Search Tips
sorted by
30 shown of 1103 entities
Access to justice and the right to food: the way forward 2015, para. 23
- Paragraph text
- The following examples illustrate the positive role played by regional human rights mechanisms. In the case Centre for Minority Rights Development (Kenya) and Minority Rights Group International on behalf of Endorois Welfare Council v. Kenya, the Endorois, a primarily pastoralist indigenous community, were removed from their lands by the Government of Kenya to establish a wildlife reserve. The African Commission found Kenya to have violated articles 8, 14, 17, 21 and 22 of the African Charter. The Commission noted that, as a consequence of its removal, the community had been "relegated to semi-arid land", which was unsuitable for pastoralism. The ability to graze animals, a key means of subsistence for the community, had become impossible as a result of loss of their land and this threatened the community's survival.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the right to food
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Environment
- Food & Nutrition
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Ethnic minorities
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
Access to justice for people living in poverty 2012, para. 18
- Paragraph text
- Certain groups that suffer from structural discrimination and exclusion and are disproportionately represented among the poor, particularly ethnic and racial minorities, migrants and indigenous peoples, encounter additional barriers to accessing justice. Those difficulties are multiplied for women living in poverty, who experience compounded discrimination and disempowerment, not to mention financial constraints. Therefore, across different contexts, women living in poverty experience particular difficulties in accessing justice mechanisms and winning judicial recognition, action and enforcement for crimes, discrimination and human rights violations they are disproportionately subject to. Children are often denied the due process guarantees that they are entitled to on the same basis as adults, as well as additional protections that are necessary, in particular when they are particularly deprived or marginalized.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Poverty
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Ethnic minorities
- Persons on the move
- Women
- Year
- 2012
Paragraph
Access to justice for people living in poverty 2012, para. 62
- Paragraph text
- Lack of legal aid for civil matters can seriously prejudice the rights and interests of persons living in poverty, for example when they are unable to contest tenancy disputes, eviction decisions, immigration or asylum proceedings, eligibility for social security benefits, abusive working conditions, discrimination in the workplace or child custody decisions. Indeed, exclusion of certain categories of claims from the scope of free legal aid, such as housing or immigration proceedings, or exclusion from representation before quasi-judicial tribunals, such as welfare or employment appeal boards, discriminates against the poor. Moreover, the legal processes which relate to such civil matters are often extremely complex and their requirements onerous, creating insurmountable obstacles for those without the assistance of a lawyer, particularly if the State or other party enjoys such assistance. This is particularly troubling with respect to civil matters involving the most vulnerable groups, such as indigenous peoples, persons with disabilities and ethnic minorities, who often face serious deprivations and violations of their rights, and lack the means or ability to contest them.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Movement
- Poverty
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Ethnic minorities
- Persons on the move
- Year
- 2012
Paragraph
Access to justice for people living in poverty 2012, para. 76
- Paragraph text
- This can constitute a significant barrier for the poorest and most marginalized, many of whom speak local languages or dialects, as well as for indigenous populations, ethnic minorities and migrants. In particular, those who are often excluded from education services, including women, are less likely to have received adequate schooling in the official or predominant language.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Education
- Equality & Inclusion
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Ethnic minorities
- Persons on the move
- Women
- Year
- 2012
Paragraph
Access to justice for people living in poverty 2012, para. 78
- Paragraph text
- Even when the predominant language is spoken, cultural differences can impede communication within the judicial system. In addition to imbalances of power, in some cultural groups, different terminology may be used for specific occasions or to speak to people in a different relationship, and time and place may be described in different ways. Furthermore, intercultural communication between indigenous groups or ethnic minorities and judicial officers can be impeded by differences in perceptions of politeness; cultural taboos which prevent the giving of certain evidence; and reliance on interrogatory methods. When judicial processes do not adopt measures to facilitate cross-cultural communication and adapt to cultural differences, this may contribute to higher rates of conviction on criminal charges, undermining the right to a fair trial.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Ethnic minorities
- Year
- 2012
Paragraph
Access to justice for people living in poverty 2012, para. 86
- Paragraph text
- Informal justice systems are often more accessible to persons living in poverty and may have the potential to provide quick, affordable and culturally relevant remedies. However, informal justice mechanisms frequently exhibit some of the same weaknesses as State systems. For example, they may exclude women, minorities and disadvantaged groups, be susceptible to corruption and abuse of power, require payment from claimants or impose heavy fines, and in some there may be frequent lengthy delays in deciding cases.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Poverty
