U.S.: Obama Urged to Sign Native Rights Declaration
By Haider Rizvi
IPS - Inter Press Service
UNITED NATIONS, May 6 (IPS) - The United States is considering whether to endorse a major U.N. General Assembly resolution calling for the recognition of the rights of the world’s 370 million indigenous peoples over their lands and resources."
The position on [this issue] is under review," Patrick Ventrell, spokesperson for the U.S. mission to the U.N., told IPS about the Barack Obama administration’s stance on the non-binding U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
Approved by a vast majority of the U.N. member states in September 2007, the General Assembly resolution on the declaration was rejected by the George W. Bush administration over indigenous leaders’ argument that no economic or political power has the right to exploit their resources without seeking their "informed consent."
Three other "settler nations" of European descent, namely Canada, New Zealand and Australia, also voted against the declaration, which states that indigenous peoples have the right to maintain their cultures and remain on their land.
However, last month, the new left-leaning government in Canberra reversed its position, announcing support for the declaration.
"We show our respect for indigenous peoples," said Jenny Macklin, a member of the Australian parliament. "We show our faith in a new era of relations between states and indigenous peoples in good faith."
The new government of Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has also offered an apology to the indigenous communities who suffered at the hands of European settlers for decades.
Indigenous rights activists in the United States say they want the new liberal democratic government in Washington to make a similar move to address the grievances of native communities who have long been subjected to abuse and discrimination.
"The U.S. [should] become a resolute supporter of the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples," argued James Polk, who writes for Foreign Policy in Focus, a progressive periodical published by the Institute for Policy Studies in Washington.
"It’s a comprehensive document that affirms that indigenous peoples are equal to all other peoples, and that, in the exercise of their rights, they should be free from their discrimination," he added.
The declaration reflects growing concerns of aboriginal communities about the continued exploitation of their resources and suppression of their cultural vales and practices by commercial concerns and governments that are alien to their cultures.
According to many scientists, the traditional knowledge and cooperation of indigenous communities are vital elements in the global fight against climate change and loss of biodiversity.
During his election campaign, President Obama repeatedly said that he cared about the issues facing Native American communities and insisted that they could trust him – pledges that are now being watched closely.
As [he] reached out to new voter blocs last summer, Obama made a campaign stop at an Indian reservation in Montana, where he told the audience, that, as an African American, he identified with their struggles.
"I know what it’s like to not have always been respected or to have been ignored and I know what it’s like to struggle and that’s how I think many of you understand what’s happened here on the reservation," Obama said.
In his speech, Obama added: "A lot of times you have been forgotten, just like African-Americans have been forgotten or other groups in this country have been forgotten."
In the Nov. 4 presidential elections, a vast majority of Native people voted for Obama, according to Frank LaMere of the Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska, who led the American Indian delegation to the Democratic Convention.
On the campaign trail in Montana, Obama was adopted as an honourary member of the Crow Tribe, a ceremony that natives say is reserved for special guests. On that occasion, he was given a new name, "Barack Black Eagle."
Before Obama became the first-ever non-white president of the United States, the country faced scathing criticism from a Geneva-based U.N. rights body for its treatment of the indigenous communities and objectionable use of their traditional lands and resources.
In March 2006 and again in 2008, a panel of U.S. experts analysed the U.S. government’s treatment of indigenous citizens and ruled that it was guilty of racial discrimination.
Canada, another settler-nation founded on the indigenous territories in North America, has also been scolded by the U.N. Committee on Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) for its abusive and discriminatory treatment of acts of native communities.
The right-wing government in Ottawa continues to justify its current policies towards the native population as just and fair with no indication whatsoever of a willingness to sign the U.N. document on indigenous peoples’ rights.
In the United States, there appears to be some signs of policy shift with regard to the U.S. government’s relations with the American Indian communities. Some representatives of indigenous tribes are currently working with Obama as advisors.
However, it remains unclear when and if the Obama administration would sign the declaration. "I can’t comment further," said Ventrell about the outcome of discussions on possible U.S. support.
__________________________________________________________
Article: Copyright © 2009 IPS-Inter Press Service
Image: Copyright 2009 TPM Media LLC
Native Rights News is making this material available in accordance with the Fair Use Doctrine codified at Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107: This article is distributed without charge or profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information. Distribution of this material is for research and educational purposes that will promote social and economic justice and benefit society.
____________
Native Rights News (NRN) is published by the Alliance for Indigenous Rights, a nonprofit corporation owned and operated by Temple Beit Shem Tov as part of its Peace and Justice Ministry.
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
U.S. Position On UNDRIP Under Review By Obama Administration
Read more!
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Sign-On Letter to Canadian Government Calls for Action to Stop Abuses Committed by Extractive Industries
[Editor's Note: Victoria Tauli-Corpuz, current chair of the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (UNPFII) , is urging organizations and individuals to add their support and signature to her letter to Canadian Prime Minister Steven Harper. In that letter, Ms. Tauli-Corpus expresses her disappointment in Canada's past and current policies vis a vis the abuses committed by Canadian transnational corporations against Indigenous Peoples and the environment. She asks that the Canadian government take specific actions to curb such abuses and hold the Canadian extractive industry to account. Following are both letters.
Alliance for Indigenous Rights is signing on to the letter, and we urge all NGO's and individuals concerned about protecting Indigenous Peoples rights and the environment to do the same. -- Perry H. Chesnut, Editor NRN]
Sign-on Letter to Canadian Government
FYI. If you wish to sign-on, please respond directly to vicky@tebtebba.org. Thanks.
----- Original Message -----
From: "vicky tauli-corpuz" mailto:vicky@tebtebba.org
Sent: March 30, 2009
Subject: Letter to Canadian Government
Dear Friends,
At the Expert Group Meeting on Extractive Industries, Indigenous and Corporate Social Responisbility a discussion was held regarding the response of the government to the series of roundtables held in Canada which looked into the issue of Extractives. Obviously, the government has not accepted the recommendations. So we drafted a letter [below] which contains our disappointment with the results. Please read this and if you want to sign on please send your name and your organization [to vicky@tebtebba.org]. If you do not have an organization, [please sign] as an individual.
regards, Vicky
Victoria Tauli-Corpuz
Executive Director, Tebtebba
Convenor, Asia Indigenous Women's Network
1 Roman Ayson Road, Baguio City, Philippines, 2600
Telephone: 63-74-4447703 Fax: 63-74-4439459 mobile: 63-91-75317811
website: http://www.tebtebba.org/
http://www.un.org/socdev/esa/unpfii
------------ --------- --------- ------
29 March 2009
Manila , Philippines Peoples' Rights
The Right Honourable Stephen Harper
Prime Minister of Canada
Office of the Prime Minister
80 Wellington Street
Ottawa , ON
Canada
K1A 0A2
Dear Prime Minister Harper,
It is with great regret that we, the undersigned participants of the International Expert Workshop on Indigenous Peoples' Rights, Corporate Accountability and Extractive Industries, and the International Conference on Extractive Industries and Indigenous Peoples, note the adoption of the new Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Strategy for the Canadian International Extractive Sector. It is a strategy that falls far short of upholding Canada 's international commitments on human rights, Indigenous Peoples and the environment. By advising on existing voluntary guidelines, instead of imposing binding, regulatory requirements, it is one that will do little to stop abuses by Canadian extractive companies from continuing unabated and unpunished.
