Highlight

Select one, many or all resource types to be displayed in this list.

by Jana Walker - Despite some strides in addressing violence against Native women, there is no doubt United States law falls far short of even the minimum human rights standards set forth in the UN Declaration on the Right of Indigenous Peoples.  Considering the United States’ trust responsibility to Indian nations, coupled with the standards in the Declaration, it is imperative that the U.S. act now to end the epidemic of violence against Native women.

, 02/01/2012 - 10:10am

Representatives met with U.S. officials to discuss the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

, 11/03/2010 - 8:32am

Tribal leaders meet with U.S. officials in third consultation

, 10/26/2010 - 3:30pm

Robert T. Coulter, Executive Director, will be speaking at the University of Buffalo Law School.

 

By: Indian Law Resource Center
, 03/29/2010 - 10:31am

Peru Congress Revokes Land Laws

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/8108388.stm 

Peru’s Congress has overturned two controversial land ownership laws that sparked deadly clashes between police and Amazon tribal groups.

At least 34 people were killed in the clashes earlier this month.

The laws were passed under powers Congress had granted President Alan Garcia to implement a free trade agreement with the US.

Tribal groups said they were not consulted and some of Peru’s South American neighbours voiced opposition.

Ambassador recalled

Congress passed the revocation measure by 82-12 after a five-hour debate.

The Amazon tribal groups argue the decrees - passed in 2007 and 2008 - open up mineral and mining rights in a way that would threaten their way of life.

The worst of the clashes occurred when police tried to clear roadblocks set up by the groups at Bagua, 1,000km (600 miles) north of Lima.

Peru’s Prime Minister Yehude Simon had earlier said the government had to know how to listen.

He said the reversal of policy would not put at risk Peru’s free trade agreement with the US but has said he will step down once the dispute is settled.

The dispute led to a diplomatic row between Peru and Latin American neighbours Venezuela and Bolivia.

Peru recalled its ambassador to Peru for consultation on Tuesday after Bolivian President Evo Morales described the deaths of the indigenous protesters as a genocide caused by free trade.

Peru’s Foreign Minister Jose Antonia Garcia Belaunde called Mr Morales an "enemy of Peru".

, 06/18/2009 - 3:51pm

By Renzo Pipoli

http://www.indiancountrytoday.com/home/content/47921432.html 

Peruvian President Alan Garcia assured reporters in Lima June 10 - in his first comments following a deadly confrontation June 5, described by Natives as their worst single-day killing in decades - that it is a lie many Natives died because police restored order through "martyrdom."Just a day earlier, Prime Minister Yehude Simon and Interior Minister Mercedes Cabanillas endlessly appeared in funerals of dead police, speaking in Congress or talking to media, justifying the use of force to end nearly 60 days of protests by Natives by describing them as manipulated savages and cowardly killers.Between June 7 and 9, the Peruvian government had run an advertising campaign showing images of dead police with multiple spear wounds. This continued, even as one minister of Garcia’s cabinet, Carmen Vildoso, resigned in protest.The organization of Native Amazon residents, AIDESEP, which has 350,000 members, warned the government about the campaign; saying the ads describing Natives as savage killers were only building hate among Peru’s 28 million people against the Natives.Maria Zavala, the permanent representative of Peru to the Organization of American States, said June 9 in Washington that only nine Natives had died out of 34 deaths reported since the June 5 violence in the Amazon. She said the rest of the casualties were of policemen killed trying to restore order."In those numbers you have the proof that the police sometimes acts in martyrdom," Garcia said. He blamed the misinformation about a higher death toll on "a little serious international news agency" he did not name and bad reporters.He again called Native leader Alberto Pizango, who had been elected by all Amazon tribes as head Apu, or biggest chief, through AIDESEP, "a criminal." Pizango was leader of the Natives, but since June 8, has been inside the Nicaraguan embassy in Lima; the country is expected to grant asylum.


What is the real human toll?