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Ethnic minorities
- Women
- Year
- 2012
Paragraph
Access to land and the right to food 2010, para. 1
- Paragraph text
- One billion people are hungry today. For the vast majority - smallholders or agricultural workers, herders, artisanal fisherfolk and members of indigenous communities - access to land is a condition for the achievement of a decent standard of living. The reason why approximately 500 million people depending on small-scale agriculture are hungry is not only that the price they receive for their crops is too low and they are less competitive than larger production units, but also that they cultivate plots that are often very small - which makes the vast majority of them net food buyers - and they are often relegated to soils that are arid, hilly or without irrigation as they compete against larger productive units for access to land and water. Whether because small-scale farming has become non-viable or because they have been expelled from the land in the absence of effective security of tenure, many such farmers become agricultural workers on large-scale plantations, where they are often paid lower than subsistence wages and left without social or legal protection. Artisanal fisherfolk pastoralists and agro-pastoralists now face a similar threat: as land becomes scarcer, they increasingly risk being excluded from the fishing and grazing grounds on which they have been able to rely for generations. And the precarious position of indigenous peoples and forest-dwelling populations may be attributed in particular to the increased pressure on the forests on which they depend for their livelihoods.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the right to food
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Environment
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Ethnic minorities
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Access to land and the right to food 2010, para. 3
- Paragraph text
- For some of the groups that are the most vulnerable today, this means protecting existing access to land, water, grazing or fishing grounds, or forests, all of which may be productive resources essential for a decent livelihood. In such cases, as detailed below, the right to food may complement the protection of the right to property or of indigenous peoples' relationship with their lands, territories, and resources. In other cases, because landlessness is a cause of particular vulnerability, the obligation of the State goes further: it is to strengthen such access or make it possible - for example, through redistributive programmes that may in turn result in restrictions on others' right to property. This obligation of States is especially clear in cases in which the members of such groups have no alternative means of producing food or gaining sufficient income to purchase food that is sufficient, adequate and culturally acceptable.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the right to food
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Environment
- Food & Nutrition
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Ethnic minorities
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Access to land and the right to food 2010, para. 10
- Paragraph text
- The pressures referred to above exacerbate conflicts over land and lead to a worrisome criminalization of social movements aimed at carrying out agrarian reforms "from below", including by claiming land that is unused and, in their view, should be distributed more equitably. As a result, serious violations of a range of human rights occur, including murders of peasants connected to such activities, which the Special Rapporteur has documented in a number of communications to States. But the increased pressures on land are also a source of concern because of the weak protection of those who depend most on the land for their survival: smallholders, traditional fisherfolk, pastoralists and peoples (including indigenous and tribal peoples) that rely on the products of the forest. The present report first addresses the situation of indigenous peoples, which is specific insofar as the right of such peoples to have their lands demarcated and protected is recognized under international law. It then considers the position of smallholders, who cultivate the land in conditions that are often insufficiently secure, and that of other land users, such as fisherfolk, pastoralists and herders, who are particularly dependent on commons. The key message is that, while security of tenure is important and should be seen as crucial to the realization of the right to food, individual titling and the creation of a market for land rights may not be the most appropriate means to achieve it.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the right to food
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Ethnic minorities
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Access to land and the right to food 2010, para. 12
- Paragraph text