Among the Indigenous Peoples present at these two meetings - the first was organized by the Tebtebba Foundation and the second by United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (UNPFII) - are those who earlier in the decade shared personal reports of abuse by Canadian mining companies with the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade (SCFAIT). In 2005, as you know, that Committee responded by calling on the Government of Canada to "establish clear legal norms to ensure that Canadian companies and residents are held accountable when there is evidence of environmental and/or human rights violations associated with the activities of Canadian mining companies."
In "Building the Canadian Advantage" that recommendation has been ignored, as have the groundbreaking consensus recommendations that resulted from the National CSR Roundtable process. Together these recommendations represent the views of national Parliamentarians, civil society, Indigenous Peoples, industry, labour, socially responsible investors, academics and members of the Canadian public. Given this breadth of support, it is disappointing that the Conservative Government of Canada has chosen to so freely set aside the progressive outputs of democratic and officially mandated dialogue.
Particularly alarming in the new CSR Strategy is the absence of an independent and empowered ombudsperson to investigate and respond to the concerns of affected communities, and the lack of provisions for sanctions and withdrawal of public support when extractive companies fail to comply with human rights and environmental standards. Furthermore, an appointed CSR counselor, who requires the consent of the company involved to undertake a review, and who may target his or her review at both communities and their allies, offers no real recourse for communities that have been adversely affected by Canadian extractive companies, and raises serious questions about corporate co-optation of this instrument, as well as fears that the review process may be used against Indigenous Peoples.
Over the course of the last seven days, numerous participants at the International Conference on Extractive Industries and Indigenous Peoples and the International Expert Workshop on Indigenous Peoples' Rights, Corporate Accountability and Extractive Industries have made it clear that the abuse of Indigenous Peoples' rights to lands, territories and resources at the hands of Canadian extractive companies is ongoing. This reality once again underscores the failure of voluntary, industry-driven initiatives to protect human rights and reinforces the need for extra-territorial regulation of extractive industries, especially in the context of weak governance in host countries.
It is our position that the "Canadian Advantage" has already been established in the global extractive sector and it has been established at the expense of the environment and of Indigenous Peoples. The advantage that has been lost is Canada 's reputation as a leader on human rights.
As these important meetings draws to a close in Manila, we call on the Government of Canada to take immediate steps to bring its CSR Strategy for the Canadian International Extractive Sector into line with the recommendations of the SCFAIT Report and the Report of the Advisory Group to the National Roundtables on CSR and the Canadian Extractive Sector in Developing Countries.
It is also critical that any effort by the Canadian government reflects respect for Canada's obligations under such agreements as the Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, as well as internationally recognized rights that have been entrenched in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). As you are aware, UNDRIP was endorsed by the Canadian House of Commons last year and in 2007 the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination' s (CERD) concluding observations to Canada noted: "with concern the reports of adverse effects of economic activities connected with the exploitation of natural resources in countries outside Canada by transnational corporations registered in Canada on the right to land, health, living environment and the way of life of indigenous peoples living in these regions." CERD concluded by recommending that Canada "explore ways to hold transnational corporations registered in Canada accountable."
Until such a time as full regulatory measures governing Canadian extractive companies can be enacted, we further encourage Canadian Parliamentarians, including members of the Conservative Party of Canada, to consider passing the proposed Bill C-300, an Act respecting Corporate Accountability for the Activities of Mining, Oil or Gas in Developing Countries. Over the short-term this Act would effectively supplement the Canadian CSR Strategy by requiring publicly-funded extractive companies to uphold standards like the International Finance Corporation' s Performance Standards on Social and Environmental Sustainability, with Ministers empowered to review complaints and required to report back to Parliament. Particularly welcome are the suggested amendments contained within Bill C-300, which would lead to the withdrawal of support by Export Development Canada and the cessation of investment by the Canadian Pension Plan where extractive operations are inconsistent with the guidelines that are endorsed in section 5 of the Act.
Ultimately, we request that you reconsider your limited CSR response and commit to measures that genuinely address the serious human rights and environmental abuses associated with Canadian extractive industry companies.
For your information, we have attached the Manila Declaration, the document that resulted from the International Conference on Extractive Industries and Indigenous Peoples, and will forward the report of the Expert Group Workshop when it is finalized.
We look forward to receiving your reply and request that it be directed to the Secretariat for the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, so that they might in turn forward it to participants of the Manila meetings.
Thank you for your consideration of our concerns, which echo those raised by over 100 participants from 35 countries.
Institutional Signatories (as of 30 March 2009)
Indigenous Peoples Alliance of the Archipelago ( Indonesia )
Cordillera Peoples Alliance ( Philippines )
Kanak Agency for Development ( New Caledonia )
Centre for Environmental Research and Development ( Papua New Guinea )
Western Shoshone Defense Project ( USA )
PIPLinks - Indigenous Peoples Links ( UK )
Tebtebba Foundation (Indigenous Peoples' International Centre for Policy Research and Education) ( Philippines and UK )
Individual Signatories (as of 30 March 2009)
Mr. Brian Wyatt ( Australia )
Ms. Urantsooj Gombosuren ( Mongolia )
Mr. Cathal Doyle ( Ireland )
Ms. Meaghen Simms ( Canada )
Ms. Elisa Canqui Mollo ( Bolivia )
Mr. Luis Vittor ( Peru )
__________________________________________________________
Source: http://IndigenousThinkers@yahoogroups.com
Native Rights News is making this material available in accordance with the Fair Use Doctrine codified at Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107: This article is distributed without charge or profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information. Distribution of this material is for research and educational purposes that will promote social and economic justice and benefit society.
____________
Native Rights News (NRN) is published by the Alliance for Indigenous Rights, a nonprofit corporation owned and operated by Temple Beit Shem Tov as part of its Peace and Justice Ministry.
Read more!
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Canadian Copper Mining Firm Uses Violence to Deal with Indigenous Resistance in Equador
TMX Group denies claim. Win could affect thousands of other projects by Canadian companies.
TheTyee.ca
By Jennifer Moore
"Financing being raised in Canada is travelling across borders to do harm," said lawyer Murray Klippenstein by phone from his office in Toronto. "We want to find out if our legal system can respond to this."
Klippenstein is perhaps best known for his representation of the estate and family of native activist Dudley George, who was shot and killed by police in Ipperwash Provincial Park in Ontario in 1995. This lawsuit revealed deep political involvement from the premier's office and resulted in a landmark public inquiry.
In another ambitious and possibly precedent-setting case, Klippenstein is representing three villagers from the valley of Intag in northwestern Ecuador who are suing Copper Mesa Mining Corporation (TSX:CUX) and the Toronto Stock Exchange. They allege that company directors and the TMX Group have not done enough to reduce the risk of harm being faced by farmers and community leaders in Intag who have faced violent threats and attacks for opposition to a large open-pit copper mine in their pristine cloud forests.
Still, they hope to go further. "What is happening in Intag is illustrative of a wider problem," a summary of the legal claim states, "the corporate and financial unaccountability of the Canadian mining industry." So while the case uses established legal principles, the plaintiffs hope it will lead to long-awaited legal reforms to help better control thousands of Canadian financed projects abroad.
Klippenstein, who said he "has learned to go miles on very little," acknowledges the "staggering financial mismatch" and says that companies have hundreds of millions of dollars to gain, so it won't surprise him if they spend tens of millions on the case. He also anticipates years of counterattacks, including motions and appeals on technicalities.
But he emphasized that the basics of the case are straightforward. "There's a simple fundamental legal point that you shouldn't harm somebody and that you shouldn't use your money to hire someone who you know is likely to do harm."
