2. The need
for a new mechanism
3. The
possible options on the new mechanism
i. Name: Working Committee on
Indigenous Rights
iii. Procedures for nomination
/election
4. Precedents
in other main bodies of the UN
5. Background
on the mechanisms on indigenous rights at the UN
1.
Introduction
The United Nations Human Rights Council (HRC) in
its resolution 6/16 of 28 September 2007 decided to hold one and half day
informal meeting to discuss the most appropriate mechanisms to continue the
work of the Working Group on Indigenous Populations (WGIP) - a subsidiary body
of now defunct Commission on Human Rights.
This informal meeting is scheduled to be held in
Geneva on 6-7 December 2007. Indigenous peoples’ representatives will hold a
caucus at the Palais des Nations on 4 and 5 December 2007.
As the States, indigenous peoples and other
stakeholders prepare for the informal meeting, two issues figure prominently –
the need for a new mechanism to continue the work of the WGIP and its “Added
Value” considering the existence of the United Nations Permanent Forum on
Indigenous Issues and the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights
and fundamental freedom of indigenous peoples.
In this briefing paper, Asian Indigenous and Tribal
Peoples Network (AITPN) provides the justification for such a new mechanism,
its added value and various options available for the establishment of such a
new mechanism.
2. The need for a new mechanism
With the deletion of “indigenous issues” as a
separate agenda item of the Human Rights Council, the focus/emphasis on the
rights of indigenous peoples has substantially reduced. The new mechanism of
the Human Rights Council - Universal Periodic Review (UPR) which focuses on the
implementation of rights - will virtually remain inaccessible to majority
indigenous peoples because of range of factors including the lack of capacity
conditioned by discrimination.
The UN Under-Secretary-General for Economic and
Social Affairs, José Antonio Ocampo, while addressing the sixth session of the
Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues referred to the “huge implementation gap
between legislation and the daily realities of indigenous peoples”.
[1]
The UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of
human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous peoples also repeatedly
stated that “the vacuum between existing legislation and administrative, legal
and political practice constitutes a violation of the human rights of
indigenous people”.
The “implementation gaps” for the realisation of
human rights in general and the rights of indigenous peoples in particular have
been universally recognised. But the existing mechanisms relating to indigenous
peoples remain ineffective to bridge or reduce the implementation gaps.
Therefore, there is a need for a new mechanism on indigenous peoples in the
Human Rights Council which shall contribute towards achieving the objectives of
the Human Rights Council on the implementation of rights because of the
shortcomings of the existing mechanisms as explained below.
First, the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues
(PFII) with governmental and indigenous experts should have ideally been the UN
body to reduce the implementation gap. It has been mandated to “promote the
integration and coordination of activities relating to indigenous issues within
the United Nations system”. With an under-staffed Secretariat headed by a P-5
level officer, the promotion of “integration and coordination of activities” by
the PFII has been effectively reduced to the exercise of submission of the
annual sessional reports to the ECOSOC. The annual sessional reports are deeply
flawed - they consist of “ONLY” recommendations without reflecting the ground
realities of the indigenous peoples, the statements of experts and the
governments.
Second, the Special Rapporteur on the situation of
human rights and fundamental freedoms as a mechanism of the Human Rights
Council does not have the necessary mandate to reduce the implementation gap or
take indigenous peoples’ world view. The Special Rapporteur has no interactive
mechanism with indigenous peoples. Its mandate is to intervene in urgent cases
of human rights violations of indigenous peoples and therefore interaction is
only limited to the victims or the State authorities
[2]
and not with the indigenous communities per se. The Special Rapporteur’s presence
in Geneva is episodic. The Special Rapporteur cannot undertake country visits
without the invitation from the member States and he was allowed to visit only
10 countries in the last six years.
[3]
Third, the Human Rights Council in the
establishment of the Advisory Committee failed to take indigenous peoples
worldview in its work. The resolution 5/1 on institutional building states that
for the nomination of experts of the Advisory Committee “gender balance and
appropriate representation of different civilisations and legal systems” should
be ensured. There is no reference to “indigenous world view”. The United
Nations has rightly been accused of not including “indigenous peoples” in its
Charter and subsequent human rights standards. It is essential that the Human
Rights Council creates a mechanism to take indigenous peoples’ world view in
its work – which can only be done through participation of indigenous peoples
and unfortunately that can not be ensured by the Special Rapporrteur.
Fourth, the Office of the High Commissioner for
Human Rights (OHCHR) too failed to
incorporate “indigenous issues” in the implementation of rights through
technical cooperation projects. Until now, the inclusion of indigenous issues
in the technical cooperation projects
had been episodic. It not only depended on the predilections of those who
developed the projects but the State’s relations with indigenous peoples. There
exist no policy guidelines in the OHCHR to include indigenous peoples’ issues
in the technical cooperation projects. But, the OHCHR will play a more critical
role than ever for implementation of rights through technical cooperation
projects. The General Assembly Resolution (A/RES/60/251) establishing the
Human Rights Council stated that the Council, among others, shall be guided by
“constructive international dialogue and cooperation” and that the Council
shall focus on “advisory services, technical assistance and capacity-building,”
for “the full implementation of human rights obligations undertaken by States
and follow-up to the goals and commitments related to the promotion and
protection of human rights emanating from United Nations conferences and
summits”.
Nonetheless, given the limitations of the existing
mechanisms on indigenous peoples to ensure “implementation” of rights, there is
a need to create a new mechanism in the Human Rights Council, which shall focus
on the implementation of the rights of indigenous peoples with their full
participation as the stake-holders.
3. The possible options on the new mechanism
i. Name: Working Committee on
Indigenous Rights
The name of the new mechanism of the Human Rights
Council to be created in place of Working Group on Indigenous Populations may
be “Working Committee on Indigenous Rights”. The title “Working Committee on
Indigenous Rights” distinguishes it from the Permanent Forum on Indigenous
Issues, Working Group on Indigenous Populations and the Advisory Committee of
the Human Rights Council. Moreover, it conveys the sense and purpose of the new
body - to promote and implement “rights”.
ii.
Composition / membership
Option
1:
The “Working Committee on Indigenous Rights” of the
Human Rights shall consist of 5 independent experts of which at least three
shall be indigenous experts and that the experts be nominated from five
geographical regions of the United Nations.
Option
2:
The Special Procedure of the Human Rights Council
i.e. Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental
freedom of indigenous people be expanded from one expert to five experts of
which three shall be indigenous experts and be renamed as “Working Committee on
Indigenous Rights”. It will submit a report on its annual session as well as
the annual report as submitted by the Special Procedures.
Precedence on Option 2: In 2005, then Commission on Human Rights
created the “Working Group on the use of mercenaries as a means of violating
human rights and impeding the exercise of the rights of peoples to self-determination”
to succeed the mandate of one member Special Rapporteur on the use of mercenaries, which had been in
existence since 1987.
iii.
Procedures for nomination /election
The experts of the “Working Committee on Indigenous
Rights” shall be nominated by the President of the Human Rights Council
following the same procedure as for the nomination of the Special Procedures
iv.
Terms of the members
The experts of the “Working Committee on Indigenous
Rights” shall serve for a period of three years. They shall be eligible for
re-election once.
v.
Functions/mandate
The main mandate of the “Working Committee on
Indigenous Rights” shall be to implement
the rights of indigenous peoples through providing of expertise and bringing
indigenous peoples’ worldview within the work of the Human Rights Council and
other UN human rights mechanisms through studies, research and interactive
dialogue; mainstreaming indigenous peoples rights; providing advice during the
development of technical cooperation projects including identifying and
promoting best practices through technical cooperation projects; working in
close relation with other bodies of the Human Rights Council such as other
Special Rapporteurs, special representatives, independent experts and Advisory
Committees, the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues and National
Institutions on Indigenous Peoples.
vi.
Sessions
The “Working Committee on Indigenous Rights” shall
hold one annual session for 5 working days per year. Additional sessions may be
scheduled in the regions on an ad hoc basis with prior approval of the HRC.
vii.
Subsidiary organs
The “Working Committee on Indigenous Rights” can
establish subsidiary bodies with the authorisation of the Council.
viii.
Participants
Member States, United Nations bodies and organs,
inter-governmental organisations and non-governmental organizations in
consultative status with the Economic and Social Council may participate as
observers; organizations of indigenous people may equally participate as
observers in accordance with the procedures which have been applied in the
Working Group on Indigenous Populations and the Permanent Forum on Indigenous
Issues.
ix.
Rule of Procedures
The “Working Committee on Indigenous Rights” will
be guided by the rules of procedures of the Human Rights Council and can develop
its own rules of procedures.
