Critical Indigenous Rights Studies

2017

As indigenous peoples have become actively engaged in the human rights movement around the world, the sphere of international law, once deployed as a tool of imperial power and conquest, has begun to change shape. Increasingly, international human rights law serves as a basis for indigenous peoples’ claims against states and even influences indigenous groups’ internal processes of decolonization and revitalization. Empowered by a growing body of human rights instruments, some as embryonic as the 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), indigenous peoples are embracing a global “human rights culture” to articulate rights ranging from individual freedom and equality to collective self-determination, property, and culture. Accordingly, this Essay identifies and provides an account of what we see as an unprecedented, but decidedly observable, phenomenon: the current state of indigenous peoples’ rights—manifesting in tribal, national, and internationa...

Santa Clara Journal of International Law, 2022

It has become an annual ritual for the world—especially through the United Nations (UN)—to organize events and activities celebrating Indigenous Peoples. Further to this disposition, the UN has adopted a Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Equally, it is now fashionable to include the needs, and questions, affecting indigenous peoples in our development programs and climate action activities—albeit sometimes as an addendum to the mainstream policies. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and the current prominence of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI), and decolonialization language in international policy briefs, give further credence to this apparent commitment to the rights of indigenous and othered communities. The recently concluded UN Climate Action Conference in Scotland (C0P26) also voiced out some of the concerns of indigenous communities. Beyond these Conventions, Treaties, Declarations, and good faith statements, about the rights of indigenous/othered communities, it is imperative to articulate a set of principles, that can ensure that these apparent commitments do not become miserable comforts to indigenous and othered communities. Such principles can be implemented as best practices, and therefore sharpen the blunt edges of liberal international human rights. More so, such will enhance the pedagogies regarding the rights of indigenous peoples using Critical Race Theory (CRT) and Third World Approaches to International Law (TWAIL) because indigenous people are often the racialized other, and also part of the “third world.” Thus, this essay highlights the possibilities that CRT and TWAIL can bring to the paradigms and proposes a ten-principle approach through which we can (re)invigorate these conventions, treaties, and declarations; thereby enhancing the human rights of indigenous/othered communities.

Social Science Research Network, 2006

The article gives an overview of the current status of human rights and poverty in the context of the contemporary struggles of indigenous peoples. It aims to describe the framework of indigenous rights as constituted by, and constitutive of, the relationship between legal processes at the international, regional and national levels. The article also makes links to broader issues such as the racial, ethnic, linguistic and cultural human rights instruments, as well as to the important linkage to international poverty law. It outlines the current status of international legal protection for indigenous peoples before giving different cases in which these legal mechanisms have been used and questioned at the regional and national levels. The article concludes by arguing that indigenous rights standards play an important role in terms of serving as 'ceilings' or 'floors' between which indigenous movements and supporting NGOs can mobilize and find a legal framework to form their case.

This paper takes the ratification of the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples as its departure point. Reactions to the Declaration have thus far been mixed. According to advocates, these events signal ‘a new consensus’ that brings ‘to an end the nation states’ history of oppression of indigenous peoples’. According to critics, however, we have uncritically assumed an alliance between human rights and Aboriginal rights initiatives. This paper draws on these conflicting accounts, the theories of Rancière, and a discussion of a current Canadian court case to offer an assessment of the political possibilities of the UN declaration. Overall we argue that the value of the Declaration rests on our interpretation of the political process by which these rights are enacted. The possibilities of rights-based politics are always contextually dependent. In some instances a human rights frame can represent radical repositionings and rearticulations while at the same time always risking the possibility of co-optation. The acts of politics, in particular acts of dissensus, are the key factors that will impact whether the Rights of Indigenous Peoples lead to transformation or to the reinforcement of the status quo.