Conflict escalates
Marcia Ramírez is secretary of the Intag Community Development Committee. She lives near the end of the road in an isolated village in one of the most biodiverse places on earth. Her community of Chalguayaco Alto sits at the crossroads of two biodiversity hotspots, the Tumbes-Chocó-Magdalena and the Tropical Andes.
"It isn't fair," she told The Tyee, "that a foreign company can come here and contract people who attack us for defending our rights, for wanting to live in a healthy environment, for defending our land and our water." She added, "We'd like the stock exchange to listen to us and to understand that we've been very hurt by one of their companies."
Now 25 years old, the fight against large scale copper mining has marked daily life for the diplomatic and dedicated leader since she was about 12.
Broad-based opposition to large scale copper mining arose when a Japanese company was initially carrying out mineral exploration a short distance away. When the company released its Environmental Impact Assessment report for the proposed mine, the news that four communities would be displaced, as well as massive deforestation, local desertification, river contamination and harm to endangered species sparked vociferous opposition that persists.
Since Copper Mesa, who has a strategic alliance with the giant Rio Tinto, took over the project in 2004, new issues have emerged with apparent attempts to break the opposition. Now land trafficking, threats of violence, as well as relatively high-paying job offers have been driving a wedge between neighbours and families in these rural communities.
"But," commented Ramírez, "what most hurt is when they came... with armed men and sprayed us with gas."
In early December 2006, over 50 heavily armed security guards, mostly ex-soldiers, were hired to reach company concessions and set up camp. Local residents had been tipped off and gathered along the narrow dirt road that the company-hired trucks would have to pass. When they arrived, Ramírez and others tried to urge the armed men to turn around. But instead, the security agents sprayed tear gas into their faces from only a metre away and fired their weapons into the air, injuring one man, also a plaintiff in the case.
When the residents didn't back down, the guards finally retreated.
The incident was caught on film by a European student researching the controversy and is retold as part of the recent film Under Rich Earth by director Malcolm Rogge that debuted at the Toronto International Film Festival in September. It has also been denounced in a complaint to the Inter-American Human Rights Commission.
Prior warning
Canadian authorities were warned that such an incident could arise.
On March 8th, 2005, three months before Copper Mesa (then Ascendant Copper) was listed on the TSX, County Mayor Auki Tituaña wrote to the Finance and Audit Committee of the Toronto Stock Exchange: "We consider it to be appropriate and fair that before accepting open "trade" of Ascendant Copper Corporation's stocks in the Stock Market, you evaluate in depth the "new" company's merits..."
Included in his list of 14 concerns were lack of prior community consultation, lack of legally required municipal approval, violation of a municipal ordinance that declares the area an "Ecological County," as well as attempts to foster divisions as a "means to achieve company profits against the citizen's will and at a cost of the loss of unique biodiversity in our territory."
Then in May, Carlos Zorrilla, executive director of the Ecological Defense and Conservation of Intag (DECOIN), travelled to Ottawa to present a complaint to the Department of Foreign Affairs claiming that Copper Mesa had violated the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development's (OECD) Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises. Mining Watch and Friends of the Earth Canada supported the claim.
"I'm here," he says in a press release, "because Canadians need to understand the real risk of violence that is emerging as a result of this company's activities." He added, "The Canadian government must take action to curb the excesses of Canadian mining companies operating and exploring overseas."
The complaint was withdrawn after eight months when it was apparent that the appropriate authorities would not apply the relevant procedures. The legal summary notes that "the TSX stock market listing of Copper Mesa has allowed the company to obtain over $25 million in capital funds -- some of which paid for the armed attackers" in December 2006.
Carolyn Quick, director of corporate communications for the TMX Group, told The Tyee her firm considers the case to be "entirely without merit" and that they will "vigorously defend this position." She would give no further comment about the letter from Mayor Tituaña nor the complaint made to DFAIT. No one from Copper Mesa was available to speak with The Tyee.
Globalization of legal accountability
Another challenge in holding companies to account in Canada, where the bulk of the world's mining companies are based, are complicated corporate structures that criss-cross continents.
"By dispersing their actions across borders and saying that 'Well, we didn't do that in Canada or Ecuador, that decision was made in the U.S.,' they can evade accountability. The courts can respond and say 'Take this case somewhere else,'" says Klippenstein.
Copper Mesa whose headquarters in Colorado, "has connections to some nine different legal jurisdictions, making it difficult to identify which jurisdiction is the proper one in which to hold the corporation accountable," says the legal summary of the case.
The former website of Copper Mesa (then Ascendant Copper) acknowledged that its corporate structure makes suing directors difficult: "All of the directors of Ascendant and substantially all of their assets and those of Ascendant are located outside of Canada. It may not be possible for purchasers of securities being qualified for distribution under this prospectus to effect service of process within Canada upon directors who reside outside of Canada..."
It is for this reason that the lawsuit focuses on decisions allegedly made in Ontario.
'Establish clear legal norms in Canada'
However, one possible advantage for rural residents of Intag preparing for a lengthy legal battle on tricky Canadian territory is that they are not alone in their concern.
Their broader goals for legal regulations of Canadian mining companies echo what the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade (SCFAIT) and the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination and other civil society groups have already been saying.
While Carlos Zorrilla was in Ottawa in 2005, the SCFAIT was writing its 14th report, which recommended that the government "Establish clear legal norms in Canada to ensure that Canadian companies and residents are held accountable when there is evidence of environmental and/or human rights violations associated with the activities of Canadian mining companies."
The government responded saying that it "will continue to examine the best practices of other states attempting to address the accountability of businesses for activities conducted abroad." But it has yet to implement mandatory rules.
Still Klippenstein is hopeful in the face of tough odds. "One has to trust in the promise of a certain amount of fairness and independence that the justice system can provide. It has been shown that powerful people can be brought to kneel this way before."
It took eight years of legal proceedings before a public inquiry was called in the Dudley George case. They never even made it to court, but a long list of recommendations was implemented.
Ramírez is also optimistic that they have a chance at justice through Canadian courts as part of their fight to leave Intag's cloud forests intact.
She points out the variety of sustainable development projects that they have been working on as alternatives to large scale mining, including community owned watersheds, a mixed mini-hydroelectric company, as well as agricultural and tourism initiatives. She urges Canadians to see the benefits: "We want future generations to have what we have."
__________________________________________________________
copyright thetyee.ca © 2003 - 2008
Native Rights News is making this material from The Tyee available in accordance with the Fair Use Doctrine codified at Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107: This article is distributed without charge or profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information. Distribution of this material is for research and educational purposes that will promote social and economic justice and benefit society.
Read more!
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Indigenous Peoples Educate, Inform & Warn at Largest Climate Change Demonstration in U.S. History
First Nation Delegates Deliver Letter to Senator Kerry in Advance of Visit from Canadian Environment Minister
More than 12,000 young people from all corners of the continent gathered in Washington, D.C. over the weekend to take part in today’s second Power Shift Conference.
The blizzard pounding the nation’s capitol apparently has not cooled the ardor of the young climate activists, who seek to change Washington’s "business as usual" attitude toward climate change and clean energy.
Various groups have scheduled more than 350 lobbying meetings with U.S. Congressmen and Senators and their staffs. An estimated 2,500 demonstrators organized by Capitol Climate Action, successfully blocked the five gates leading to the Capitol Power Plant.
Activists targeted the plant as a symbol of what is wrong with government because it burns coal and natural gas and is used to heat the Capitol’s buildings. No arrests were reported, and after four hours, the activists declared victory and raised the blockade.