Independent human rights groups in Peru are investigating corpse disappearances. The last time Peruvian security forces, or at least elements of them, made corpses of victims disappear was in the early 1990s during the government of former President Alberto Fujimori, who was sentenced to 25 years in prison for it.The official claim of 34 deaths including nine Natives is in sharp contrast to as many as 40 deaths among Natives reported by AIDESEP.The Natives have not turned bodies over to Peruvian authorities or shown them to the press. Specialists like Javier La Rosa, who is working to learn the death toll, said they may be scared and mistrust authorities and other people like him, as they see their leaders being prosecuted and criminalized.Shapiom Noningo, a new Native leader who immediately replaced Pizango as AIDESEP president, pleaded to the government to stop criminalizing Native spokespeople, insisting they are not leaders, but transmit popular Native sentiment.La Rosa, from the Lima-based human rights group Instituto de Defensa Legal, said he and seven lawyers traveled from Lima to Bagua - the epicenter of the violence - June 8 to help the Natives legally. He said 51 had been arrested.He has interviewed and confirmed the well-being and safety of nine people from Native groups who remain in detention in Bagua June 9.La Rosa said the group he visited includes those who had been occupying a pipeline substation where about a dozen police who had been sent to take care of the facility were apparently executed by Natives. Though, no Natives were captured in the pipeline area and there are no witnesses of any homicide among those under seven-day detention.He said another 25 Natives detained in the military base of El Milagro in northern Peru were scheduled to be visited by his organization June 10; and another 17 had been transported to the city of Chiclayo from other Amazon locations where they are still detained.


Disappearance investigations

La Rosa and his team have documented testimony - at this time just considered rumors - in which diverse people talk about government forces disappearing corpses to reduce the death toll. Those testimonies are being taped and the information is being followed."We have a series of rumors in Bagua among town residents, and also among both the Mestizo and Native that tell us about larger numbers of death which casts doubt over the official nine dead Natives toll." He said some reports tell of corpses thrown into helicopters and trucks, but the information has yet to be confirmed.According to reports gathered by La Rosa, the group of policemen who were apparently killed by Natives on or around June 5 in a crude oil pipeline substation had been kidnapped before the end of May. He said the government had not reported a hostage situation as part of efforts by Natives to halt the crude pipeline. The government has not officially reported any kidnapping and said police died as they attempted to talk to Natives.He said Garcia’s government apparently ordered the launching of tear gas against Natives in Bagua to break their protest even as there was a police hostage situation in the pipeline. He said the hostages were killed in reprisal.This contradicts another version - supported by comments of a police effective - identified as Fredegundo Vasquez who claimed on national television next to minister Cabanillas that he saw the group of police being killed by Natives with spears.


More Trouble Ahead

On June 5, Pizango and two other leaders, Machiguenga leader Ruben Binari and Awajun leader Marcial Mudarra, said Natives were going to immediately pull out in a sign of respect for the deceased.But the group of Native leaders said "no matter what" Natives would rather die before accepting the law changes mandated by Garcia as they are designed to strip them out of ancestral lands.The Peruvian Congress started a debate June 10 on the laws and how repealing them could end the protests.According to Natives, those laws would enrich government officials by giving them a freer hand to sell concessions for agriculture, forestry, oil, gas and lumber in areas where they have lived for centuries, but are lacking formal title ownership. Opposition leaders like Ollanta Humala claims corruption and bribes for future concessions are behind the government’s adamant position.Representatives of the Catholic church and from the Ombusdman’s office plan to help restart dialogue in coming days.A Native leader in the city of Yurimaguas, who identified himself as Segundo Pizango (Spanish for Second Pizango, Segundo is also a name) said June 10 that the protests are far from over."All these actions do not scare us. Instead they make us more angry. The government simply just does not want to repeal those laws." Several nationwide protests were planned for June 11 to get Garcia to back down on the laws.
, 06/12/2009 - 10:10am

June 9, 2009

Fort Yuma, CALIFORNIA/ARIZONA — Today, the NAFTA Tribunal in the Glamis Gold dispute against the United States released its long-awaited decision.