- In addition, the right of all peoples to freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources - as provided for in article 1 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights of 16 December 1966 and in article 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 16 December 1966 - entails the protection of indigenous peoples from certain forms of dispossession from their territories or from the resources on which they depend. Article 5 (d) (v) of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination also protects the right of indigenous communities to their lands. And the right of indigenous peoples to the official recognition and registration of their territories has been affirmed under relevant regional human rights instruments. The Inter-American Court of Human Rights and the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights consider that indigenous people's traditional possession of their lands has effects equivalent to those of a State-granted full property title: therefore, where members of indigenous peoples have unwillingly lost possession of their lands after a lawful transfer to innocent third parties, they are entitled to the restitution thereof or to obtain other lands of equal extension and quality. The right of indigenous communities to their lands includes the right to the natural resources contained therein. Property, as protected under article 21 of the American Convention on Human Rights, is considered to constitute a collective right of indigenous people, since land ownership is often centred not on the individual, but rather on the group and its community. Thus, States may have to recognize the customary systems of land tenure that protect communal property rights - for example, by giving the community a right to veto the alienation of its land by one of its constituent members, whether an individual or a clan, village or tribe.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the right to food
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Environment
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Ethnic minorities
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Access to land and the right to food 2010, para. 13
- Paragraph text
- International human rights law protects the relationship of indigenous communities with their lands, territories and resources by requiring States to demarcate such land, protect it from encroachment and respect the right of the communities concerned to manage it according to their internal modes of organization. Although sometimes those guarantees seem to be honoured more in the breach than in the observance, case law shows that use rights derived from customary tenure can be recognized and protected by the legal system; it also shows that the right to communal property - a right of the community rather than of the individual - is an alternative to individual property rights. On both counts, it can serve as a source of inspiration, in order to enhance the protection of the rights of other users of natural resources.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the right to food
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Environment
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Ethnic minorities
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Access to land and the right to food 2010, para. 23
- Paragraph text
- As customary forms of tenure are recognized, the relationship between individual and communal rights may vary. For instance, communal land rights may be formalized as an aggregation of individual rights. In Cambodia, although land may be held by indigenous communities as a whole, the 2001 Land Law allows individual community members to leave and receive their share of communal land, subject to the agreement of the entire community. Another approach is to allow local community authorities to administer rights. In Latin American States where indigenous groups have been granted both political rights and land rights, such groups have been able to achieve a degree of autonomy over land management, while gaining tenure security.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the right to food
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Ethnic minorities
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Access to land and the right to food 2010, para. 26
- Paragraph text
- For these groups, the existence of commons is vital. As noted by the Commission on Legal Empowerment of the Poor, in some legal cultures, community-based ownership of natural resources such as grazing lands, forests, water, fisheries and surface minerals is a traditional and effective way to grant control and proprietary rights to persons who have little or no other property. Such systems should be both recognized and fully protected against arbitrary seizure. Indeed, under existing international law, the requirements applicable to indigenous peoples may have to be extended to at least certain traditional communities that entertain a similar relationship with their ancestral lands, centred on the community rather than on the individual. That would encourage the management of common-pool resources at the local level by the communities directly concerned, rather than through top-down prescriptions or privatization of the commons. When such arrangements are institutionalized, the decentralized management of common-pool resources, recognizing their function as collective goods, is recognized as highly effective. Those negotiating the modalities of the use of the commons have the best information about its carrying capacity, and thus about uses that are sustainable, and the users have strong incentives to monitor the use of the commons and to report infractions.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the right to food
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Environment
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Ethnic minorities
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Access to land and the right to food 2010, para. 40c
- Paragraph text
- [In order to respect the right to food, States should:] Respect the needs of special groups. States should implement the specific rights of indigenous peoples by demarcating their lands and territories and by providing them with specific protection. States should also protect access to fishing grounds, grazing grounds and water points for fisherfolk, herders and pastoralists, for whom the protection of commons is vital. The recognition of communal rights should extend beyond indigenous communities, at least to certain communities that entertain a similar relationship with the land, centred on the community rather than on the individual;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the right to food
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Environment
- Equality & Inclusion
- Food & Nutrition
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Ethnic minorities