Among the activists were Indigenous Peoples delegations sent by several Canadian First Nations and Native American tribes from Alaska and the "lower 48" states. One of the major purposes of the Indigenous delegations was to educate, inform and warn both the young climate activists and members of Congress about the catastrophic effects the extraction and burning of fossil fuels is having on their people and their environments.
Jessica Lee, in a post to the Indy Blog this morning reports:
"You have come here to have a voice about the environment. Our ancestors have been telling the government for 200 years to protect the environment," said Travis Brown, a student at Haskell Indian Nations University in Lawrence, Kansas, to a room of more than 175 students who attended a workshop titled, "Decolonizing Our Minds: How Colonization Affects Us Today." Brown noted that native communities across the continent are being adversely impacted not only by mineral and fuel extraction companies, but now are also suffering the effects of climate change on the landscape and eco-systems. "Our people are at the risk of being exterminated."
"Representatives from several Arctic region indigenous communities explained about how the effects of climate change — which are more extreme at the earth’s poles — including melting sea ice, eroding shorelines, thawing tundra and changes to fish, seal, whale and caribou migrations are threatening their entire way of life."
And Mike, in a post to the Environmental Age Dot Com blog, also this morning, reports:
"A delegation of Indigenous youth from Alberta went to Senator Kerry’s office outlining the devastation that is tar sands and rallied with supporters today ahead of Canad’s Environmental Minister, Jim Prentice’s visit to Capitol Hill today and tomorrow.
"They hand delivered a . . . letter express[ing] concern that Canada's Environment Minister Jim Prentice will misrepresent the disastrous environmental and human rights record of the tar sands to US Congressional leaders."
Following is the letter.
March 2, 2009
Senator John Kerry
Chairman of Foreign Relations Committee
218 Russell Bldg.
Second Floor
Washington D.C. 20510
Dear Senator Kerry,
Please allow us to present you with a different perspective on Canada’s tar sands than you are likely to hear from Canadian Minister of the Environment, Jim Prentice.
We came together this year at the Powershift gathering in Washington, DC, as members of Beaver Lake Cree Nation, Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation and Lubicon Cree Nation to share our stories with 11,000 youth from across North America. We came with messages of destruction and devastation wrought by the tar sands in our communities, but also feelings of hope that together we can contribute to building a more sustainable world for our communities and future generations. These ideas of a greener sustainable world are familiar to us as an ancient First Nations way of life.
Dangerous toxic chemicals used in the extraction of tar sands are contaminating water systems stretching all the way to the arctic basin and adversely affecting communities along the way including Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation. Expansion of the tar sands is a direct attack on who we are as a people. Many First Nation peoples believe in the medicine wheel with four elements: earth, water, air and fire—three are polluted by these projects. Destroying these elements destroys who we are. The tar sands are killing us.
Beaver Lake Cree Nation is also being encroached upon by rapidly expanding tar sands infrastructure and development. Natural gas wells used to power oil production in the tar sands are almost literally in the community’s backyards. Pollution from these projects adversely affecting peoples’ health, way of life and violate established treaty rights. Animals are dying, disappearing, and being mutated by the poisons dumped into our river systems. If there is no fish, we cannot fish, if there is no more game, we cannot hunt. Our traditional lands and water houses our culture. They are one and the same. Once we have destroyed these fragile eco-systems we will have also destroyed our peoples and trampled our treaty rights.
Construction of the Transcanada North Central Corridor pipeline, set to cross through the traditional territory of Lubicon Lake First Nation without the consent of the community is an outright violation of human rights and inherent rights of the community as Indigenous peoples. With oil and logging already impacting this territory, expansion of oil infrastructure will continue to wreck havoc on the land and displace even more wildlife.
Our communities are looking for energy solutions that provide a healthy sustainable community for our future generations. The sustainable future for First Nations in Alberta, Canada and the United States of America alike, cannot be achieved by further exploiting one of the dirtiest, most energy intensive and destructive sources of oil on the planet. It's time we focus our efforts on building a clean sustainable future that puts our people to work in a safe, green energy economy.
Senator Kerry, we urge your leadership in the Congress to:
Respect and recognize established treaty rights during the Clean Energy Dialogue: These discussions will surely frame the future of energy in our countries. They will also determine the whether culturally significant and bio-diverse regions of our respective countries, as well as the livelihoods of the Indigenous peoples that inhabit this turtle island, are preserved.
Focus the Clean Energy Dialogue on renewable energy and energy efficiency: The main focus of the dialogue should be on clean energy efforts and include wind, solar, and other renewable fuels and on transportation solutions such as electrified transportation and high speed rail.
Sincerely,
Melina Laboucan-Massimo, Lubicon Cree Nation
Gitz Crazyboy, Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation
Myron Lameman, Beaver Lake Cree Nation
cc:
Minister Jim Prentice
Secretary Steven Chu
Secretary Kenneth Salazar
Secretary Hillary Rodham Clinton
EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson
CEQ Chair Nancy Sutley
__________________________________________________________
News Sources: Environment News Service, The Indypendent, The Environmental Age Dot Com
Native Rights News is making this material from the news oganizations and blogs listed above available in accordance with the Fair Use Doctrine codified at Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107: This article is distributed without charge or profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information. Distribution of this material is for research and educational purposes that will promote social and economic justice and benefit society.
Read more!
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Residential School Survivors Occupy Vancouver Church
International Media Statement, For Immediate ReleaseThe Friends and Relatives of the Disappeared (Vancouver)
The protestors entered the church sanctuary as the worship service commenced and unfurled a banner declaring "All The Children Need A Proper Burial". After leafletting the congregation and making a statement, the protestors left, vowing to return if the United Church did not surrender the remains of native children who died under their care and halt further destruction of their burial sites.
The occupation was prompted by the partial destruction this week of the last building of the United Church's former Alberni Indian residential school, where eyewitnesses claim that the remains of former students are buried.
"They're destroying the evidence of their crime, and under the law, that's a crime" said Bingo, a survivor of the Alert Bay residential school. "We're not listening to their bullshit anymore. We'll be back with more people next time."
Squamish hereditary Chief Kiapilano, who legally evicted the United Church from his territory last March, endorsed the occupation and called for similar actions by other residential school survivors. These occupations of United Churches during their Sunday services will continue and will escalate until the fallen children are brought home, their killers are brought to justice, and the residential school crime sites are all protected.
Issued by The Friends and Relatives of the Disappeared (Vancouver)
Read and Hear the truth of Genocide in Canada, past and present, at thiswebsite: http://www.blogger.com/www.hiddenfromhistory.org
"Kevin [Annett] is more deserving of the Nobel Peace Prize than many who have received it in the past."- Dr. Noam Chomsky, Institute Professor Emeritus, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
"A courageous and inspiring man." (referring to Kevin Annett)- Mairead Corrigan-Maguire, Nobel Peace Prize Laureate, Belfast, Northern Ireland"
The very lands we all along enjoyed
- Daniel Defoe, Jure Divino (England, 1706) From: Eagle Strong Voice
Native Rights News is making this material available as the result of a press release issued by The Friends and Relatives of the Disappeared (Vancouver). We are publishing the image from http://www.hiddenfromhistory.org in accordance with the Fair Use Doctrine codified at Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107: This article is distributed without charge or profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information. Distribution of this material is for research and educational purposes that will promote social and economic justice and benefit society.
Read more!
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
International Pressure Mounts on Canada to Do More about Human Rights of Indigenous Peoples
Canada's Record on Indigenous Rights Questioned at UN Human Rights Council
OTTAWA, Feb. 4 /CNW Telbec/ - The international community has sent a strong message that the Government of Canada must do more to uphold the human rights of Indigenous Peoples.
