And now:Ish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Subject: Day 5 of the Permanent Forum Working Group
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 17:54:14 -0500
From: "John H. Stevens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
References:
1
Summary of Debate - United Nations Open-Ended, Intersessional, Ad Hoc
Working Group on a Permanent Forum for Indigenous Peoples, 19/2/99 (Day
5)
(Note: this material is based on both taped transcription and real-time
notetaking, and does not perfectly or comprehensively reflect the
debates
or responses. It is a basic, quick draft whose purpose is to emphasize
prevalent trends in the proceedings. Please direct any questions,
clarifications, omissions, or comments to John Stevens, ACUNS/Native
Americas magazine [for Netwarriors]. All errors are solely mine.)
Morning Session:
The morning session began with the chair reading the written legal
opinion
of the New York Headquarters on the question of an indigenous co-chair.
It
was the same decision as the oral one made earlier in the week by the UN
legal office in Geneva, that such a thing was not possible. In
particular,
the letter cited Rule 15 which prohibits non-members from sitting as
chairs
of a UN meeting, and another rule that prevents the appointment of
co-chairs. After distributing copies of the letter the Chair then began
the business of the day, which was to be primarily the adoption of the
Working Group's report. On the basis of CRP4, the Chair drafted an
annex
(which has been sent out already by Tomas Condori) that he read out. He
stated that it would be open for discussion in the afternoon. He
further
noted that the volume of written comments was such that they could not
be
contained in the report; few if any states submitted brief comments.
Given
the volume, the report would exceed the 32 page limit. The Chair gave
the
meeting two options: one, that the Secretariat summarizes them; or two,
that they be collected as an addendum to the report. An Australian
aboriginal representative suggested that both options be exercised,
which
the Chair agreed to after consultation with the Secretariat.
After sweeping aside a few other minor technical matters, the Chair
opened
Item 6 of the agenda, on possible follow-up to the working group. He
remarked that delegates should keep two things in mind: first, that the
Commission on Human Rights would be the final arbiter of any follow-up
to
the working group: "we are not in a decision-making position." Given
that
reality, the Chair also pointed out that it would in the end be
governments
that will produce any resolution on follow-up and either adopt it by
consensus or with a vote (generally resolutions are adopted by
consensus).
Since governments will have more ability to influence the process, the
Chair suggested that the morning discussion be "first and foremost" the
indigenous delegation's discussion. Governments, he proposed, should
be
"reluctant" to take floor, and then only briefly. "It is only fair,"
the
Chair said, to give "our indigenous colleagues" their chance to speak.
This opportunity was taken up with a little hesitation by the
indigenous
delegates. As Kenneth Deer put in early on, indigenous delegates were
"quite disappointed" with what they saw as an "180 degree turn" of
government support for the PF after the previous day's procedural
sparring,
and were uncertain about how to proceed in this changed atmosphere.
Denmark had made a proposition for follow-up that included another
working
group, this time of ten days' duration, and outlined a plan for
supplementary work to be done between sessions. Denmark advocated the
chair's continued participation in a process of consultation with
governments and indigenous peoples over the course of the next year to
produce an "open, consolidated paper" that would more comprehensively
incorporate different views and create a ground for concrete proposals
to
be built on. After Mr. Deer's clearing of the air, a number of
indigenous
delegates came out in support of Denmark's proposal, and they strongly
admonished unsupportive governments (particularly India) to realize what
the effects of their obstructive actions were on the process. A
Tamazigh
representative linked this problem to a larger one of governments
suppressing indigenous peoples and failing to recognize both their
cultural
specificity and their political rights. As another indigenous delegate
put
it, there was a "new dynamic" being created in the UN to more adequately
deal with the rights and needs of indigenous peoples, and governments
needed to not only realize this, but to work to help make this new
dynamic
as fruitful as possible. Governments were also urged to show their
support
financially to counter the problem of sufficient resources for this
follow-up.
Supporting governments were praised for their foresight and
collegiality,
and they were urged to help the indigenous peoples in changing the UN
and
the minds of reluctant governments. Some of these governments, such as
Canada, pledged to work more closely with indigenous peoples in the
coming
year to hammer out the details of a PF so that a stronger case could be
presented in the future. To varying degrees, Spain, Chile, Russia,
Sweden,
Cuba, and Finland supported Denmark's ideas, and the Mexican delegate
stated that his government would co-sponsor this resolution with Denmark
at
the Commission meeting. The other CANZUS states and the UK either
ignored
the idea or rejected it; Bangladesh gave no position, but said that it
was
up to the CHR whether or not this would take place, implying that no
follow-up was as much an option as any of the others. The US mounted a
particularly severe offensive against the idea of a follow-up meeting,
stating that this was not in the working group's mandate and that
finances
were a problem. The US delegate also ominously pledged that the US would
"consider [CHR resolutions] closely" in the spring.
