 |
|||||
|
|
||||
|
|
|||||
By Gustavo Capdevila GENEVA, Nov 10 (IPS) - Governments once more applied the delaying tactics used for more than a decade in discussions of a United Nations declaration on indigenous peoples, and approval of the controversial document was put off again - this time until March.
After two weeks of deliberations, the Working Group in charge of drawing up the document decided that it would meet again if it was convened during the next session of the UN Human Rights Commission, in March.
The question of self-determination, demanded by indigenous peoples and partially objected to by some countries, once more hindered adoption of a consensus document.
The third article of the draft declaration, which stipulates the right to self-determination, has countries like the United States and Brazil uneasy over its possible influence on their territorial integrity.
The clause in question reads as follows: ''Indigenous peoples have the right to self-determination. By virtue of this right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.''
Positions with respect to the article vary from emphatic rejection by Brazil and the United States to staunch support from a group of countries including Bolivia, Pakistan, Switzerland and the Fiji islands. Other nations like Denmark and Finland are in favour of the text but suggest that self-determination of indigenous peoples must be recognised ''provided that they remain within the structure of the states in which they live.''
If the concept of external - rather than only internal - ''self- determination is included, states can legitimately fear secessionist movements,'' Finland's representative said after the Working Group adjourned last Friday.
Indigenous delegations also differ with respect to the reach of article three. Native Americans in the United States are pushing for the adoption of the text in its broadest sense, while indigenous peoples from South and Central America do not want self- determination to threaten territorial integrity, said Juan Leon, with the Coordination of Organisations of the Mayan People of Guatemala.
Another touchy question was brought up by France's proposal to replace the reference to ''indigenous peoples'' with ''indigenous populations.'' The Brazilian delegation, similarly, urged that the letter ''s'' of ''indigenous peoples'' be placed within brackets, indicating reservations.
Native comunities demand to be referred to as ''indigenous peoples'', which recognises them as nations.
''People'' and ''indigenous populations'', on the other hand, reduce them to mere groups of persons, with no recognition of them as national communities.
In two weeks of negotiations, the Working Group reached consensus on two articles: equality for indigenous men and women and the right to a nationality.
Leon maintained that the agreement on the two articles did not represent progress because they dealt with mere formalities, while the meeting failed to come up with definitions on the basic questions of education, culture, religion, cultural heritage and intellectual property.
On the contrary, the chair of the session, Peruvian Ambassador Jose Urrutia, contended that advances were made because ''there is consensus with respect to the basics'' in issues such as culture, religion and traditions.
Urrutia justified the new postponement, arguing that ''some states have problems with the text, but simply because they believe it does not adequately reflect'' the principles it seeks to enshrine.
Leon said the indigenous representatives would continue to press for a declaration that guaranteed the rights of their peoples. But, he added, the debate could outlast the UN Decade of Indigenous Peoples - which ends in the year 2004. (END/IPS/TRA-SO/PC/AG/SW/97)