Canada's human rights record was reviewed by the United Nations Human Rights Council on Tuesday, February 3 as part of the new Universal Periodic Review (UPR) process.
Of the 45 states that spoke during the three -hour session, 30 raised concerns about the rights of Indigenous peoples. Some of the strongest recommendations came from states that have traditionally allied with Canada in the promotion of human rights.
The United Kingdom, for example, recommended that Canada give its "highest priority" to addressing "fundamental inequalities" between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people including through "resolution of land claims and reconciliation of governance and self-government."
The governments of Norway and Denmark called on Canada to reconsider its opposition to the 2007 UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The Norwegian representative said, "We believe the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples is unique as a universal framework for improving implementation of existing rights of Indigenous peoples in all countries of the world."
The government of Norway also called for "comprehensive reporting and statistical analysis of the scale and character of violence against Indigenous women so that a national strategy can be initiated in consultation with Indigenous representatives to respond to the severity of this issue."
Switzerland expressed concern over the lengthy process for resolving Indigenous land disputes and the concessions demanded by the government as a condition for settling claims. Switzerland urged Canada to "redouble its efforts" to resolve land disputes and to improve the mechanisms for doing so.
Canada was also questioned about the rights of Indigenous peoples by states with close economic ties. The government of the Philippines asked, "Is there specific legislation which covers mining activities in lands claimed by Indigenous communities? What mechanisms are in place to resolve possible disputes between private corporations, local and federal government and Indigenous communities in this regard?"
Twenty-three states did not have a chance to speak because of time constraints. They have submitted questions and recommendations in writing. For example, Zambia recommended Canada "take steps to review its position on the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, consistent with the principal of international cooperation and the protection of the international human rights system as a whole."
Canada failed to consult with Indigenous peoples' organizations and domestic human rights groups before submitting its report to the Human Rights Council. Such consultation is recommended by the UPR process. Unfortunately, the failure to hold consultations was not made clear in Canada's report or in yesterday's session, which led some states to congratulate Canada on its consultations.
"The government is working with Aboriginal communities to agree on priorities," John Sims, the Deputy Minister of Justice, told the UN Human Rights Council. "The challenges are enormous. The scale of issues to confront is vast and many of the issues are technically very complex but we're moving ahead on many fronts: education, entrepreneurship, economic development, land claims, safe drinking water and so on."
Indigenous peoples' organizations and human rights groups are calling on Canada to take the recommendations of the UPR seriously and to engage constructively with Indigenous peoples and civil society to ensure their implementation.
The report of the Council's UPR Working Group will be released on Thursday, February 5. The Government of Canada will have until June to respond.
Video recordings of the session and related documents can be found online at: http://www.un.org/webcast/unhrc/archive.asp?go=090203
For further information: Assembly of First Nations: Don Kelly, Communications, (613) 241-6789 ext 334, dkelly@afn.ca; Gina Cosentino, Government Relations + International Affairs, National Chief's Office, (613) 241-6789 ext 356, gcosentino@afn.ca; Amnesty International Canada: Beth Berton-Hunter, Media Officer, Amnesty International Canada, (416) 363-9933, ext 32, Cell: (416) 904-7158; Canadian Friends Service Committee: Jennifer Preston, (416) 920-5213; Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami: Stephen Hendrie, Director of Communications, Cell: (613) 277-3178, hendrie@itk.ca; Inuit Circumpolar Council (Canada): Corinne Gray, (613) 563-2642; KAIROS: Canadian Ecumenical Justice: Ed Bianchi, Indigenous Rights Program Coordinator, (613) 235-9956; Native Women's Association of Canada: Celeste McKay, cell: (613) 858-7070; Quebec Native Women: Ellen Gabriel, (450) 632-0088 ext. 228
__________________________________________________________
© 2009 CNW Group Ltd.
Native Rights News is making this material from Assembly of First Nations available as the result of a general press release. This article is distributed without charge or profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information. Distribution of this material is for research and educational purposes that will promote social and economic justice and benefit society.
--
Posted By Alliance for Indigenous Rights to Native Rights News at 2/05/2009 02:31:00 PM
Read more!
Indian Control of Indian Education
Thinking Aloud About Theorizing Indigenous EdI read a blog entry that had me revisit need to understand cultural/political standpoint when I use authority of position to deliver curriculum (any subject, any grade, etc.). [1] What acts of praxis to transform schooling for students of First Nations ancestry? I asked this question throughout a career as classroom teacher. It is a centuries long struggle of resistance to assert independence of thought, historical record, identity, protocols and et cetera. This is a given for all indigenous peoples, whether Dené, Mohawk, Cree or Mi'kmaq. For indigenous peoples the classroom has not been a tame environment, but rather an environment to tame. Thus, a new generation of educators emerged at 1972. [2]
Praxis: 'Hands On' Tradition
Their/our modern roots are grounded in the policy statement Indian Control of Indian Education [ICIE], issued by the National Indian Brotherhood in 1972. [In 1982 the NIB became the Assembly of First Nations.] This does not imply that self-determination was new. By 1970, the Dené were developing a statement of inherent independence, with assertion that 'We the Dené of the N.W.T. insist on the right to be regarded by ourselves and the world as a Nation.' This was unanimously accepted and declared in 1975. [3]
There is a history of self-determination: students ran away from or parents/guardians kept children out of residential schools; communities continued to use heritage languages; leadership signed (or not) treaties as Nations; leadership sustained traditional acts, for examples, of political governance, art, healthcare, spirituality, environmentalism, agriculture. These acts of Ancestors produced concrete examples about how we live today because of the strength of cultural knowledge (now called Traditional Indigenous Knowledge [TIK] in modern lit).
These acts are praxis; a term, first used by Ancient Greeks to describe the 'acts of free men'. The emphasis is on men in Ancient Greek culture, unlike Mohawk or Cree understandings of women as equal, although role differentiation is understood. For Marxists, the term meant that people act to change/transform the world and not just theorize. For educators, Friere brought us critical pedagogy to deconstruct oppression by the oppressed. [4] I have lived long enough to understand more deeply that we do not save the culture but it is the culture that saves us.
For indigenous peoples, praxis is the 'acts of free people', self-determination a Gift of the Creator. No one can take away a gift of the Creator ― although some may try again and again. Does indigenous praxis suggest anarchy? I was asked this once. 'No,' I said, 'Aboriginal communities were not lawless.' Then I would be asked, 'What is self-government' As an academic, I could recite text and chapter. More now I recall the words of an Elder who repeated what he heard from an Elder senior to him. He said, 'See that little bird up in the tree. See it sit. See it fly away? That is self-determination.' Another Elder once remarked, 'Every time you decide to get out of bed in the morning that is self-government.'
Self-Government and Staying Focused
For me, life in classrooms became assertion rather than resistance. One of the goals of ICIE is reinforcement of identity (NIB, 1972, p. 3). But do we have to resist to be, or can we just be?
Resistance can keep us very busy. Better to talk Cree or Mikmawisimik than write about saving a language? [5] Use time to scour for thought-speak from our voices and not too handily rely on Gramsci's theory of hegemony? I lived the experience of the business of busyness (Smith, 2003) when living in Hungary the summer of 1984. I needed to experience standing in line-ups for food and basic toiletries and to observe how newspapers were not read but deconstructed. Marketing could take a full day. As I stood in line, the exhaustion helped me understand how I might tire of resistance, struggle and praxis. Yet, the Magyars persevered to reclaim traditional territory and preserve their language, despite a few generations forced to speak-write-read Russian.
