur regerings amptenare, ambassadeurs en soms ministers verteenwoordig.

Intensiewe onderhandelinge tussen die Verenigde Nasies strukture en die strukture van die Inheemse Volke het egter intussen hier plaasgevind. Huidiglik is daar n nuwe voorstel op die tafel wat as volg lui.

Die president van die Algemene Vergadering van die VN ( General Assembly ) sal nou die voorsitterskap oorneem en sal dan ondersteun word deur twee raadgewers van die kant van die regerings en twee raadgewers van die Inheemse Volke aan die anderkant.   (Die "General Assembly " is die hoogste gesagsliggaam in die VN Struktuur )   Hierdie voorstel is volgens alle aanduidinge, aanvaarbaar vir die Inheemse Volke, met slegs die uitsondering van die Inheemse Volke van Noord Amerika ( VSA en KANADA ) Dit is in die lig hiervan dat ek saam met ander Afrika Inheemse verteenwoordigers probeer om die regering verteenwoordigers van Afrika lande hier te probeer oorreed om die jongste voorstel van die General Assembly te aanvaar, sodat die reëlings vir die konferensie kan voortgaan. Dit dien ook genoem te word dat n ander geskilpunt is dat die verskillende State die voorbereidings vir die konferensie in volle samewerking met die Inheemse Volke moet doen. Hierdie aanspraak van die kant van die Inheemse Volke berus op die beginsel, soos uiteengesit in die UNDRIP, dat Inheemse Volke volle en gelyke deelname op regerings vlak moet hê in alle sake wat hulle raak. ( " Niks vir ons, sonder ons nie" ) Voorts het die President van die Algemene Vergadering vanoggend weer n verdere voorstel gemaak dat hy n onderhandelings proses aan die gang sal sit met Nasie State sowel as met die raadgewers van die Inheemse Volke om die saak so spoedig as moontlik opgelos te kry. Na die onderhandelinge sal daar n voorlopige dokument opgestel word wat dan as besprekings dokument kan dien vir die betrokke partye. Die eerste rondte sal plaasvind op 29 Mei 2014. Die tyd is baie min en spoedige optrede sal hoë prioriteit geniet.

Die situasie, soos hierbo bespreek, is die mees belangrikste algemene aangeleentheid hier by die Forum, afgesien van die persoonlike voorleggings wat Inheemse Volke maak t.o.v. die vordering wat daar in hul onderskeie lande gemaak is met betrekking tot hul eie inheemse sake.

Ek hoop dat ek die verwikkelinge tot sover hier na die beste van my vermoë vir u opgesom het.

Groete

Cecil le Fleur

UN Permanent Forum Holds Dialogue with United Nations Agencies and Funds

May 15, 2014 marked the fourth day of the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (Permanent Forum). The afternoon session of the fourth day was dedicated to a comprehensive dialogue with United Nations agencies and funds. Several UN agencies and funds gave statements, as did indigenous representatives.

Of particular note were statements by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the International Finance Corporation (IFC), and the World Bank. The FAO provided an inter-agency statement on behalf of UNEP, IUCN/WISP, IFAD, and ILC regarding sustainable pastoralism and the post-2015 agenda. In that statement, the FAO affirmed that pastoralism is a sustainable livelihood and that two decades of research supported pastoralism as an economically viable livelihood that caused less degradation than intensive livestock production.

In its statement, the IFC highlighted its Sustainability Framework  which consists of policies governing the actions of IFC and its clients. It noted that in 2013 it undertook its first assessment of a project applying FPIC pursuant to the Sustainability Framework. In the World Bank's statement, an update on the review of its safeguard policies was provided. The Bank noted that the main recommendation it had received regarding the review was to bring its policies into full compliance with the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and adopt the standard of free, prior and informed consent. Unfortunately, the Bank could only report that these recommendations were being "considered," and it remains to be seen whether they will be taken seriously.

The Indigenous Peoples of Africa Co-ordinating Committee (IPACC) also provided a statement, calling on the World Bank to continue applying its stand-alone policy for indigenous peoples in Africa despite the concerns of some governments regarding the use of the term "Indigenous." Additionally, IPACC called for transparency and inclusion regarding the Bank's development of the so-called "Billion Dollar Map," which seeks to map the mineral resources of Africa.

International Land Coalition 2013 Annual Report Released

The International Land Coalition (ILC), of which Natural Justice is a member has released its 2013 Annual Report. The ILC has 152 member organisations in 56 countries, representing diverse interests and entities from national civil society organisations (CSOs) and grassroots movements to international non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and United Nations agencies, all with a common agenda to work together on behalf of the world’s most vulnerable people to make tangible progress in achieving secure and equitable access to land.

UNPFII 13 Side Event – Indigenous Peoples' and Community Conserved Territories & Areas (ICCAs)

On Wednesday 14 May 2014, the GEF Small Grants Programhosted a side event jointly with UNDP, Natural Justice, the ICCA Consortium, WAMIP, UNINOMAD Iran and Cenesta to address ICCAs and how they support appropriate governance in line with Articles 3 to 6 and 46 of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UN Declaration). The event highlighted experiences from the field, with case studies from Iran, Chile, and Australia.