The Tribunal found that the State of California’s and the United States’ actions in regulating hard rock mining on public lands did NOT violate provisions of NAFTA.

"We were the first tribe to have our briefs accepted in a NAFTA claim dispute" stated Mike Jackson, Sr., President, Quechan Nation. "The award shows that the Tribunal understood that the Indian Pass area is a sacred area to the Quechan people, worthy of protection from hard rock mining. After battling the mining company for nearly fifteen years, it is good to have this decided. We encourage Glamis (now GoldCorp) to take immediate steps to put the matter behind all of us."

Such steps could include GoldCorp not appealing the decision and abandoning or otherwise relinquishing its mining claims so that the existing withdrawal of the area from new mining claims would absorb the area proposed for the mine. Glamis must also pay two-thirds of all proceeding costs.

"We are very pleased to see that an international tribunal recognized the obligation of state and local governments to respect indigenous cultural rights. We also note the United States Government worked with the Quechan Tribe in defending its interests, and that the Tribe’s voice was heard at the hearing," stated Courtney Ann Coyle, Attorney for the Tribe. "We sincerely hope that the Tribe’s actions will pave the way for increased participation by other indigenous peoples in international economic law disputes."

However, the ruling does not appear to affect GoldCorp’s mining claims in the land. The Tribe has continued its strong opposition to mining – or any development – in this sacred place. The Tribe will be examining its options to further ensure protection of this place in perpetuity.

Preservation would be consistent with the United States’ position in the dispute that, "Glamis’s unpatented mining claims … never included the right to mine in any manner which interfered with the state’s ability to accommodate the free exercise of religion, injured Native American sacred sites or endangered the environment or public health and safety." Thus, use of the land cannot proceed in violation of those tribal rights/interests. The international tribunal found Glamis’s claims wanting, as the Clinton Administration found their claims under domestic land use laws equally flawed.

The Tribe intends to call upon the Obama Administration to confirm the validity of the original Solicitor’s Opinion in this matter, which determined that BLM has the ability and indeed the obligation to deny mines that would impair or degrade native sacred places. A federal court agreed with the original Opinion, application of which would lead to another denial of the mine, should GoldCorp or another company foolishly seek to permit it in spite of the site’s history.

The Quechan Indian Nation is a federally recognized Tribe. About 3,000 Tribal members live on the reservation. The Quechan is the third largest California land-based tribe, with about 45,000 acres in reservation status.

Their aboriginal lands include the area protected in the Clinton-era decision originally denying the Glamis Gold mine, a denial that was later rescinded by the Bush Administration, and lands which became the poster child for successful hard rock mining reform in California. The Tribe has utilized the Indian Pass area since time immemorial for religious, ceremonial and educational purposes. The Indian Pass area was also designated as one of the 11 Most Endangered Historic Places in 2002 by the National Trust for Historic Preservation.

The Tribe offers its deep appreciation to all of its supporters who helped protect this sacred area.

For additional information, please contact:

Mike Jackson, Sr., President Quechan Nation 760.572.0213
Pauline P. Jose, Quechan Culture Committee 760.572.0661
Courtney Ann Coyle, Attorney Quechan Nation 858.454.8687 or CourtCoyle@aol.com

 _______________________________

The full decision is available at this State Department link.   Also see the State Department’s media release

  

, 06/09/2009 - 3:19pm

For Immediate Release: April 15, 2009
Contact: Leonardo Crippa, Staff Attorney
Indian Law Resource Center
(202) 547-2800
 lcrippa@indianlaw.org 

MDB Obligations to Respect Human Rights


The Indian Law Resource Center announces a workshop and a discussion of its paper, entitled Principles of International Law for Multilateral Development Banks, during the upcoming Eighth Session of the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues in New York City.  