Life in classrooms today continues to be self-surveillance about whose knowledge, tradition, history, standpoint takes precedence. Given what First Nations Ancestors survived, it is good to revisit Indian Control of Indian Education, policy adopted in 1973 for students of indigenous Ancestry within the borders of Canada.
ICIE (1972)
In 1972, we used 'Indian'; we still do in particular circumstances. In 1974 the Canadian School Trustees adopted ICIE stating, 'any transfer of educational jurisdiction from the federal [Canada] to the provinces must be done with prior consultation with Indian peoples,' and school must be a place where Aboriginal students 'learn their own language, history and culture in the classroom, with curricula revised. [6, 7] This is policy of Assembly of First Nations and Canadian government.
So when I/we wonder about how I/we will transform the classroom today (whether bush camp or post-secondary lecture hall), it is sometimes good to reread the policy adopted on behalf of parents/guardians, youth and children.
The policy is in play so we can act as our Ancestors did. My think of this post reminded me of Kirkness' (1998) recipe that First Nations need to cut the shackles, cut the crap and cut the mustard. [8]
ENDNOTES
[1] Thank-you TH for post. Made brain work. I refer to:
http://twinkleshappyplace.blogspot.com/2009/01/kaupapa-maori-theory-theorizing.html
[2] See: Calliou, S. (1999). Activism and self-determination in First Nations education (1972-1988). In J. Hylton (Ed.). Aboriginal self-government in Canada (2nd Edition, Chpt. 8). Sask, SK: Purich Publishing Ltd.
[3] Full text: http://www.denenation.com/denedec.html. By 1970, parents of Rae-Edzo reclaimed the elementary school because they knew they would provide a more relevant education, including heritage language. There is a checklist for teacher self-assessment. See: http://www.newteachersnwt.com/culture_based_education2.html
[4] Freire, P. (1969). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. This idea discussed previously; e.g., Sartre described 'digestive' or 'nutritive' aims of education, where knowledge is fed by teachers to 'fill them out'. Sartre, J.P. (1947, Paris), Une idée fundamentale de la phénoménologie de Husserl: L'intentionnalité, Situations 1.
[5] Mikmawisimik, is an Algonquian language spoken by 8000 Indians in the Canadian Maritimes (particularly NS) and a few US communities. . . . Mi'kmaq is written alphabetically today, but in the past it was written in pictographs, which predate European contact.' Jesuit missionaries modified to teach Christian prayers. Micmac hieroglyphics do not resemble Ancient Egyptian or Mayan. Mi'kmaq is not linguistically related to Ancient Egyptian or other Semitic languages. See: http://www.native-languages.org/mikmaq.htm
[7] Re. history of overturn of use of 'Indian', the Hon. F.A. Calder, Nisgha, spoke as elected MP in Canadian Parliament, 'This may be the time to mention that the native people of Canada do not appreciate being lumped together as a faceless body known as Indians. We would prefer to be recognised by our own distinctive national, linguistic, and cultural characteristics'. See:
http://qp.gov.bc.ca/hansard/30th2nd/30p_02s_730215p.htm
[8] Kirkness, V.J. Aboriginal education in Canada: A retrospective. (1999). Journal of American Indian Education. Vol 39(1). Special issue #2. Available @
http://aboriginaleducation.epsb.ca/documents/kirkness.pdf
Editor's Note:
Dr. Sharilyn Calliou, is a status band member of the Michel First Nation, located in Treaty 6 Territory, Canada and is descended from the Mohawk, Cree and Lakota Peoples. A career teacher, she has served in many capacities in inner city schools, as well as in an on-reserve isolated northern community. She received her Ph.D. in Curriculum & Instruction from the University of British Columbia, where she taught in the Native Indian Teacher Education Program and Ts''kel, First Nations Graduate Studies in Education. Doctor Calliou has been published in English Journal, the Journal of Native Education (Canada) and the Canadian Journal of Community Education. Her daily blog Word Zoo can be found at http://wordzoo.spaces.live.com/?_c11_BlogPart_pagedir=First&_c11_BlogPart_BlogPart=blogview&_c=BlogPart&partqs=amonth%3d1%26ayear%3d2009
© Sharilyn Calliou. 20 January 2009. All rights reserved. May be reproduced for educational use but NOT commercial use.
Native Rights News is publishing this article with express permission of the author without charge or profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information. Distribution of this material is for research and educational purposes that will promote social and economic justice and benefit society. The image used in this article was obtained from the Visual Resources Database of the Minnesota Historical Society and is published in accordance with the Fair Use Doctrine codified at 17 U.S.C. Section 107 of the United States Copyright Act.
--
Posted By Alliance for Indigenous Rights to Native Rights News at 1/30/2009 10:35:00 AM
Read more!
Recent Legal Victories Uphold Indigenous Land Rights
Recent legal victories affirm rights of indigenous peoples to ownership and control of their ancestral lands - pressure on holdout nations mounts
by Perry H. Chesnut, Editor NRN
Published January 14, 2009
On January 8, 2009, we published the UN press release in which the special rapporteur for indigenous rights praised the Nicaraguan government for demarcating and granting legal title to ancestral lands belonging to the Awas Tingni Community, an indigenous people who occupy an area on the Atlantic Coast of the country.
This victory of a small indigenous community came after more than a decade of struggle and is important for indigenous people not only in the Americas, but around the world because, as stated by the press release, "This was the first case in which an international tribunal with legally binding authority found a Government in violation of the collective land rights of an indigenous group, setting an important precedent in international law."
Although the United States and Canada are members and purport to be staunch supporters of the Organization of American States (OAS), both have failed to ratify the organization's American Convention on Human Rights. Such ratification not only adopts the articles of the convention that define the duties and obligations of nation-states to indigenous peoples, but also serves as a legally binding acceptance of the jurisdiction of the Inter-American Court on Human Rights.
Despite their much-trumpted claims of being champions of human rights, the U.S. and Canada have a long history of rejecting international declarations of the rights of indigenous peoples. As everyone who follows these issues knows, out of the entire UN General Assembly, only the U.S., Canada, Australia and New Zealand voted against the UN DRIP that was enacted on September 13, 2007. And as we reported recently in OAS Moves Forward on DRIP Tailored to Needs of Indigenous Peoples in Western Hemisphere - U.S. Expresses "Reservations", the "U.S. government has submitted statements to the [OAS] working group outlining its general reservations about the outcome of each negotiation session" in the drafting of an OAS American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
It seems obvious that the U.S. and Canada are unlikely to ratify any human rights treaty that would allow aggrieved Indian tribes and nations to bring cases against them in any international tribunal - for the very reason that such tribunals are not captive instruments of the powerful global corporations that control U.S. and Canadian policy. For the present, U.S. and Canadian indigenous groups must resort to their own national courts and legislatures, which are riddled with obvious conflicts of interest and hardly unbiased.
Having said this, however, I should note that of the OAS' thirty-five member nations, twenty-four have ratified the Convention on Human Rights and twenty-two have officially accepted the jurisdiction of the Inter-American Court on Human Rights. For these nations, the decision is a legally binding precedent that upholds the right of indigenous peoples to ownership and control of their ancestral homelands. As James Anaya, who was present at the land titling ceremony said, "In addition, it provides a model for other Governments to comply with their international legal obligations to recognize and protect the rights of indigenous peoples to their traditional lands and resources in practice."