This provoked a series of biting replies from indigenous
representatives
regarding the United States' non-payment of UN dues and the pitiful
state
of funding around human rights issues (the entire UN human rights
apparatus
gets only 1.76% of the annual UN budget). One indigenous representative
from the Philippines point out that the problems being discussed were
created by a "long history of colonization and, bluntly, of course by
governments." The US eventually responded to all this derision by
saying
that it was up to governments to decide this amount, and that it was in
their power to change this, but they did not. At that point the Chair
rechanneled the discussion since in his mind it has gotten far
off-topic,
and shortly after that closed the meeting a half-hour early so that he
and
the Secretariat could work on CRP5, the draft report.
Afternoon Session:
The afternoon session was the most tense, and also the most
disjointed, of
the sessions. The meeting had not convened by 3:30, and shortly
thereafter
the indigenous caucus met in another room to discuss the draft report.
The
final meeting of the working group re-convened at about 4:15PM, and the
Chair began by discussing some of the ground rules for adopting the
report.
He also discussed technical parts that would be filled in later. Also, a
number of government delegates has brought up the problem of using the
word
peoples, a problem " familiar to us all." A number of delegations had
asked for it to be changed, and the Chair had ruled that, with the
exception of official UN titles and quotations from resolutions, that
the
term would be written according to each participant's usage. ,This
included the Chair's part of the report Chair and the difference in
usage
by various speakers. The Chair proposed a footnote that would state
that
the usage of the "s" was not official (i.e., legally binding) both
spellings would be used "without prejudice to particular delegations. .
.
." In the summary, the Chair stated that he would use "peoples" because
it
was used by the majority in the room
Immediately after that Brazil requested that the governments be
permitted
to caucus on a motion that might assist the drafting process. The Chair
suspended the meeting for fifteen minutes, which turned into about
twenty.
When the meeting reconvened Peru read a summary of the government
caucus,
which advocated a drafting process that did not go line-by-line, but
rather
point-by-point. The state governments proposed that Secretariat
summaries
be kept, and that material from CRPs 1-3 would only be included if a
delegation felt that they reflected their ideas. This would basically
allow governments to put the parts of the CRP documents that they liked
into the report. The Chair tried to discourage extensive debate over
this,
but a few governments persisted. Brazil once again stated that, while
it
had complete trust in the Chair, that it felt that the proceedings still
did not reflect the concerns of all parties accurately. Denmark
intervened
and proposed that instead these summaries merely be skipped over since
they
were the Chair's responsibility and that the group concentrate on the
Secretariat's part of the report. This was approved by a very relieved
chair who then gave the floor to Sri Lanka, as the representative of the
Asian Region.
Sri Lanka stated that the terms people and peoples had been used without
prejudice, but that the resolution called for a PF for indigenous
people.
Many of the Asian states had yet to take a position on this, but felt
that
there should be more discussion of whether or not the WGIP should
continue
to exist. The final views of the Asian group would depend on the mandate
and the question of how membership would be determined. The more
ambitious
the mandate, the harder it would be to find consensus; furthermore,
indigenous representatives may not have parity with governments in this
forum. This issue was connected to the larger issue of definition,
which
the Asian Group had raised in the past, and they felt that their views
must
be taken into account. There was not yet a convergence of views between
states and indigenous peoples over this question, and it was hoped that
the
report should be distributed to governments and parties for discussion
in
future. Sri Lanka closed by maintaining that the statement was made in
a
constructive spirit to create a broad consensus over points of
difference.
The Chair responded to this statement with a mixture of diplomacy and
disappointment. The issue of the "s", he said, has already been
covered.
He regretted that this statement came a half hour before the end of the
working group; if it has been delivered earlier, these issues could have
been addressed. He stated that he valued the Asian group's
participation,
but would have hoped for more direct participation from individual
governments. He pointedly stated that distribution of the document
would
be according to normal procedures.
The Chair then turned to the actual adoption of the report,
which he
handled with admonishing swiftness, given the few minutes left to adopt
the
report. The first half-dozen pages of the report were adopted with
barely
a complaint; only the crack of the Chair's gavel and his brief
recitation
of the pagination marked the progress of the adoption. On later pages
there were requests for changes, and the Chair generally had those with
requests submit them in writing. Several of the changes were calculated
to
redefine the levels of support for various assertions. Most changes
came
from governments who felt that "their views" were not "adequately
represented" in certain sections. At a few junctures the Chair nearly
lost
his patience when governments asked him to put parts of his summaries
in
the report or change his own reflections on the working group. He did
accept minor points of clarification but chided members who wanted the
reports taken out and then replaced selectively. Finally, at about
6:15PM
the report was finally adopted by the working group. After a few words
from the representative of the Republic of Ireland (Ireland is chairing
this spring's CHR) and a brief closing speech by the Chair, the working
group was formally adjourned.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
League of Indigenous Sovereign Nations of the Western Hemisphere
To receive organizational information, announcements and news:
Please send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe,
send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
LISN Web Site | http://www.lisn.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Tsonkwadiyonrat (We are ONE Spirit)
Unenh onhwa' Awayaton
http://www.tdi.net/ishgooda/
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
