USA can't protect indeginous people's rights due to natural disasters???

[NVMojo]

The lies out of our nations' leadership know no bounds ...

American Indian Law Alliance:


Progress at the UN Working Group on the Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous peoples

– 15 December 2005


Wednesday and Thursday, December 14 and 15, 2005, saw some forward movement in the process at the United Nations to find consensus on a useful and meaningful Declaration of Indigenous peoples’ rights. In spite of efforts by some states to hinder the effective content of the document as reported earlier in the week, yesterday saw increased understanding between the Indigenous Caucus and a number of states including Mexico, Norway, Canada, and Denmark, among others.

Provisional Adoption

In addressing the Indigenous Caucus last night, Canadian and Danish representatives went so far as to say that they look forward to passage of a strong and effective Declaration by the General Assembly in 2006. This, they noted, is consistent with the 2nd Decade of the World’s Indigenous Peoples and with the General Assembly affirmation earlier this year in which it committed “to continue making progress in the advancement of the human rights of the world’s indigenous peoples at the local, national, regional and international levels” including “adoption of a final draft United Nations declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples…” (General Assembly Resolution A/RES/60/1 24 October 2005, p. 127).

Over the past several days at the Working Group, Norway chaired numerous meetings with Indigenous peoples’ representatives and states in order to find common ground and effective final language for the text of the Declaration. These meetings occurred both in and out of the formal plenary sessions with all delegations present. June Lorenzo of the American Indian Law Alliance and Devashish Roy, Chakma people, are to be particularly commended for much of the leg work involved in bringing these discussions to fruition.

This morning Ms. Guri Hestflatt of the Norwegian delegation presented the outcomes to the chairperson of the Working Group. In her statement she said that progress was “encouraging in both form and substance” and that all delegations “demonstrated considerable effort to reach consensus.” As a result, ten preambular and ten operative paragraphs were presented as ready for provisional adoption. (Provisional adoption simply refers to agreement on the text while noting that none of the articles of the Declaration are considered adopted until the entire Declaration is accepted.) In addition to the 20 paragraphs now considered ready for provisional adoption, an additional 15 are “very close.”. This would represent acceptance of more than half of the total 64 paragraphs that constitute the text of the Declaration.



Remaining Hurdles

However, major obstacles still remain. The difficult issue of the total package of paragraphs on self-determination have not been resolved. The United States, New Zealand and Australia continue to put forth substantial objections. In a complicated twist of legalese the United States has actually used circumstances surrounding national disasters as a reason to limit this critical right of Indigenous peoples. (One might ask if the Declaration’s passage would have further reduced the inadequate response to Katrina – it seems like a hallow argument at best.) These states (US, NZ and Australia) are still insisting on language that would protect their “territorial integrity” and plenary power over Indigenous peoples.

Compelling arguments against the position of these few states have been presented and supported by Indigenous peoples and other states. A group of non-Indigenous human rights organizations made an excellent intervention yesterday in an attempt to hold states accountable for their positions:

“With the obvious imbalance of power between states and Indigenous peoples, it is not clear to us why this discussion is preoccupied with perceived threats to states, rather than the very grave and pervasive threats to Indigenous peoples.

“Indigenous representatives have expressed concern that the concepts of political unity and territorial integrity are already being used by some states to justify denial of Indigenous peoples’ rights and repression of the defenders of those rights.

“As human rights organizations, we are concerned that the inclusion of a specific reference to the principles of political unity and territorial integrity in a Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples would at best, reinforce an unacceptable status quo and at worst may encourage even greater human rights violations against Indigenous peoples.

“Furthermore, the proposal of New Zealand, Australia and the United States for article 45bis is particularly concerning as it would allow states to invoke the concepts of political unity and territorial integrity to justify the denial of any and all rights in the Declaration, no matter how fundamental to the welfare and survival of Indigenous peoples.”

The text of this intervention accurately reflects the principles supported by a majority of states and Indigenous representatives. Together we are working to agree on langauge that would preserve the original text on the right of self-determination. States that cannot support the total expression of human rights will hopefully find themselves increasingly isolated.

Treaty Provisions

Additionally, Willie Little Child presented revised articles on treaties (preambular paragraphs 6, 13, and Article 36) that had also been the subject of intensive negotiations. However, when presented to the Working Group, the United States again took the floor to state that they did not concur and would be introducing their own language on these paragraphs. Unfortunately, representatives of many North American Indigenous nations whose territories lie within the borders of the United States (especially large treaty nations like the Lakota and Haudenosaunee) did not participate in this aspect of the work.

Coming soon…

Although these essential elements remain to be tackled in the next session of the Working Group (January 30 – February 3, 2006), there are clear indications that progress is being made. The more text that is agreed to between states and Indigenous peoples’ representatives, the less room there is for the Chairperson to introduce his own interpretation of a compromise. In this way, the strongest possible Declaration will be presented to the Commission on Human Rights, which represents the minimum standard for Indigenous peoples. The American Indian Law Alliance will prepare a final report, including the language of the text that has been proposed as well as some of the highlights of the debate prior to the January/February session.


American Indian Law Alliance
611 Broadway, Suite 632
New York, NY 10012 USA
212-477-9100 telephone
212-477-0004 facsimile
[e-mail]

[Clara T]

1. An Article of interest

BRAZIL  :  Top officials accused of genocide of Indians  14 Dec 2005

A former state governor and a former top policeman are among the accused in Brazil's first ever investigation into the genocide of an uncontacted Indian tribe.

Twenty-nine people are being detained in Operation Rio Pardo, the investigation into the genocide of the uncontacted Rio Pardo Indians. In the last decade, the Indians' land has been invaded by land grabbers and logging companies.


The government's Indian affairs department, FUNAI, has found camps inside the territory with land measuring equipment, and bombs and ammunition to intimidate the Indians. The invaders admit to finding thirty hurriedly abandoned Indian shelters.


Speaking from the city of Cuiabá, public prosecutor Mario Lucio Avelar told Survival he believed there were sufficient grounds to prosecute for genocide. According to the UN, the crime of genocide can mean, ‘Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part'.

Survival's director Stephen Corry said today, ‘It's shocking that in the twenty-first century, with so many of Brazil's tribes gone forever, those remaining are still in danger of genocide. Brazil must take immediate action to recognise and protect the land of the Rio Pardo Indians, before it is too late.'

For more information call Miriam Ross on [phone] or email [e-mail]

http://survival-international.org/news.php?id=1258