This landmark decision upholding Indigenous land rights is the first to come from an international tribunal. But there have been similar decisions won by indigenous groups in the supreme courts of their own countries (Mayan Indians in Belize in October 2007, and Indians in Brazil in December 2008). One suspects that a tidal wave of international public opinion recognizing the important role that indigenous peoples play in the protection of the planet and its ecosystems, as well as the growing global demand for basic human rights is now beginning to drive court decisions. If so, it will not be long before countries that refuse to sign and live up to human rights and indigenous rights treaties will be seen as pariah states that intend to continue their past practices of genocide, colonialism and exploitation of their native populations. Eventually, the citizens of hold-out countries such as the U.S., Canada, Australia and New Zealand will demand that their governments sign and ratify the various human rights treaties and live up to their responsibilities as members of the greater global community.
One final point I would like to make regarding the Awas Tingni Community v. Nicaragua case. The Awas Tingni Community would not have made it to the Inter-American Court on Human Rights had they not received the ongoing legal assistance of the Indian Law Resource Center with offices in Helena, Montana and Washington, D.C. Mr. James Anaya, Professor at the University of Iowa College of Law and member of the Indian Law Resource Center; Ms. Maria Luisa Acosta, associate attorney in Nicaragua; and Mr. Todd Crider of the firm Simpson, Thacher & Bartlett all assisted the Awas Tingni in bringing their case before the OAS Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and served as "Legal Advisors to the Commission" in its pursuit of the case in the international court.
For more information about this landmark case in international law upholding the land rights of indigenous peoples, you can find links to copies of the complaint and the court's decision, as well as an archive of articles that have been written about the case on this page at the Indian Law Resource Center.
__________________________________________________________
© Copyright Alliance for Indigenous Rights 2009
Native Rights News hereby grants permission for this article or portions of it to be copied and republished on condition that the author and Native Rights News is given attribution. In addition, if the article or a portion of it is published over the Internet, a link to this page must be included.
--
Posted By Perry Chesnut, Editor to Native Rights News at 1/14/2009 09:41:00 AM
Read more!
Written Submissions to UN Human Rights Council Blast Canada
Submissions to Geneva council include issues such as treatment of indigenous peoples, immigration
Linda Diebel
NATIONAL AFFAIRS WRITER
Canada could soon find itself "named and shamed" as a country that violates human rights in a United Nations review.
Close to 50 submissions blasting Canada – on everything from the state of indigenous peoples to problems with immigration policy – have been filed with the Geneva-based United Nations Human Rights Council as part of a new review process for UN nations.
"To be criticized doesn't mean Canada has joined the worst of the worst (abusing nations)," said Alex Neve, secretary-general of Amnesty International Canada, of Canada's review that begins Feb. 3. "But as a general rule, Canadians are proud this is a country that believes in human rights and do want our governments (federal, provincial and territorial) to do the right thing."
The Amnesty submission highlights several concerns. In a section on indigenous rights, it notes more children are in the care of the state now than during the century-plus period when they were forcibly removed from communities and sent to Indian residential schools.
"The Canadian record of upholding the rights of indigenous peoples is a real disgrace and a source of national shame," said Neve. "These are not political, economic or natural resource matters. These are issues of human rights."
He said Amnesty International expects Canada to be cited for falling short on human rights issues in a number of areas when the UN rights arm publishes its final report.
While only member states can ask questions or make recommendations during the Feb. 3 hearing, written submissions are taken into consideration for the report.
Canada currently sits on the 47-member council, a slot filled by rotation.
In its submission, the Assembly of First Nations criticizes Ottawa for refusing to endorse the 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, as well as other problems.
"Canada's position blatantly rejects and undermines the international and domestic rights processes," it says, noting the indigenous population of Canada is "drastically over-represented in incarceration rates, disabilities, poor health indices, suicide and poverty."
The brief cites last year's apology by Prime Minister Stephen Harper on behalf of Canadians for Indian residential schools, which were aimed at assimilation. Churches ran the schools for about 150 years, an issue addressed by a class-action settlement, the creation of the Indian Residential Schools Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the public apology.
But the submission suggests no progress has been made.
Grand Chief Ed John, from the First Nations Summit in B.C., said Canada has "a duty to uphold human rights at the highest level."
"The government is opposed to the declaration (on aboriginal rights) for purely ideological reasons," said John.
John criticized the federal government's labelling as consultations its meetings with non-governmental organizations – including with his group and others in B.C. last Friday – when the federal submission to the UN is dated Jan. 5.
"It was after the fact," said John.
The federal government lauds Canada's rights record in its lengthy brief, citing everything from the court system and universal health care to education.
Paul Joffe, an international human rights lawyer, said the power of the review comes with publicity or its "name and shame" aspect.
"What country wants to be put in a report as being against human rights?" asked Joffe. "This process is meant to encourage countries to improve their behaviour and uplift standards."
This new process means countries will be judged for the first time by their peers, rather than by UN agencies.
All 198 UN members are reviewed every four years.
"Canadians should be concerned because the government signs international agreements and doesn't abide by them," said John Lewis, human rights co-ordinator for the Toronto-based group, KAIROS.
"In particular, we've begun to fall down on economic, social and cultural rights. That is worrisome at any time, but particularly so during an economic downturn."
In its brief, KAIROS, an organization with ecumenical support, says a majority of migrant workers in Canada report they "continue to face unacceptable living and working conditions" and that "workplace safety standards are not properly monitored and enforced."
__________________________________________________________
© Copyright Toronto Star 1996-2009
Native Rights News is making this material from the Toronto Star available in accordance with the Fair Use Doctrine codified at Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107: This article is distributed without charge or profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information. Distribution of this material is for research and educational purposes that will promote social and economic justice and benefit society.
--
Posted By Alliance for Indigenous Rights to Native Rights News at 1/14/2009 07:30:00 AM
Read more!
Monday, January 12, 2009
Ecuadorian Government Debates Law Favoring Canadian Mining Companies over Constitutional Rights of Nature and Indigenous Tribes
By Daniel Denvir, Today correspondent
The Mining Law, currently under debate in the provisional National Assembly, or Congresillo, would replace the Mining Mandate passed in May of this year. The Mandate froze mining operations and revoked a number of concessions to foreign corporations. The law would create a National Mining Company and increase state control over foreign corporations, which are largely Canadian. But the law would also allow mining to take place anywhere, including in protected areas and sharply limit community input.
In Quito, buses arrived from throughout the country to protest the mining law. Marching to the National Assembly, protesters clashed with police, who used pepper spray to push back activists intent on meeting with legislators. A small delegation was allowed to enter in the afternoon. The protests were organized by the Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities of Ecuador (CONAIE) and the Coordinator for the Unity of the Left and for Life, a new organization dedicated to regrouping social movements to confront Correa.
The march is possibly a prelude to a nation-wide uprising. While the protest was not large by Ecuadorian standards, representatives from many communities were present. Earlier this month, more than 30 organizations gathered in the Amazonian city of Coca and agreed to oppose Correa’s business friendly policies. Former Correa spokesperson and Assembly Member Monica Chuji said, “Today is a first step in a broader process of unifying social movements. Today we don’t have quantity, but we have unity.” Chuji, an Amazonian Kichwa, broke with Correa’s Alianza País Party in September, accusing the president of opposing indigenous rights.
Correa insists that responsible mining is necessary for Ecuador’s development. In November, Correa accused the indigenous movement of “losing their compass and playing into the hands of sectors that they have historically criticized, such as the Right, which the current administration is combating.” Correa has threatened to send the Mining Law to a national referendum if the indigenous movement alters it or blocks its approval, accusing the CONAIE of being anti-democratic.