Rights : Sociological Perspectives, 2006

It has become increasingly clear that the vociferous insistence on liberal market capitalism and strong nation states as the solution to all manner of global problems is another expression of Western dominance. These twin globalising forces operate at the expense of both the natural environment and the vitality of small peoples whose ways of life depend on autonomy and cultural continuity. One response to this juggernaut is the appeal to human rights, apparent in the international activism of hitherto separate groups of indigenous peoples. Members of relatively small groups such as the Ogiek, Wirajuri, Mapuche, Nahua, Blackfoot and Innu now pass through the halls of the United Nations and are intimately involved in the negotiation of their rights with states and multinational corporations. Historians, anthropologists and political theorists have all undertaken research on indigenous peoples and their human and other rights. However, relatively few sociologists have taken an interest in a subject that is now truly global in its ramifications. Starting from the premise that the contemporary consideration of indigenous peoples' rights is bound up with European colonial expansion, we outline some of the features of a sociological understanding of indigenous rights. We start by considering indigenous-European relationships and the authoritative frameworks within which such relationships have been encapsulated. Then we look at the colonial processes of territorial dispossession and forced cultural change, which lie at the heart of contemporary indigenous rights appeals. From there we consider the problematic conceptions of indigenous peoples in sociology and sociological approaches to human rights. Finally, we contrast the social and political critique of rights contained in the writings of various indigenous scholars with the individualistic and statist notions advanced by liberal democratic theorists. Indigenous peoples and European expansion During the era of European expansion from the sixteenth to the eighteenth centuries, the rights of 'savages', 'infidels' and 'heathens' were a matter of debate among legal scholars, philosophers, politicians and statesman in the

2005

This article uses the stalled Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples as the impetus for an examination of arguments championing and opposing the framing of Indigenous rights as human rights. Failings both theoretical and practical – in the conceptualisation, promulgation and interpretation of human rights – have long left Aboriginal peoples at a disadvantage. The dual focus of Indigenous claims is unique in the rights lexicon, asserting the right to be simultaneously different from and equal to the majority population. Yet Indigenous rights are often perceived, by governments with the power to block their progress, as a threat to state sovereignty; to the equality of citizens; to national unity; to the sanctity of private property; and to the fostering of a free-market economy. A concerted effort to broaden existing conceptions and frameworks to include not only group rights, but those specific rights essential to Aboriginal collectivities, is imperative to the survival of Native peoples as peoples. Additionally it has much to offer the discourse of human rights itself.

Routledge, 2009

In recent decades, human rights have come to occupy an apparently unshakable position as a key and pervasive feature of contemporary global public culture. At the same time, human rights have become a central focus of research in the social sciences, embracing distinctive analytical and empirical agendas for the study of rights. This volume gathers together original social-scientific research on human rights, and in doing so situates them in an open intellectual terrain, thereby responding to the complexity and scope of meanings, practices, and institutions associated with such rights. Chapters in the book examine diverse theoretical perspectives and explore such issues as health, indigenous peoples' rights, cultural politics, the United Nations, women and violence, the role of corporations and labour law. Written by leading scholars in the field and from a range of disciplines across the social sciences, this volume combines new empirical research with both established and innovative social theory.

2020

This book highlights the cogency and urgency of the protection of Indigenous peoples and discusses crucial aspects of the international legal theory and practice relating to their rights. These rights are not established by states; rather, they are inherent to Indigenous peoples because of their human dignity, historical continuity, cultural distinctiveness, and connection to the lands where they have lived from time immemorial. In the past decades, a new awareness of the importance of Indigenous rights has emerged at the international level. UN organs have adopted specific international law instruments that protect Indigenous peoples. Nonetheless, concerns persist because of continued widespread breaches of such rights. Stemming from several seminars organized at the Law Department of the University of Roma Tre, the volume includes contributions by distinguished scholars and practitioners. It is divided into three parts. Part I introduces the main themes and challenges to be addressed, considering the debate on the self-determination of Indigenous peoples and the theoretical origins of ‘Indigenous sovereignty’. Parts II and III explore the protection of Indigenous peoples afforded under the international law rules on human rights and investments respectively. Not only do the contributors to this book critically assess the current international legal framework, but they also suggest ways and methods to utilize such legal instruments towards the protection, promotion, and fulfillment of Indigenous people’s rights, to contribute to the maintenance of peace and the pursuit of justice in international relations.

2006

Anthropology Today, 2004

This article forms part of an ongoing debate on rights and the use of the term ‘indigenous’, which has so far included exchanges in Current Anthropology, the New Humanist, and ANTHROPOLOGY TODAY, as indicated in the bibliography. The authors here respond specifically to an article by Adam Kuper, published in Current Anthropology and the New Humanist. Professor Kuper has been invited to respond and has indicated his intention to do so in the forthcoming issue of ANTHROPOLOGY TODAY. Readers are invited to contribute their own views to the debate. [Ed.]