And now:Ish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: NETWARRIORS FRONTLINE REPORTS 17th WGIP 7/30/99 [excerpts from the western hemisphere] ____________________________ Indigenous Relatives and Supporters: *********************************************** Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organization Monitor Working Group on Indigenous Populations 17th Session 26 July - 30 July Disclaimer: This monitor is not an official transcript of the Working Group, but represents substantially what was communicated during the meetings. UNPO apologizes for any inaccuracies. If you have corrections, comments or suggestions please contact the UNPO Secretariat in Room A 388. Wednesday, July 28, 1999 Day 3, Morning Session 1.Madam Daes 2. Secretary Julian Burger 4. Sr. Antonio Jacanamijoy/ President of the Coordinadora: Talked of the contradiction of situation of IP in the Amazon area. Here community lands are recognized and cannot be restricted. Furthermore, the ILO language protection of Convention 169 has been ratified in Bolivia, Colombia and Brazil. However, he expressed concern about the worsening of the economic situation and the violation of HR of IP. He referred to two cases in the Amazon region. In Colombia, IP are suffering from enforced displacement to the cities. At the same time, he talked of strategies to intimidate IP. He concluded that even if IP are recognized in the constitution, their right to land is not. 5 Mr Hubertus Samancun of International Alliance of Tribal People of the Tropic Forest: Talked of the death of Dr Andrew Gray and paid tribute to him. ITEM 5. Principal Theme: Indigenous People and their relationship to land. 1. Chair Mrs. E. Daes: She talked about the Second progress report on indigenous people and their relationship to land. She stated, in particular, that it is now recognized that IP have a particular spiritual relationship to the land. Presentation of second progress report to the Working Group on IP and their relation to land. It should be noted some governments have given reports on IP. However, the progress report has not taken specifically into consideration any comment, submission or recommendation received by governments, or submitted by indigenous people. Therefore, due to the great complexity of the study, additional time should be given to governments and IP to provide material, information and ideas to work on the issue. She declares that she bears all responsibility for the report as it stands. At present, it is composed of an introduction and 6 chapters. The report proposes several recommendations. It must be acknowledged that there is an important evolution taking place in the field of IP rights, and that these rights cannot be frozen at any time. At the same time this evolution takes place in a climate of unwillingness- on the part of governments- to recognize IP ownership, use or occupancy of land. Expropriation of Indigenous land and resources for national interest and development programs is a tragic reality. Removal and relocation of IP is another continuous problem. She mentioned other problems such as those related to indigenous land in the trust of governments as well as the failure of states to protect the environmental integrity of IP land and resources. She stated that there was an urgent need to find solutions to IP problems and that the survival of IP was at risk. She underlined that IP have a distinctive, profound and specific relationship to land with an economic, spiritual, political, social and cultural dimension. She maintained that fair and voluntary negotiations seemed to be the best way to solve IP problems. She mentioned the ILO Convention of 1989 concerning IP, which is said to recognize some minimum rights of IP on their land. The Chairperson's report contains some preliminary recommendations to the UN. One of these is that states' legislation should recognize the relationship between IP and land, and seek to promote IP participation in this process. Secondly, IP must not be deprived of rights to land and resources. Thirdly, constitutional reforms should be implemented as appropriate within the time limit allowed by the decade of IP. She made some further recommendations: that there should be recognition and implementation of land agreements; that means for training and education should be identified, also in settlement implementation; that a permanent forum for IP, which would play an instructive role on the issue, should be established; that IP should participate in decision and policy making in relation to land and resources. The Chairperson saw her main goal as the submission of a final working paper on IP that would be constructive and helpful to IP. 2. Sr. Alfredo Sfeir-Younis of the World Bank: Stated that the World Bank was ready and willing to address IP issues. He underlined that the issues discussed during the week would be addressed by the World Bank. He stressed that the mandate of the WB was limited as far as the protection of HR was concerned, but that the organization was aware of that the goal of poverty eradication was fundamental to attaining human rights and that living in poverty was a violation of human rights. He underlined three underlying dimensions as crucial in the promotion of human development and human rights: Solid socioeconomic planning would be essential to promote access to education, health and sanitation. He claimed that important trade offs would be necessary to enable this. Secondly, there must be a greater effort on the part of the governments to see existing rights materialize. To enable this, justice systems must be strengthened, participation and social inclusion enhanced, investment in basic social services increased. The WB's work on gender equality, environmental conservation and management, provision of social services, provision of public services, financing basic infrastructure and institutional development. Thirdly, he stated that it was difficult to mainstream the concerns he had mentioned into macroeconomic planning and implementation. He highlighted the need to change value systems to make societies become more equitable and to give IP and their cultures the necessary institutional and political space to develop and flourish. Next Mr. Sfeir-Younis stated that the World Bank was aware of the importance of land for IP. The Bank's policies of IP focused on the protection of HR, extended the definition of IP and recognized their cultural uniqueness. In 1998, the World Bank organized national and regional consultations and promoted the participation of IP. Even though policies are not the solution of the problem they