Related Aricles UNDRIP PROVISIONS ON SELF-DETERMINATION AND SELF-GOVERNMENT

AIPP Regional Capacity Building Program - Training Modules on the UNDRIP 30 RIGHTS AIPP

III. REALITIES ON THE GROUND

A. General Situaion

Before the adoption of the UNDRIP by the UN General Assembly, many governments in Asia refused to recognize the indigenous peoples’ rights now provided for in the Dec- laration; many even disagreed with the basic premise that their countries had indigenous peoples who were distinct from the main- stream populations. Even after the UNDRIP was approved, some governments in the re- gion still attempted to minimize the Decla- ration’s application to their respective coun- tries. Current leaderships in many nation-states, often reflecting entrenched discriminatory ideas and practices in their respective societies, still tend to deny the application of the right to self- determination to indigenous peoples living within their boundaries. They refuse to apply this right on an ongoing basis, and from time to time in its different aspects and contexts civil and political, economic, social and cultural. In practice, the specific right to autonomy and self-government is denied in varying degrees to indigenous peoples in Asia, save for a few exceptions which are discussed below. Even in cases where the right to autonomy and self-government is formally recognized in state law, a daunting array of obstacles continues to prevent its substantial realization in prac- tice. In Asia, as elsewhere, the very first problem is that many states do not even have accurate listings, maps, and ethnographic data on indigenous peoples’ identities and territories, which are crucial in defining the parameters of self-government. In discussing laws and policies, and challenges in their implementation, refer to the points made under headings [B] and [C] below, but also ask the participants to draw upon their knowledge of the laws and policies in their own country and respective localities to fill up a Gaps Analysis table. Suggested Method Module-1 Choose the appropriate method or combi- nation of methods among the following: Sharing of experiences or case studies Short film documentary, photos Guided open discussion Synthesize the main points that arise in the process. Suggested Method AIPP Regional Capacity Building Program - Training Modules on the UNDRIP Gaps Analysis UNDRIP NATIONAL OR GAPS CONSIDERATIONS OPTIONS PROVISIONS ON LOCAL LAWS IMPLICATIONS RECOMMENDATIONS SELF- OR POLICIES DETERMINATION AND SELF- GOVERNMENT Paragraph or Specific laws, Specific laws, Can current laws, What needs to be Article number policies policies NOT policies be used to done? How? By conforming conforming support indigenous whom? Where? with UNDRIP with UNDRIP peoples’ positions When? For how or interests? Are long? there loopholes in the law that can be used for or against indigenous peoples? Should the matter be approached legally? Or politically? On self-determination On self-government

B. Laws and Policies Related to the Recogniion of the Right

1. Right to self-determination

There are few examples in national laws of an explicit recognition of the right to self-de- termination, in its most comprehensive definition that allow peoples to create an independent state. Such examples include the Constitution of the defunct Soviet Union, the Panglong Agree- ment in Burma and the case of Sabah and Sarawak in the 1950s, when the Federation of Malaysia had just been founded. However, there are several examples of the recognition of the right to self-determination in the more specific context of autonomy and self-government see below.

2. Right to self-government

The indigenous peoples of India have strived for years to achieve self-government. The peoples of Nagaland, Manipur and Mizoram were able to achieve this through struggles that 31 RIGHTS AIPP Module-1