This paper provides legal support for the argument that multilateral development banks (MDBs) are legally obligated to promote and respect human rights.  Currently, MDBs claim that they are not legally obligated to abide by international human rights law, and they do not have to promote or respect human rights when implementing projects.  However, projects funded by MDBs, like the World Bank and Inter-American Development Bank, often have negative impacts on Indigenous communities and their lands, resources, and environments.  Such MDB projects are often carried out without community consent and in violation of Indigenous peoples’ fundamental rights, including their rights to land, territories, natural resources, self-government, and self-determination.  

We invite you to attend the UN Permanent Forum side event on the Principles of International Law for Multilateral Development Banks during which we will discuss the ways these principles can be used to protect and defend the rights of communities impacted by MDB projects. 

 ____________________

Where: Eighth Session of the Permanent Forum at DC2-12th Floor Conference Room, 2     UN Plaza, 44th Street, United Nations Headquarters, New York, NY 10017 
  

When: May 26th, 2009 from 1:15 pm - 2:45 pm

____________________ 

For more information, go to http://un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/session_eighth.html or contact the Permanent Forum Secretariat at (917) 367-5100 or IndigenousPermanentForum[at]un.org.

Please take a look at an abbreviated version of our Principles paper (English) containing just the proposed principles, or the full paper (English/Spanish) including the principles and the legal arguments upon which they are founded.  

The Indian Law Resource Center is a non-profit legal advocacy organization that provides legal assistance to the Indigenous peoples of the United States, Mexico, Central and South America who are fighting for the protection of their lands, resources, human rights, environment, and culture. The Indian Law Resource Center is a non-governmental organization with consultative status before the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations and the Organization of American States. More information on the Indian Law Resource Center and our projects is available at www.indianlaw.org.  

, 04/16/2009 - 12:06pm

President Obama has an opportunity to send the world a message about American justice.

He can add America’s name to the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples before the Organization of American States. This is a historic effort by all countries in the Americas to recognize and declare that human rights belong to indigenous peoples, both as individuals and as communities, nations, or tribes. Negotiations over the draft American Declaration in the Organization of American States have reached a critical point. All the countries of the Americas must now exert the political will to finalize and adopt the American Declaration. Last year, the United States refused to actively negotiate. This must change, and each of us can help make that happen.

We live in an era of self-determination, yet Congress still claims the power to do what it wants - confiscate our native lands in violation of the Constitution, strip our jurisdiction, exploit our natural resources and refuse to honor its treaty obligations. Many of our nations and communities face a daunting set of social and economic challenges, as well as violation of treaty and human rights on a daily basis. Our northern tribes and Native Alaska villages see their very existence threatened as climate change undermines their subsistence lifestyles.

All the countries of the Americas must now exert the political will to finalize and adopt the American Declaration.


The adoption of a strong American Declaration would be a tremendous step toward ending the appalling treaty and human rights violations that are so often inflicted on our Indian and Alaska Native tribes and communities. The declaration states the commitment by these countries to the rights of Indian peoples - our right to exist as distinct cultures, our right to govern our own affairs, our right to own and use our lands, and our right to be free from discrimination.

Indian and Alaska Native nations have always had to fight to make sure the United States government respects and protects our rights as tribal governments and as Indian peoples. This declaration is an important step in protecting those rights. The United States did not vote for the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples even though it publicly agreed with most of its provisions. We have a new opportunity to make sure the United States commits to protecting our rights by joining in adopting of a strong American Declaration.

United States leadership is key to gaining the respect for treaty and human rights that is lacking in the Americas. Strong leadership from the United States would signal a change in its foreign policy on human rights, reinvigorate the OAS negotiations, and lead to the adoption of a strong American Declaration. The new administration provides an excellent opportunity for us to encourage such leadership from the U.S.

As Indian nations and as communities and individuals, this is the time to vigorously encourage the United States to support a strong American Declaration that respects and declares our rights. And while we are at it, let’s also see to it that the U.S. declares its support for the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

Wilma Mankiller is the former principal chief of the Cherokee Nation.

, 03/24/2009 - 6:20pm
Syndicate content