may help. IP have suffered the greatest violation of HR, therefore great efforts must made to promote sustainable development. In South America, efforts must be made to protect and recognize the fundamental rights of IP. 3. Mr. Les Malezer of National Indigenous WG on Native Title (NIWG): Criticized the existence of discriminatory laws on IP and, in particular, the refusal of governments to recognize IP rights. He maintained that governments did not take sufficient steps to eliminate all forms of discrimination against IP. He claimed that the concept of land was legally too complicated, and that legislation was racially discriminatory. He stated that there had been a lack of effective participation of IP in 1998 constitutional amendments. He requested that in Australia the discussion on the recognition of Title people's rights should be re-opened and that discrimination provisions should be removed. He asked what the Australian government had done, and what it was going to do to promote the rights of indigenous peoples in the future? 7. No speech submitted 9. Ms. Hokulei Lindsey of Na Koa Kalahui Hawai'i: Stated that the IP have a close relationship with their land and lived off it. She said that although the number of foreigners had grown, and the trading system had been transformed into a Western one of private ownership. IP, however, were forever subject to traditional rules. She maintained that the King and the chiefs were each partly responsible for the promotion and prospering of Hawaii. However, after the illegal overthrow of the Hawaii Crown, all land was seized by the US as public property in order to promote the well being of the natives. The State has not lived up to this obligation. The indigenous Hawaiians have never given up their claim to these lands and these claims are tied to their inherent relationship to their land. Hawaiian land continues to be illegally sold to private investors. National Hawaiians belong on the land and want to have it returned to them. 11. Working Group Expert Mr. M. A. Martinez: Requested that all participants wishing to make comments on his report to do so under the appropriate item on the Agenda. 15. Chair Mrs. E. Daes: Mr. Antonio Iviche Onique of the Federacion Nativa del Rio Madre de Dios (FENAMAD), Peru was not present 17. Mrs. Heather J. Milton of the Native Youth Movement: Noted that the Indigenous peoples of Grassy Narrows were experiencing a form of devastation to their land in the form of logging. She stated that the logging companies were using chemicals designed to kill the underbush and unwanted growth, so that only the trees would remain. However, these chemicals were progressing into the food chain through water poisoning and land exploitation. She stressed that these chemicals were killing off traditional berry grounds and medicines available in the area. She stated that new threats also existed to the traditional lifestyle in the form of nuclear waste disposal. 18. Dr. Taiaiake Alfred of the University of Victoria (Mohawk Nation at Katinawake): Said he was proud to be present at the WG with his indigenous brothers. He urged IP to strive for solidarity, which would create a new spirit and promote the survival of IP. He feels that this spirit does not yet exist. He asked the group to consider one simple issue: that IP own their land. By refusing to acknowledge IP peoples' rights, states demonstrate their total prejudice and feeling of superiority against IP. He urged the working group to carry out work on racism and anti-discrimination, and to examine ways in which state laws and policies are founded on notions which contradict the spirit of equality and the principal of universal human rights. 19. Chair Mrs. E. Daes: Nadir Bekir - not present. 23. Mr. Willie Littlechild Q.C. of the International Organization of Indigenous Resource Development: Gave some additional considerations - firstly, that the link between self-determination and the right to land be recognized. Secondly, that he wished to see the right to self-determination figured in the paper on IP. He added a number of concluding observations regarding Canada. He stated that there was no evidence of the right to self-determination. He further stated that reserve land is vastly overcrowded at present. He underlined that the current population cannot be accommodated. He noted that the conversion to reserve status was close to impossible. He maintained that ownership of land should include airspace, surface and undersoil resources. 24. Mrs Chairmaine Roasting of the Maskwachees Cultural College (IOIRD): Noted that in her case, water was never surrendered as part of the negotiations. However, she said that in spite of this the former government was still claiming a lake in their area to be under government possession. This had led to widespread fears about the safety of the water and the possibilities of air pollution which would greatly endanger the way of living of the IP in her area. 25. Chair Mrs. E. Daes: Aucan Huilcaman of the Consejo de todas las Tierras Mapuche was absent. 26. Chief Oren Lyons of the Haudenosaunee Nation: Stated that it was said by his people that spirituality was the highest form of politics. He stressed the title to lands lay in the hands of the future generations. For this reason he felt it was important, therefore, to protect the interest of future generations. He affirmed the rights of IP to ownership of their land. He noted that IP use respect as a law allowing IP to maintain a spiritual relationship with the land. 27. Chair Mrs. Daes: Closed the session. The 1999 UNPO Monitor is produced by the following volunteers: Dborah Robledo - Ilaria Canali - Ferran Cabrero - Fiona Glen - Annabel Maupas UNPO Contact addresses: Office of the General Secretary Americas Coordination Office Tartu Coordination Office Javastraat 40a 444 North Capitol Street P.O. Box 414 2585 AP The Hague Suite 846 Tartu, EE 2400 the Netherlands Washington D.C., 20001-1570 Estonia tel: + 31-70-3603318 tel: + 1-202-637-0475 tel: + 372-406651 fax: + 31-70-3603346 fax:+1-202-637-0585 fax: + 372-405620 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.unpo.org The UNPO Monitor is produced with equipment kindly lent to us by Texas Instruments/Micro 2000 Reprinted under the Fair Use http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html doctrine of international copyright law. &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& Tsonkwadiyonrat (We are ONE Spirit) Unenh onhwa' Awayaton http://www.tdi.net/ishgooda/ UPDATES: CAMP JUSTICE http://shell.webbernet.net/~ishgooda/oglala/ &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