- Year
- 2010
Paragraph
Achieving durable solutions for internally displaced persons in urban settings 2014, para. 59
- Paragraph text
- In some cases, such as in Colombia, there are hundreds of associations of internally displaced persons, representing various communities of origin, women's groups or indigenous groups, among others. The Government has set up a consultative process with those associations that reaches out to such groups. The Government of Georgia has also engaged in widespread consultations with internally displaced persons (see A/HRC/26/33/Add.1). While not flawless, such processes represent a meaningful effort by Governments to consult internally displaced persons. Consultations can affect the attitude of the Government towards such persons, as was the case in Afghanistan. For example, until 2013, the authorities had not considered internally displaced persons to be permanent citizens of Herat, but, following the consultations, the political elites of the city now acknowledge the permanent settlement of those persons in the city. In a major breakthrough, the Government is now considering upgrading and regularizing the Maslakh settlement. Measures aimed at achieving durable solutions for internally displaced persons can therefore yield positive results when internally displaced persons are treated not as objects, but as active participants in the search for, and implementation of, durable solutions.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the human rights of internally displaced persons
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Movement
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Ethnic minorities
- Persons on the move
- Women
- Year
- 2014
Paragraph
Analysis of the impacts of international investment agreements on the rights of indigenous peoples 2016, para. 13
- Paragraph text
- Under international human rights law, indigenous peoples are recognized as peoples vested with the right to self-determination, as affirmed in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, by virtue of which they are entitled to determine their own social, cultural and economic development. The rights affirmed under those treaties, which have been widely adopted, take on particular characteristics when interpreted in the light of indigenous peoples' distinct realities, needs, world views and historical contexts and the jus cogens prohibition of racial discrimination. The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples offers the clearest articulation and interpretation of those rights as they pertain to indigenous peoples.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Ethnic minorities
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Analysis of the impacts of international investment agreements on the rights of indigenous peoples 2016, para. 14
- Paragraph text
- This is reflected in the jurisprudence of the United Nations human rights treaty bodies, which instruct States to use the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples when implementing their treaty obligations. The treaties have also been interpreted by national and regional courts and commissions in Latin America and Africa in the light of the provisions of the Declaration and the International Labour Organization (ILO) Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (No. 169), indicating the universal applicability of those instruments and signalling the emergence of customary international law in the area of indigenous peoples' rights.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Ethnic minorities
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Analysis of the impacts of international investment agreements on the rights of indigenous peoples 2016, para. 15
- Paragraph text
- The concept of "indigenous peoples" is not defined under international law. However, its generally accepted characteristics include: self-identification as an indigenous people; the existence of and desire to maintain a special relationship with ancestral territories; distinct social, economic or political systems from mainstream society, which may be reflected in language, culture, beliefs and customary law; and a historically non-dominant position within society. This applies irrespective of State nomenclature.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Ethnic minorities
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Analysis of the impacts of international investment agreements on the rights of indigenous peoples 2016, para. 16
- Paragraph text
- Indigenous peoples' territorial and property rights are sui generis in nature, encompassing the territories and resources that they have traditionally owned, occupied or otherwise used or acquired, including the right to own, use, develop and control resources. Those collective rights exist irrespective of State titles and are premised on: their status as self-determining peoples entitled to the lands and resources necessary for their physical and cultural survival; their customary land tenure regimes; and long-term possession of ancestral territories.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Environment
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Ethnic minorities
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Analysis of the impacts of international investment agreements on the rights of indigenous peoples 2016, para. 18
- Paragraph text
- Human rights bodies have consequently clarified that economic growth or national development cannot be used as a basis for non-consensual infringements on the territorial and cultural rights of indigenous peoples. This is reinforced by the erga omnes nature of the right of all peoples to self-determination, the prohibition of racial discrimination and the fact that their protection is a matter of public interest.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Ethnic minorities
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Analysis of the impacts of international investment agreements on the rights of indigenous peoples 2016, para. 27
