Chittagong Hill Tracts, Bangladesh

RIGHTS AIPP AIPP Regional Capacity Building Program - Training Manual on the UNDRIP 38

C. Monitoring

1. Difficulties in monitoring

The monitoring of self-government, autonomy and other aspects of self-determination remains an immense challenge for indigenous peoples. In many cases, the absence of any in- ternational or other supra-national mechanisms to resolve disputes over self-government is a key factor hindering proper monitoring. Similarly, the absence of any national or international mechanism to oversee implementation of peace accords and other political agreements on self- determination and self-government also creates difficulties in monitoring.

2. Major processes and mechanisms for monitoring

National judicial processes and human rights mechanisms and international human rights mechanisms treaty bodies, UN special rapporteurs, the UN Human Rights Council are among the major venues to monitor the various aspects of self-determination, including self-govern- ment. However, the disadvantaged situation of most indigenous peoples and their marginal par- ticipation, or absence of participation, in international and national mechanisms often stand in the way of proper monitoring of self-government.

3. Presence at the UN

The sustained presence of indigenous peoples in a substantive manner in UN the and other human rights processes is extremely important for ensuring proper monitoring of indigenous peoples’ rights at the international level. While participation in the specialized mechanisms dealing with indigenous peoples rights – such as the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Is- sues, the UN Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples – and engaging with the UN Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of Indigenous Peoples is important, substantive engagement with other UN and international mechanisms is also vital for advocacy on indigenous peoples’ rights. Similar efforts may be required at the national justice system, national human rights mechanisms if any, lobby and advocacy through civil society groups and, of course, participation in the mainstream political process, however difficult this might be. Remember to wrap up the session, summarizing the main points. Note to trainers Module-1 RIGHTS AIPP AIPP Regional Capacity Building Program - Training Manual on the UNDRIP 39 Free, Prior, Informed Consent Prepared by Lulu A. Gimenez Module 2 OBJECTIVES 1. To understand free, prior, informed consent FPIC as an instrument of self-determination; 2. To gain an overview of key issues related to this instrument; 3. To know the provisions in the UNDRIP that pertain to FPIC; 4. To assess the extent to which the right to FPIC is respected or violated in our respective coun- tries; 5. To learn from the experiences of indigenous peoples in trying to exercise this right; 6. To identify the challenges in exercising the right to FPIC, and to define the best ways of ad- dressing such challenges. CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION A. Background B. Definition of terms and scope II. UNDRIP PROVISIONS A. Core articles B. Related articles

III. REALITIES ON THE GROUND; EXPERIENCES AND LESSONS LEARNED

IV. CHALLENGES A. Needs, capacities, strategies B. Implementation and monitoring

I. INTRODUCTION

A. Background

Even in colonial times, it was already ac- knowledged that indigenous peoples ought to be consulted on plans that would likely affect them, and that they ought to be free to either give or withhold their consent to these plans. Rarely, however, has this principle been re- Distribute metacards to the participants and ask them to write down their answers to the question: What do you understand by free, prior, informed consent or FPIC? Collect and cluster the written replies, and refer to them as you give an input guided by the following. Suggested Method Module-2