On 9/9/07, Sudhir Devadas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
the good teacher should read ralph ellison...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
probably an unconditional commitment to pluralism precludes honouring of
treaties with tribes, but our dollar-genuflecting academics couldn't be
bothered with such trifles:
*UN General Assembly backs indigenous peoples' rights*
43 minutes ago
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5ixWgtCGxM1ZSp0cA7qDku9h87pRA
UNITED NATIONS (AFP) ? The UN General Assembly on Thursday adopted a
*non-binding
declaration* protecting the human, land and resources rights of the world's
370 million indigenous people, despite opposition from Australia, Canada,
New Zealand and the *United States*.
The vote in the assembly was 143 in favor and four against. Eleven
countries, including Russia and Colombia, abstained.
The declaration, capping more than 20 years of debate at the United Nations,
also recognizes the right of indigenous peoples to self-determination and
sets *global human rights standards* for them.
It states that native people have the right "to the recognition, observance
and enforcement of treaties" concluded with states or their successors.
Indigenous peoples say their lands and territories are being threatened by
such things as mineral extraction, logging, environmental contamination,
privatization and development projects, classification of lands as protected
areas or game reserves amd use of genetically modified seeds and technology.
UN chief Ban Ki-moon hailed the vote as "a historic moment when UN member
states and indigenous peoples have reconciled with their painful histories
and are resolved to move forward together on the
path of human rights, justice and development for all".
But Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United States, countries with
sizable indigenous populations, expressed disappointment with the text.
They said they could not support it because of their concerns over
provisions on self-determination, land and resources rights and giving
indigenous peoples a right of veto over national legislation and state
management of resources.
Among contentious issues was one article saying "states shall give legal
recognition and protection" to lands, territories and resources
traditionally "owned, occupied or otherwise used or acquired" by
indigenous peoples.
Another bone of contention was an article upholding native peoples' right to
"redress by means that can include restitution or when not possible just,
fair and equitable compensation, for their lands and
resources "which have been confiscated, taken, occupied, used or damaged
without their free, prior ad informed consent".
Opponents also objected to one provision requiring states "to consult and
cooperate in good faith with the indigenous peoples ...to obtain their free
and informed consent prior to the approval of any project
affecting their lands or territories and other resources, particularly in
connection with the development, utilization or exploitation of mineral,
water or other resources."
Indigenous advocates note that most of the world's remaining natural
resources -- minerals, freshwater, potential energy sources -- are found
within indigenous peoples' territories.
"Unfortunately, the provisions in the Declaration on lands, territories and
resources are overly broad, unclear, and capable of a wide variety of
interpretations, discounting the need to recognize a range of rights over
land and possibly putting into question matters that have been settled by
treaty," Canada's UN Ambassador John McNee told the assembly.
A leader of Canada's native community, Phil Fontaine, slammed his
government's stance.
"We're very disappointed with Canada's opposition to the declaration on
indigenous peoples," said Fontaine, leader of Assembly of First Nations, who
came to New York to lobby for adoption of the text.
Canada's indigenous population totals some 1.3 million people, out of a
total population in 32.7 million.
Adoption of the declaration by the assembly had been deferred late last year
at the initiative of African countries led by Namibia which raised
objections about language on self-determination and the
definition of "indigenous" people.
African countries were won over after co-sponsors amended an article to read
that "nothing in the declaration may be ...construed as authorizing or
encouraging any action which would dismember or impair, totally or in part,
the territorial integrity or political unity of sovereign and independent
states".
The declaration was endorsed by the Geneva-based UN Human Rights Council
last year.
in solidarity,
sudhir
(*emphases added*)
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
