RIGHTS AIPP
AIPP Regional Capacity Building Program - Training Manual on the UNDRIP
36
tals. Notable exceptions include AMAN in Jakarta, Indonesia, and the Assembly of First Na- tions in Ottawa, Canada.
• In some cases, it is the capacities of states that may require strengthening to enable them to deal with indigenous peoples’ issues. Here, indigenous peoples have a role as well, for it
is their rights that are violated if the states’ capacities in protecting their rights are weak. Reliable information and data on indigenous peoples and their situations are often unavail-
able. Often, national census data is not ethnically disaggregated to reflect the actual social, educational and economic status of indigenous communities. National laws and policies,
and consequently, national programs often do not account for the differing socio-economic context of indigenous communities, perpetuating the cycle of discrimination, exclusion and
marginalization. Auditing of national laws and policies, and consequent legal, administra- tive and programmatic reforms would raise the capacities of states to deal in an equitable
and just manner with indigenous peoples’ rights and development needs.
2. At the local sub-national levels Challenges regarding needs. At the local level, there may be serious gaps in the knowl-
edge of indigenous communities regarding their rights and entitlements from local government bodies. Thus, one pressing need is to disseminate information about the indigenous peoples’
entitlements under local government laws or other laws and policies in culturally appropriate formats booklets, compendia, monographs, video, etc.
Challenges regarding capacities. Capacity-raising of indigenous communities remains a
major challenge in most parts of Asia.
Module-1
Trainers should develop a good knowledge of the major self-gov- ernment issues that require focus at the national and local levels.
Note to trainers
1. The trainers should discuss with the participants the current situation of capacity needs of the communities, their weaknesses and strengths, and the possible forms of
training, organizational reforms, networking etc., that may be required to enhance the capacities of indigenous organizations.
2. The discussions on capacities should be at all levels: local, national, international. It is very common to find that most indigenous peoples’ organizations have little or no
voice in their national capitals. Thus capacity-raising of indigenous peoples’ organi- zations at national levels could constitute an integral part of the trainings.
3. AMAN the national-level organization of the indigenous peoples of Indonesia can be cited for best practice for other indigenous peoples to follow tailored to their
needs, of course.
Note to trainers
RIGHTS AIPP
AIPP Regional Capacity Building Program - Training Manual on the UNDRIP
37
Trainers will need to make this as participatory as possible as it will require the trainees to discuss a matter which at times is con-
ceptually difficult.
Note to trainers
3. Challenges regarding strategies
Examples: • From 1986 to 1987, the Cordillera Peoples’ Alliance CPA successfully campaigned for
provisions for indigenous peoples’ regional autonomy in the post-Marcos Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines. But when an Organic Act for the creation of the Cordil-
lera Autonomous Region was formulated, the CPA saw that it gravely lacked provisions that would guarantee democracy and respect for the diverse political and cultural institutions of
the region’s various peoples. Also it was severely limited in land-resource rights guarantees and respect for variation in the customary land-resource laws of peoples. Thus, instead of
advocating the ratification of the Organic Act, the CPA conducted a region-wide educational
campaign on its flaws and successfully convinced communities to reject it. Some observers saw this as a step backward in the movement for Philippine indigenous peoples’ self-deter-
mination. The CPA, however, felt that it was a step necessary to prevent the institutionaliza- tion of what it believed would have been a distorted form of self-government.
• The Saami in Norway and the Jumma in Bangladesh sometimes utilize the strategy of providing local and indigenous language as a compulsory qualification for jobs with local
authorities and schools. This limits non-indigenous peoples’ role in local governance and development programmes.
B. Implementaion
In many cases, the major challenge in enforcing the right to self-determination, including the right to self-government, is not the absence of a law or policy but rather their non-implementa-
tion. There are numerous examples from various parts of Asia.
1. ADCs of Northeast India
The Autonomous District Councils ADCs in Northeast India are a case in point. Theoreti- cally, the ADCs are vested with the authority or prerogative to legislate on matters of customary
law, but without the cooperation of the Governor of the province, this may not be possible, as was the case for example with the Chakma ADC in Mizoram state.
2. Chittagong Hill Tracts, Bangladesh
Similarly, in the Chittagong Hill Tracts region in Bangladesh, an accord was signed on 2 De- cember 1997 between the Government of Bangladesh and the Parbatya Chattagram Jana Sam-
hati Samiti JSS, a political party of the indigenous peoples, to reestablish peace, demilitarize the region and devolve self-government rights to a regional council and three district councils.
However, more than twelve years after its signing, many crucial aspects of the accord remain unimplemented.
Module-1
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