Natural Justice’s Jael Makagon opened the presentations by providing an overview of Article 3 to 6 and 46 of the UN Declaration, which are the subject of the theme of this year’s Permanent Forum. He emphasised the importance of Article 3, which affirms Indigenous peoples’ right to self-determination, and highlighted tension within the UN Declaration regarding the parameters of this right. He also noted that ICCAs serve as the embodiment of exercising the rights set forth in Articles 3 to 6. 

Ari Gorring of Kimberley Land Council discusses
indigenous protected areas in Australia

The next three presenters from Iran, Chile, and Australia spoke on the challenges and successes of the development and implementation of ICCAs in their respective regions. Dr. Taghi Farvar highlighted the importance of obtaining appropriate recognition of ICCAs. An important element that has been crucial to success in Iran is the self-declaration by nomadic communities of their ICCAs independent of the government. This is important because it is often difficult to determine which government agency should be approached to recognize ICCAs, and self-declaration allows communities to take the process into their own hands. Juan Carlos Tonko, leader of the Kawesqar People, spoke on the challenges facing his community in the very southern tip of Chile, that has long been utilising the resources of the sea. Mr. Tonko spoke about how their community has been expelled from a protected area and of recent collaborations with scientists conducting research, which next to mapping of fauna, flora and animal species included noting the original names of the region as a first step of reclaiming the territory. Finally, Ari Gorring presented on the experience of the Kimberley Land Council in Northwest Australia. In this case, the communities face many challenges in their efforts to determine indigenous territories and seeking sustainable partnerships that are not reliant on government. Ms. Gorring spoke of their model of generating enterprise based on local values and is not reliant on government resources.

Finally, Kanyinke Sena from Kenya commented on these case studies noting how ICCAs can help communities to realize the rights set forth in the UN Declaration. He also shared some examples from Kenya highlighting the continuing conflict between the government and ICCAs / collectively controlled areas and territories. While communities are still being expelled from government controlled protected areas, however, Kanyinke highlighted the potential of community co-management systems as a first step in the right direction.

13th Session of UNPFII: African Caucus responds to the World Bank on the Safeguard review process

Mr Kanyinke Sena delivers the African Caucus' response

The African Caucus would like to raise the following two issues of concern in regards to Indigenous peoples of Africa.

First, Indigenous peoples in Africa are alarmed with new developments unfolding in the World Bank safeguard review process. Recent statements made by Mark King, Head of Safeguard Review, suggest that the World Bank is reluctant in applying its ‘Stand- alone policy for Indigenous peoples’ in Africa due to the concerns raised by a few governments in relation to the term ‘Indigenous’.

It is important for the Bank to note the following:

• The vast majority of African countries supported the adoption of the Declaration, with no objection raised to the term ‘Indigenous’;
• Several countries have taken legislative steps in recognizing Indigenous peoples on the continent;
• The African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights recognizes the term ‘Indigenous’ and subsequently the collective rights of Indigenous peoples, including pastoralist and hunter-gatherer communities;
• Jurisprudence on the specific rights of Indigenous peoples have been developed in national and regional courts;
• All Heads of State of the Economic Community of Central African States (ECCAS) recently institutionalized, in an official manner, the recognition of pastoralists as Indigenous peoples.

The World Bank should therefore support what is today broadly accepted throughout Africa, rather than reversing the trend.

In the same line, the African Development Bank should also align its thinking with that of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights and work more towards the recognition and respect of the rights of Indigenous peoples in Africa.

Second, Indigenous peoples of Africa have recently been made aware of what has been dubbed the Billion Dollar Map. In February 2014, the World Bank announced a $1 Billion Fund to map Africa’s mineral resources by using satellites and airborne surveys. The Bank has pledged $200 million toward the fund, and hopes that governments and mining companies will provide the remaining $800 million. Several developed countries have expressed initial interest in supporting the fund, and it is expected that eventually mining companies will contribute as well.

Despite the potentially profound ramifications of the project, little is currently known about the proposed fund beyond brief reports in several news outlets.

The impacts of extractive industries on Indigenous peoples are well documented. These include significant environmental, social and cultural effects leading to the loss of traditional livelihoods, threats of food security and cultural survival. These impacts can lead to severe conflicts with communities, up to and including war.

Despite these entrenched issues, there has been no mention of the creation of procedures for communities to be involved in the process of creating the Billion Dollar Map, nor how subsequent increases in mining would uphold social and environmental safeguards and international legal norms. Further, there are no indications that lands and waters traditionally used or occupied by communities will be marked on the map.

Recommendations:

• As Indigenous peoples of Africa, we call on the World Bank, African governments, investor governments and the private sector to end this lack of transparency and share all relevant information pertaining to the Billion Dollar Map;
• We would also like to know how commitments to international norms and standards, in relation to the rights of Indigenous peoples, will be recognized and respected;
• Given that most of the mineral wealth is found in Indigenous territories, Indigenous representatives need to be appropriately represented in the mapping process.

Finally, we would like to make our brothers and sisters in other parts of the world aware of the fact that similar mapping initiatives are likely to be launched in other parts of the world. Already Paolo de Sá, Manager of the Oil, Gas, and Mining Unit at the Bank stated that the obvious next step would be to create another fund to come up with an integrated map of South American mineral resources.