- Paragraph text
- Typically, the host States involved employ economic development policies aimed at the exploitation of energy, mineral, land or other resources that are predominantly located in the territories of indigenous peoples. The government agencies responsible for implementing those policies regard such lands and resources as available for unhindered exploitation and actively promote them as such abroad to generate capital inflows. Recognition of indigenous peoples' rights in the domestic legal framework is either non-existent, inadequate or not enforced. Where they exist, institutions mandated to uphold indigenous peoples' rights are politically weak, unaccountable or underfunded. Indigenous peoples lack access to remedies in home and host States and are forced to mobilize, leading to criminalization, violence and deaths. They experience profound human rights violations as a result of impacts on their lands, livelihoods, cultures, development options and governance structures, which, in some cases, threaten their very cultural and physical survival. Projects are stalled and there is a trend towards investor-State dispute settlements related to fair and equitable treatment, full protection and security and expropriation.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Economic Rights
- Environment
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Ethnic minorities
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Analysis of the impacts of international investment agreements on the rights of indigenous peoples 2016, para. 28
- Paragraph text
- Despite significant developments in the recognition of indigenous peoples' rights and safeguards under international human rights law, investment in those sectors is generating "increasing and ever more widespread effects on indigenous peoples' lives" as the legal vacuum arising from the lack of recognition or enforcement of their land rights facilitates arbitrary land expropriation, enabling national and local officials to make those lands available for investment projects. At the same time, the vast majority of those lands are protected under international investment agreements, and related investor-State dispute settlement disputes in agribusiness and extractive sectors are expected in Africa and Asia, while in Latin America there is a growing number of claims concerning settlements in relation to such activities in or near indigenous territories.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Environment
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Ethnic minorities
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Analysis of the impacts of international investment agreements on the rights of indigenous peoples 2016, para. 34
- Paragraph text
- International human rights law recognizes that in certain contexts restrictions can be placed on indigenous peoples' property rights. However, to be legitimate, such restrictions must be: (a) established by law; (b) necessary; (c) proportional to their purpose; and (d) non-restrictive to the peoples' survival. It affirms that, in the context of indigenous peoples' property rights, these conditions imply that good-faith consultations must be held to obtain free, prior and informed consent before any measures affecting those property rights can be considered legitimate.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Ethnic minorities
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Analysis of the impacts of international investment agreements on the rights of indigenous peoples 2016, para. 35
- Paragraph text
- Inadequate respect and protections for indigenous peoples' land and free, prior and informed consent rights when granting rights to investors over their territories are the root causes for subsequent and broader violations of indigenous peoples' rights. In such contexts, international investment agreements that fail to recognize international human rights law obligations contribute to the subordination of indigenous peoples' rights to investor protections, as those protections become an obstacle to future recognition of indigenous peoples' pre-existing rights.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Ethnic minorities
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Analysis of the impacts of international investment agreements on the rights of indigenous peoples 2016, para. 36
- Paragraph text
- In order to address the perverse situation that arises when indigenous peoples are prevented from realizing their land and resource rights owing to protections afforded to investors, a former Special Rapporteur has stressed: That resolving [indigenous peoples'] land rights issues should at all times take priority over commercial development. There needs to be recognition not only in law but also in practice of the prior right of traditional communities. The idea of prior right being granted to a mining or other business company rather than to a community that has held and cared for the land over generations must be stopped, as it brings the whole system of protection of human rights of indigenous peoples into disrepute.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Environment
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Ethnic minorities
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Analysis of the impacts of international investment agreements on the rights of indigenous peoples 2016, para. 43
- Paragraph text
