[atp-news] Fw: Third Report on the WGDD (fwd)

[Petra Bursee (Adivasi-Tee-Projekt)]

Liebe FreundInnen und Mitglieder des ATP,
hier erneut Aktuelles zur Diskussion der Working Group zur Draft
Declaration.
Liebe Grüße, Petra Bursee

Adivasi-Tee-Projekt (ATP)
c/o Petra Bursee
Kopernikusstraße 41, 14482 Potsdam
Tel./Fax: 0331 - 718327


>  Greetings,
>
>  Today's discussions/negotiations were about Articles 18, 33, 45, and
> Preambular Paragraphs 6, 10, 11, 15.  This will be a significantly shorter
> report than I have sent the last two days as there were so many proposals
> made towards this series of provisions that it would be quite confusing to
> attempt to elucidate every proposal made.  All of them will be detailed
> within the Chairman's final report, and it is possible in the following
> days that many of the disparate proposals, through consultations, may
> become unified proposals and it will be clearer to present them to you.
> Furthermore, as discussions are (somewhat problematically) based on the
> Nordic Proposal text, you will need to refer to a copy of the text to see
> what is being discussed.  Again, this is too confusing to attempt to
> outline in these highly informal reports, and thus I will only be
> including the original text and a very basic outline of what was
> discussed.
>
>  A18: Indigenous peoples have the right to enjoy fully all rights
> established under international labour law and national labour
> legislation.
>  Indigenous individuals have the right not to be subjected to any
> discriminatory conditions of labour, employment or salary.
>  *The Nordic Proposal, henceforth referred to as CRP1, proposes lengthy
> text insertion regarding child labor and indigenous children.  It also
> will change 'peoples' to 'individuals' among other things.  AILA, IITC,
> ICC, Associacion Napguana, the Asian Indigenous Caucus, CISA, Guatemala,
> Mexico and Bolivia, for the most part agreed that the text should remain
> in the original Sub-Commission text version.  Many of them proposed their
> own amendments to the text, or amendments to the Nordic amendment.  It was
> especially important that indigenous 'peoples' be maintained.
>
>  A33: Indigenous peoples have the right to promote, develop and maintain
> their institutional structures and their distinctive juridical customs,
> traditions, procedures and practices, in accordance with internationally
> recognized human rights standards.
>  *CRP1 cuts and shifts around language that has to do with 'distinctive
> juridical customs.' The Saami Council found CRP1 acceptable.  ICC,
> Confederacy of Treaty 6 Nations, AILA, Asian Caucus, IITC, Guatemala,
> Bolivia, the Navajo Nation said that there could be some flexibility with
> language in this article (but preferred the original text) and made points
> regarding how indigenous juridical systems are not merely customs and as
> it is many nations prevent indigenous groups from using their juridical
> practices.  Furthermore, the terminology 'applicable' in regards to
> international human rights standards is problematic as it seems to
> domesticate international law.
>  *Canada has reservations on this article, as does Australia who would
> like additional language to determine what constitutes indigenous legal
> systems.
>
>  There was a very dramatic situation regarding Mr. Pary of the
> organization Indian Movement Tupaj Amaru, which as many know has been
> suspended for one year because of a situation with the American
> government.  Today the USA delegate asked the Chair to please not let Mr.
> Pary take the floor anymore as his organization has been suspended, and it
> constitutes fraud for him to be speaking under the name of another NGO.
> There was quite a lengthy discussion regarding legal issues, in which Mr.
> Chavez suspended Mr. Pary's participation in the discussions until a legal
> decision was given from the NGO Committee.  Cuba took the floor in Mr.
> Pary's favour and said that Mr. Pary should be allowed to speak until a
> decision is made, and that Mr. Chavez should not be prejudged.  The Chair
> explained that if a decision comes back claiming that Mr. Pary's presence
> has been fraudulent and illegal, then quite a bit of damage would have
> been done to the process and so he was sticking by his original decision
> and would suspend Mr. Pary from discussions until he heard from the legal
> department.
>
>  A45: Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any
> State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform
> any act contrary to the Charter of the United Nations.
>  *Again CRP1 adds quite a bit of verbiage to the end of this article.
> Many indigenous peoples noted that this article can not be discussed until
