Development & Aid, Global, Global Geopolitics, Headlines, Human Rights, Population

RIGHTS: U.N. Indigeous Leader Pessimistic On Declaration

Ushani Agalawattta

UNITED NATIONS, Sep 12 2003 (IPS) - The long-sought U.N. declaration on indigenous rights will not be adopted before the end of 2004, the final year in the decade for indigenous people, predicts Ole Henrik Magga, chairman of the U.N. Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues.

But a proposal submitted by Nordic countries to a crucial meeting that begins in Geneva on Monday could determine if the draft declaration has a future, he added.

Magga, a Sammi from Norway and the first chairman of the fledgling U.N. Forum, told IPS he is optimistic the declaration’s universal standards will eventually be adopted by the world community.

The Working Group on the Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples meets Sep. 15-26, at which time most observers believe the declaration will either sink or swim before the end of the U.N.-designated International Decade of the World’s Indigenous Peoples (1995-2004).

The Permanent Forum, which might be the most significant accomplishment of the decade, was established in 2000 to inform the U.N. system on indigenous issues.

Magga is positive about its work to date.

Q: As the International Decade of the World’s Indigenous Peoples comes to an end, what progress has been made?

A: Well, we had two main objectives on the international level: establishing a Permanent Forum and the Draft Declaration. Now we have the forum so let us say that 50 percent of the objective has been realised.

We also wanted to see the declaration adopted next year before the end of the decade. This is obviously not going to happen unfortunately. There are serious difficulties with the draft declaration.

Q: What are the main obstacles to the adoption of the declaration?

A: There are three major obstacles: the concepts of self determination, people, and territory. Every time these words are mentioned in the declaration there will be some governments raising their hands and saying, ‘look we are not happy with this concept’.. But these are key concepts to indigenous peoples.

For the time being, we have a draft and many indigenous peoples see with good reason that this is the best text we could have and they are defending it. Unfortunately, many governments are sitting on the other side and saying, ‘we are not prepared to accept it’. So what are we to do?

Next week, some countries including my own (Norway), are putting forth an initiative to bridge this gap between the two parties. It will be very important to watch what will happen in the course of the next two weeks in Geneva. This will decide whether there will be any declaration at all, at least within 2004.

Q: Do you see a solution to the conflict between the parties?

A: I think there might be, but I am not an expert on international law … You know, in this kind of text, a comma, one word, or one letter is the difference between hell and heaven to some people. I believe in compromise. The world is so complicated that if we are not willing to have compromise we will not get anywhere.

Q: What role if any does the Permanent Forum play in these negotiations?

A: We are not doing much with that because we simply don’t have resources. You know we have had the Secretariat (based in New York) just since January. And they have been working since the conclusion of the last session on the report of the session. So we really don’t have resources. But when it comes to the working group, they have all the information they need. It is a very sophisticated operation.

Q: What happens if the draft declaration is not adopted?

A: It will be a blow to our rights, but it will still be an outcome. Even if it has not been adopted it is still a kind of international standard in our terms because we can always refer to it as the standards from the indigenous side.

Even if not formally accepted by courts today, I think little by little it will have value because it will be there and, after all, it mirrors the understanding of the indigenous peoples.

Q: What is the role of the Permanent Forum in contrast to the Working Group?

A: There are two main differences. The Permanent Forum deals with six mandated areas. One of them is human rights, similar to the working group. We also cover health, environment, culture, education and development.

And the other is the level. While the working group is a subsidiary body of the sub-commission under the commission of human rights; we are on the same level as the Human Rights Commission itself. We are advising ECOSOC (the economic and social council) and we are supposed to advise all the other U.N. agencies, programmes and funds. Therefore, we have a much wider mandate.

Q: How is the forum being received by the U.N. system?

A: My impression is that we have been received in a very positive spirit. ECOSOC has responded very positively to our recommendations; in fact all of them have been supported or at least partially accepted.

With the (U.N.) agencies there are differences. Some of them have been very good; we have a good relationship with the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights. I would say the World Bank has been very active, surprisingly, in fact more active than any of the other agencies.

They are launching this grant facility and are supporting the forum as well. This is a good thing. You know that the World Bank has been very controversial.

Q: How is the funding from the World Bank being received by the indigenous community?

A: We don’t know yet; it remains to be seen how people will react. But so far the spirit has been very positive and we have had very frank discussions with the World Bank. Vice President Ian Johnson has played a leading role in this.

Hopefully we can establish dialogue one by one with all the agencies. I couldn’t say that these are the bad guys, but I also realise that they have their programmes so it will take some time before they could incorporate our recommendations into their work.

This is very complicated work and if you expect that everyone will be with you tomorrow then you will be very disappointed. It just does not work that way.

Q: How is the indigenous community reacting to the work of the forum, given their initial skepticism?

A: Well they have good reason to be very skeptical because the U.N. system has not really been doing that much for them. But you also have to judge because the U.N. system itself depends on the governments.

The governments are the foundation; they are in fact the ones to decide what the U.N. system does. After all, they are the main actors when it comes to human rights and ordinary citizens, especially when it comes to minorities.