- In Von Pezold and Border Timbers v. Zimbabwe (2015), the company claimed expropriation under the bilateral investment treaties between Germany and Zimbabwe and between Switzerland and Zimbabwe in the context of the State's taking of land. Four indigenous communities, whose traditional lands were the subject of proceedings, submitted an amicus submission claiming that the State and the company had human rights obligations towards them. In its preliminary order of June 2012, the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes tribunal acknowledged their claims to the lands and that its determinations may well have an impact on the interests of the indigenous communities. However, the tribunal rejected their amicus submission on the grounds that: (a) the communities and their chiefs lacked "independence", as they were associated with people affiliated to the Government, and therefore the claimants may be unfairly prejudiced by their participation; (b) it was not in a position to decide if they were indigenous or not and lacked the competence to interpret indigenous peoples' rights; (c) it was not persuaded that consideration of international human rights law obligations, including, article 26 of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples was part of its mandate, and rules of general international law did not necessarily extend to international human rights law; and (d) neither the State nor the company had raised indigenous rights issues. It concluded that the putative rights of the indigenous communities as "indigenous peoples" under international human rights law was a matter outside of the scope of the dispute.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Ethnic minorities
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Analysis of the impacts of international investment agreements on the rights of indigenous peoples 2016, para. 47
- Paragraph text
- The Plurinational State of Bolivia responded that: (a) it had acted in the public interest and had been justified in reverting ownership to the State in accordance with the principles of proportionality and necessity, to avoid security concerns arising out of indigenous peoples' opposition to the project and to restore public order; (b) it was enforcing domestic legislation that should have tempered the company's legitimate expectations, as the State made no commitment to stability; (c) the project violates rights recognized in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples; (d) the company had attempted to fabricate consent in total disregard for the right to self-government of the concerned indigenous peoples; (e) the bilateral investment treaty had no applicable law clause, so there should be "systemic interpretation" in accordance with article 31 (3) (c) of the Vienna Convention on the law of treaties, including human rights obligations towards indigenous peoples under national and international law, as this would be consistent with the evolving nature of standards around fair and equitable treatment, full protection and security, arbitrariness and expropriation; and (f) customary international law recognizes the primacy of human rights over investor protections, citing the ruling of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in Sawhoyamaxa v. Paraguay and Article 103 of the Charter of the United Nations.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Ethnic minorities
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Analysis of the impacts of international investment agreements on the rights of indigenous peoples 2016, para. 48
- Paragraph text
- In response, the company contends that: (a) the State failed to show how the systemic interpretation would result in having to degrade the protections granted to the company under the treaty to uphold the putative rights of indigenous communities under international law; (b) the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, OECD Guidelines and the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights are non-binding instruments, while the ILO Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (No. 169), the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and the jurisprudence of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights are not binding on the United Kingdom, and consequently they are not rules of international law applicable to relations between the parties; (d) the State failed to demonstrate that protection of indigenous peoples' rights had advanced to the level of "erga omnes obligations" or why human rights trump investor protections.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Ethnic minorities
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Analysis of the impacts of international investment agreements on the rights of indigenous peoples 2016, para. 49
- Paragraph text
- The company invoked the view of Canada in Grand River Enterprise Six Nations, Ltd. v. the United States (see para. 48) that the ILO Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (No. 169) and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples do not form part of customary international law, and the decisions of previous tribunals in Glamis Gold v. United States (see para. 47) not to rule on the applicability of indigenous rights and in Von Pezold and Border Timbers v. Zimbabwe (see para. 46) that indigenous rights do not fall under the scope of bilateral investment treaties. The company holds that an exception maintaining preference for indigenous peoples' rights over investor protections would be necessary to "degrade" investor protections and points to the standard Maori exception employed in the bilateral investment treaties of New Zealand as evidence of this.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Ethnic minorities
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Analysis of the impacts of international investment agreements on the rights of indigenous peoples 2016, para. 56
- Paragraph text
- The decision in that case is regarded as forward-looking in terms of ensuring respect for the protection of indigenous peoples' sacred spaces and demonstrating that awards can be sensitive to and inclusive of indigenous peoples' issues. The tribunal's decision that a 50 per cent reduction in the projected earnings, arising from a measure aimed at protecting indigenous peoples' sacred places, did not constitute indirect expropriation and that the measures did not constitute a "manifestly arbitrary" denial of justice, supports this view.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Economic Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Ethnic minorities
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph