Special Rapporteur (SR) on the human rights and fundamental freedoms situation of indigenous people, Rodolfo Stavenhagen

Human Rights Council, Sixth Resumed Session, 12^th and 13^th December 2007

Statement by the Special Rapporteur (SR) on the human rights and fundamental freedoms situation of indigenous people, Rodolfo Stavenhagen, and interactive dialogue

Mr Stavenhagen recalled the importance of the indigenous people’s cause, particularly in the year of the adoption by the GA of the Declaration on Rights of Indigenous People. Despite the efforts to raise awareness of these rights, the economic, social and human development of indigenous people is generally lower than the average. This is partly due to the fact that development policies have not tackled the structural causes of marginalisation of indigenous people because of lack of recognition, protection and human rights guarantees.

The SR’s report documents best practices of sustainable development project and he mentions the achievements of Brazil, India and Peru in the areas of education and health. Policies fostering empowerment and ownership of rights strengthen the organisation and capacity of indigenous people. Further, increasing access to authority position at local level has been granted in Bolivia, Ecuador, Chile, Mexico and Uganda, which had interesting consequences in the design of social services and priorities in public investment. A key issue among indigenous people’s rights is the recognition and protection of land and natural resources rights.

Relating to his visit in Bolivia, the SR noted the improvement made since the indigenous President Evo Morales came to power as well as the fact that the Declaration has status of internal law in Bolivia. However, he voiced concerns about the persistent phenomenon of racism and discrimination against women that he witnessed among civil servants and attitudes of political parties. Also, the SR was preoccupied by the bondage situation in some guaraní parts of the country.

Concerning his visit to the Philipines, the SR noted that the situation has remained unchanged since his last visit four years ago. Despite some positive developments, the lack of access to natural resources for the purpose of survival is still of important magnitude. Indigenous people face forced evictions due to the legal power that e.g. international companies have. Of particular concern are the increasing number of extra-judicial killings, torture cases, forced disappearances, illegal detention that are attributed to the police, the armed forces and paramilitary groups.

The SR also visited the hydroelectric project of La Parota, in Mexico, in company of the SR on adequate housing, concluding that, considering the size of the affected population in terms of displacement, the project did not comply with the human rights standards enshrined in international instruments ratified by Mexico.

Finally, the SR presents a general report on the situation of indigenous people in Asia, a region that he was allowed to visit only on one occasion. He notes that Asian indigenous are particularly marginalised and suffer from systematic human rights violations as consequence of land loss. Land loss is critical as it might trigger the disappearance of entire people. Moreover, this is exacerbated by extensive agriculture and deforestation due to State concessions or illegal uprooting. As indigenous people are often inextricably connected to their natural environment, they are especially vulnerable. However, they lack any means to defend their rights. Further, the SR notes that there is a systematic displacement practice in favour of infrastructure mega projects, especially dams.

He concludes reaffirming the weight of the Declaration of indigenous people’s rights.

Interactive Dialogue

Bolivia, as concerned country, described the national development plans that are currently undertaken and that include the indigenous people’s conclude and participation. Another point was the recognition of the pluralistic and diverse composition of the Bolivian society up to the level of the constitution.

China, India and other Asian Countries, strongly objected to the annex on the rights of indigenous people in Asia because of diverse reasons: first, objection was made to the assumption of indigenous peoples living in Asia. According to India, the entire population of Asia is indigenous and the acceptance of only a part of the population as indigenous is considered inaccetable. This comment is based on a part of the definition of indigenous people in the ILO Convention 169, disregarding further elements of the definition in other provisions. Secondly, China criticised that the information gathered by the Special Rapporteur was coming mainly from NGO sources, thereby going against the Code of Conduct that specifies that, in particular, information provided by the States concerned have to be considered.

Portugal, speaking on behalf of the European Union, asked about means to influence development policies in order to be sensitive to indigenous people’s interests and also about indicators to measure this feature of policies. A further concern was the recognition that environmental degradation is tantamount to a form of eviction and Portugal wanted to know how design policies to address these issues.

Cuba raised the point that development policies did not tackle the structural causes for the marginalization of indigenous people.

Mr Stavenhagen replied to the States’ comments, starting with the questions of the European Union. In his view, methodological development is required to find independent indicators for human rights of indigenous peoples in different countries related to different social, economic and cultural situations and related to environmental degradation. He confirmed the Canadian delegate’s concern that particular attention must be paid to indigenous in urban settings, as they run an even greater risk to all into “invisible” population

In reply to Peru’s concern about the implementation of the Declaration, the SR precised that in the long term, both NGOs, IOs, and public policies and justice have to include relevant provisions in their respective plans.

Further, the SR clarified that the subject of free previous and informed consent by indigenous peoples to development policies is in need o fan adequate methodology because often, the SR observed that consultations with indigenous were held but that the results were not fully understood, thereby missing a chance to meet the real needs of the indigenous peoples in question.

Concerning the intervention of the Asian Group, the SR claified that the study had been requested by the UN permanent forum on indigenous issues. Mr Stavenhager said that he was conscient about the debates around the definition of indigenous peoples and that it was not up to him to determine a definition. However, he pointed the attention to the fact that the very same Convention quoted by some Asian countries in the interactive dialogue in order to back their views included the element of auto-definition by the indigenous people. He justified himself saying that he was also to report on the groups that define themselves as indigenous.

Noelia Díaz