4. Precedents in other main bodies of the UN
The main functioning bodies of the United Nations
namely General Assembly and Economic and Social Council established more than
one Committee or Commission depending on the priorities of the body concerned.
For example apart from Credential Committee and
General Committee, the UNGA has six main committees i.e. the Disarmament and
International Security Committee (First Committee) which deals with disarmament
and related international security questions; the Economic and Financial
Committee (Second Committee) which deals with economic questions; the Social, Humanitarian and Cultural
Committee (Third Committee) which deals with social and humanitarian
issues; the Special Political and
Decolonization Committee (Fourth Committee) which deals with a variety of
political subjects not dealt with by the First Committee, as well as with
decolonization; the Administrative and Budgetary Committee (Fifth Committee)
which deals with the administration and budget of the United Nations; and the Legal Committee (Sixth Committee) which
deals with international legal matters.
Human Rights Council must be innovative for
promoting inclusive approaches to protection and promotion of rights of specific
groups. Within the Human Rights Council, there are four Special Procedures
involving more than one expert. These are: Working Group of Experts on People
of African Descent, Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, Working Group on
Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances and Working Group on the question of the
use of the mercenaries as a means of violating human rights and impeding the
exercise of the right of people to self-determination. In fact, in 2005, the
Working Group on the use of mercenaries as a means of violating human rights
and impeding the exercise of the rights of peoples to self-determination was
created to succeed the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the use of
mercenaries, which had been in existence since 1987.
The Human Rights Council must not limit its
subsidiary bodies only to the Advisory Council or the Special Procedures, and
it must develop more than one subsidiary body to fulfill its mandate.
5. Background on the mechanisms on indigenous
rights at the UN
The United Nations Commission on Human Rights
gradually created a number of mechanisms pertaining to the indigenous peoples
and these were endorsed by the Economic and Social Council and the General
Assembly.
The Working Group on Indigenous Populations (WGIP)
was created as a subsidiary body of the Sub-Commission on Prevention of
Discrimination and Protection of Minorities pursuant to the Economic and Social
Council resolution 1982/34. The WGIP basically had the mandate for standard
setting - to review developments pertaining to the promotion and protection of
human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous peoples and to give
attention to the evolution of international standards concerning indigenous
rights.
In 1985, the United Nations Voluntary Fund for
Indigenous Populations was established with the purpose of assisting
representatives of indigenous communities and organizations to participate in
the deliberations of the Working Group.
In 1985, the WGIP started drafting the Draft United
Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. In 1994, the
Sub-Commission on Human Rights in its resolution 1994/45 adopted the Draft
Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples as adopted by the WGIP.
In 1995, the Commission on Human Rights in its
resolution 1995/32 established the Open Ended Inter-Sessional Working Group to
elaborate the Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. At its
11th session held from 5 to 16 December 2005 and its resumed session from 30
January to 3 February 2006, the WGDD adopted the Draft Declaration.
In 2001, the Commission on Human Rights adopted a
resolution 2001/57 to appoint a Special Rapporteur on the situation of the
human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous people. Since 2002, “indigenous issues” became an item
of the agenda of the Commission on Human Rights.
With the establishment of the Permanent Forum on
Indigenous Issues in 2002 as a subsidiary body of the ECOSOC, the WGIP which is
often described as the parent organisation of all the mechanisms created so far
in the United Nations on indigenous issues increasingly became directionless
because of the lack of specific mandate.
[1] . http://www.un.org/News/briefings/docs/2006/060515_Ocampo.doc.htm
[2]
. The Special Rapporteur,
among others, is mandated to:
(a) To gather, request, receive and exchange
information and communications from all relevant sources, including
Governments, indigenous people themselves and their communities and
organizations, on violations of their human rights and fundamental freedoms;
(b) To formulate recommendations and
proposals on appropriate measures and activities to prevent and remedy
violations of the human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous people;
(c) To work in close relation with other
special rapporteurs, special representatives, working groups and independent
experts of the Commission on Human Rights and of the Sub-Commission on the
Promotion and Protection of Human Rights, taking into account the request of
the Commission contained in resolution 1993/30”
[3]
. The Special Rapporteur so far received invitations to visit Guatemala,
the Philippines, Mexico, Chile, Colombia, Canada, South Africa, New Zealand,
Kenya and Bolivia.