> a more complete discussion was done on the issue of self-determination as
> well as article 6.  Again, based on sound legal issues, it was
> demonstrated by the speakers that CRP1 adds nothing to this article, and
> in fact undermines the Charter of the UN as well as international treaties
> and conventions.
>
>  PP6: Recognizing the urgent need to respect and promote the inherent
> rights and characteristics of indigenous peoples, especially their rights
> to their lands, territories and resources, which derive from their
> political, economic and social structures and from their cultures,
> spiritual traditions, histories and philosophies,
>  *Japan found the CRP1 amendment caused a contradiction between inherent
> rights and rights that are derived from indigenous people's agreements
> with States.  They presented a proposal to which New Zealand (one of the
> drafters of CRP1) agreed to.
>  *The Assembly of First Nations, IITC, ICC, Asian Caucus, and other
> indigenous delegates brought up this problematic of inherent rights being
> separate from state-granted rights.  ICC and Mexico both presented new
> proposals of alternative language.
>  *Mr. Chavez asked all of the proposal-makers to get together and
> consolidate their various views and come back with one proposal.
>
>  PP10: Emphasizing the need for demilitarization of the lands and
> territories of indigenous peoples, which will contribute to peace,
> economic and social progress and development, understanding and friendly
> relations among nations and peoples of the world,
>  *The CRP1 proposal changes the wording of this as they feel
> demilitarisation may not necessarily contribute to peace, etc.  USA would
> like simply to delete the text.  Guatemala made a proposal of alternate
> language which was outright objected to by the CRP1 drafters.
>
>  PP11: Recognizing in particular the right of indigenous families and
> communities to retain shared responsibility for the upbringing, training,
> education and well-being of their children,
>  *unfortunately, I was not present for this discussion.
>
>  PP13: Considering that treaties, agreements and other arrangements
> between States and indigenous peoples are properly matters of
> international concern and responsibility,
>  *There were several proposals brought to the table aside from the CRP1
> proposal, which included from Goddess Mililani, COICA, Willie Littlechild
> with AILA, Canada, and the Navajo Nation.  Mr. Chavez asked them again to
> meet and consolidate into one proposal.
>
>  PP15:  Bearing in mind that nothing in this Declaration may be used to
> deny any peoples their right of self-determination,
>  *Again the CRP1 proposal contains the addition of further text to
> explicate applicable principles of international law which would apply.
> With the addition of the CRP1 text, consensus was very close last year.
>  *AILA and Guatemala renewed their proposal from last year's WGDD and
> asked that it be brought to the floor again.
>  *It seemed that most people were bothered again by the term 'applicable',
> although as it is continually said, the original text is the clearest
> version of the right being outlined.  Indigenous organizations also noted
> that this PP needed to be discussed in conjunction with article 3 on
> self-determination.
>
>  IITC wanted to know when the Chair was planning on breaking into a formal
> session to adopt the articles 2,3,7,9 which had been discussed and still
> remained with no changes.  The Chair noted that the WG is not ready for
> adoption as States had wanted to discuss the issue of self-determination
> before moving onto these.  He gave a tentative time frame of next week to
> bring this up for discussion again.
>
>  I fear that these reports will become more and more technical as
> proposals upon proposals will continue to be made in the working towards
> consensus.  I will continue to do my best making sense of the discussions,
> and as concrete proposals are submitted in writing I will try to include
> these into my reports.  For those who had requests regarding these
> reports, problems, etc, they will have to send me an email to remind me
> and I will do my best to oblige.
>
>  Until tomorrow,
>  Sezin
>
>  ---
>  Drink from the clear stream.  Drink slow, drink deep.  For when you reach
> the other side, you will forget you ever dreamed this beautiful life.
>  -Louise Erdrich, 'The Antelope Wife'
>
>
> --
> Adivasi Koordination Deutschland e.V.
> c/o Dr. Theodor Rathgeber
> Jugendheimstrasse 10
> D- 34132 Kassel
> ph.: +49-(0)561-47597800 / Fax: +49-(0)561-47597801
>
> NEU: GMX ProMail mit bestem Virenschutz http://www.gmx.net/de/go/mail
> +++ Empfehlung der Redaktion +++ Internet Professionell 10/04 +++
>