But Dr. Byron Real López, an expert in environmental law, wrote in a recent report that the Mandate “is concerned with solving important issues. ... such as the corruption surrounding the indiscriminate granting of concessions. But the proposed law ignores the ecological and social conflicts that mining activity causes. ... and thus would tend to aggravate them.” López argues that the proposed law would violate a number of provisions in the new constitution, such as those protecting the rights of nature and indigenous communities.
Juan Francisco, a young Kichwa, traveled from the Southern province of Cañar. “We will never let them into our territory, which provides our water. Responsible mining is a miserable lie that the government wants to sell to us.” Juan Francisco said that the government should instead support sustainable and organic farming.
“We oppose the Mining Law because we love nature. Mining will kill us, it will poison the water with chemicals. We all drink this water and we all will die. Water doesn’t belong to anyone. It belongs to us all.”
Despite Correa’s dismissive comments, it appears that the government is taking the movement seriously. Two days after the protests Ecuador’s interim legislature, the Congresillo, announced that they were considering extending discussion on the law by seven days – potentially pushing back a vote until Jan. 12. On Dec. 26, Congresillo President Francisco Cordero began a series of meetings with social movement leaders opposed to the project. The stated objective is to incorporate critics’ perspectives before the proposal undergoes a second debate, the last step before a vote.
But the CONAIE demands that the law be shelved so that a national debate on mining can take place. And protesters were adamant in their opposition to large-scale mining.
Carmen, a Saraguro Kichwa woman from the Southern province of Loja, said, “We oppose the Mining Law because we love nature. Mining will kill us, it will poison the water with chemicals. We all drink this water and we all will die. Water doesn’t belong to anyone. It belongs to us all.”
Campesino Jorge Marin traveled hours by bus from the Southern Amazonian province of Morona Santiago. “We’re here to stop the Mining Law, a law that will make it impossible for us to be owners of our land. We are here to defend nature and let the Congress know that we depend on the Amazon for life.”
Leaders of the CONAIE were scheduled to meet in a special assembly the first week of January to discuss a possible national uprising.
Salvador Quishpe, a Kichwa leader from the Southern Amazonian province of Zamora Chinchipe, told the crowd that mass mobilization would be necessary to stop the Mining Law. “If we have to celebrate Christmas in the streets to stop this law, we will!” Quishpe said that while it was impossible to bring thousands of people from Zamora Chinchipe to Quito, 1,500 delegates met in his province earlier this month and declared their support for nation-wide mass mobilizations.
© 1998 - 2009 Indian Country Today
Native Rights News has adapted and is making this material from Indian Country Today available in accordance with the Fair Use Doctrine codified at Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107: This article is distributed without charge or profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information. Distribution of this material is for research and educational purposes that will promote social and economic justice and benefit society.
Read more!
Monday, December 15, 2008
AFN Chief Calls Canada's Record on Human Rights for First Nations Peoples Shameful
Canada's opposition to the human rights of Indigenous People at UN Conference on Climate Change is shameful says AFN National Chief
OTTAWA, Dec. 10 /CNW Telbec/
Assembly of First Nations 
This International Day for Human Rights on December 10 marks the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR).
"The United Nations theme for this year's anniversary is 'Dignity and
justice for all.' The Universal Declaration of Human Rights represents an
international commitment to dignity and justice for every person, for all
peoples, everywhere. Human rights are not a luxury; they belong to everyone.
Canada's denial of the rights of Indigenous people offends the core values,
principles and rights the UN Declaration of Human Rights represents," said
Assembly of First Nations National Chief Phil Fontaine.
This statement comes after Canada opposed the recognition of Indigenous
rights in a new international initiative on climate change that was advanced
this week. The climate initiative known as the Reduced Emissions from
Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD) at the United Nations Conferenceon Climate change is currently being held in Poznan, Poland.
The National Chief stated, "It is incomprehensible in an advanced
democratic state as Canada to choose to ignore the rights of Indigenous
people. We are physically, spiritually and culturally tied to our natural
world. We are tied to the land, water, and all aspects of the physical
environment. The denial of our rights in this important global climate change agreement violates our fundamental human rights as Indigenous peoples."
Canada, the United States and Australia expressed interest in including
reduced emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in this agreement. It aims to fight deforestation in developing economies by tapping emissions trading markets in a future climate agreement that will follow up on the first phase of the UN's Kyoto Protocol, which expires in 2012.
However, as the text was being drafted yesterday, Canada joined the
United States, Australia and New Zealand in insisting that references to
Indigenous rights and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of
Indigenous Peoples be struck from the text.
"Canada's position at the United Nations Conference on Climate change is
the latest in a series of hostile decisions against Indigenous rights which
continue to affect Canada's international reputation as a defender and
promoter of human rights," said AFN National Chief Phil Fontaine.
The National Chief added that the refusal of the Canadian government to
sign the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
despite a motion passed in the House of Commons on April 8, 2008 which called on Parliament to implement and adopt the principles in the declaration offends Canadian law.
"Moreover the rights of our children are also compromised in this
country. The federal government has refused to address discrimination against First Nations children in the Child Welfare system and education. First Nations Child and Family Services agencies receive, on average, 22% less funding than provincial agencies, a point the Auditor General remarked upon in her May 2008 report," said National Chief Phil Fontaine.
The Auditor General criticized the program indicating that shortfalls in
funding mean the federal government is not providing First Nations Child and Family Services agencies with adequate funding requirements to meet the number or the needs of children in state care.
In October, the Canadian Human Rights Commission decided to put the case before the Canada Human Rights Tribunal. However, the federal government
recently filed for a judicial review on technical issues that will delay the
hearing and stall justice for thousands of First Nations children who are
living under state care.
"This is a complete contradiction of the Government's position, which in
the last Parliamentary session insisted that the Canadian Human Rights Act apply to First Nations citizens on reserve. However, this inconsistent
standard of human rights promotion and protection by the Canadian Government for First Nations children violates the principles of equality, fairness and universality of human rights. The rights of our children or any children should not be suspended on technicalities," the National Chief remarked.
Similar to the Child Welfare issue, other core programs for First Nations
children, such as education, have been capped at 2% a year, which does not
keep pace with inflation or the growing First Nations population.
"The deepening gap in the quality of life and well-being for First
Nations compared to Canadians continues to widen and this is not acceptable for any person or child, including First Nations," Fontaine noted.
Currently, First Nations students receive $2,000 less per child annually
for educational support than students in provincial schools. In 2007, INAC
identified a need for 69 new schools while another 95 schools needed major repairs. Approximately 40 First Nations communities do not have schools at all. INAC's current plan addresses only 27 of those sites, but the funding is on hold.
"On this day which celebrates human rights, I call on the Government of
Canada to do the right thing and uphold and promote the human rights of
Indigenous people and the human rights of our children".
The Assembly of First Nations is the national political organization
representing First Nations citizens in Canada.
For further information: Karyn Pugliese, Communications Officer, Cell:
(613) 292-1877; Gina Cosentino, Government Relations and International
Affairs, National Chief"s Office, Cell: (613) 314-2661, gcosentino@afn.ca
_____________________________________________________
© 2005 Groupe CNW Ltée
Native Rights News is making this material from CNW TELBEC - Assembly of First Nations available in accordance with the Fair Use Doctrine codified at Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107: This article is distributed without charge or profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information. Distribution of this material is for research and educational purposes that will promote social and economic justice and benefit society.
Read more!
