Report of the Western Ghats Ecology Expert Panel - Part II : Actionable points for the WGEA : Appendix 3 : Objections Raised at UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues to Indian Proposals

Opinion
       26/12/2018
                    1624.

Appendix 3 : Objections Raised at UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues to Indian Proposals

UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, Tenth Session, New York, 16–27 May 2011: Agenda Item 3(c): Follow-up to the recommendations of the Permanent Forum: free, prior and informed consent (Tuesday, 17 May 2011)

Joint Statement on Continuous violations of the principle of free, prior and informed consent in the context of UNESCO’s World Heritage Convention Submitted by:

UNESCO’s World Heritage Centre

Budakattu Krishikara Sangha, Karnataka, Western Ghats, India (representing indigenous peoples of Pushpagiri Wildlife Sanctuary, Brahmagiri Wildlife Sanctuary, Talacauvery Wildlife Sanctuary, Padinalknad Reserved Forest, Kerti Reserved Forest); Pothigaimalai Adivasi Kanikkaran Samuthaya Munnetra Sangam (Kalakkad Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve, Western Ghats, India); Adivasi Gothrajaan Sabha, Kerala (Aralam Wildlife Sanctuary, Western Ghats, India); Adivasi-Dalit Land Rights Committee, Kerala; Adivasi Gothra Mahasabha, Kerala, India (representing Shendurney Wildlife Sanctuary, Neyyar Wildlife Sanctuary, Peppara Wildlife Sanctuary, Kulathupuzha Range, Palode Range, Ranni Forest Division, Konni Forest Division, Achankovil Forest Division, Mankulam Range, Chinnar Wildlife Sanctuary, Silent Valley National Park, Attapadi Reserved Forest, Aralam Wildlife Sanctuary); Kerala Girivarga Kanikkar Sangham (Shendurney Wildlife Sanctuary, Neyyar Wildlife Sanctuary, Peppara Wildlife Sanctuary, Kulathupuzha Range, Palode Range); along with a large number of other organizations from all over the world.

1. Introduction :

1. We would like to again bring to the attention of the Permanent Forum our serious concern about the continuous and on-going disrespect of the principle of free, prior and informed consent by UNESCO’s World Heritage Committee when it designates sites in Indigenous peoples’ territories as ‚World Heritage sites‛.

2. This issue has already been brought to the attention of the Permanent Forum on several occasions, by Indigenous peoples and organizations from many different parts of the world.

3. There are numerous examples of Indigenous sites on the World Heritage List that have been inscribed without the free, prior and informed consent of the Indigenous peoples concerned. In many cases Indigenous peoples were not even consulted when their territories were designated as World Heritage sites, although this designation can have far-reaching consequences for their lives and human rights, their ability to carry out their subsistence activities, and their ability to freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development in accordance with their right of self-determination.

4. The practice of the World Heritage Committee is inconsistent with the provisions of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, the Programme of Action for the Second International Decade of the World's Indigenous People, the United Nations Development Group’s Guidelines on Indigenous Peoples’ Issues, the comments and concluding observations of the UN human rights treaty monitoring bodies, the views of the UN Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples, the Resolutions of the 4th World Conservation Congress (Barcelona, 2008), and the recommendations of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues.

5. It is also inconsistent with UNESCO’s objective to integrate a human rights-based approach into all of its programmes and activities. It contrasts with the practice of UNESCO’s Intergovernmental Committee for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, which has adopted Operational Directives ensuring that elements can only be inscribed on UNESCO’s lists of intangible cultural heritage if the free, prior and informed consent of the communities and groups concerned has been obtained.

6. Last year, at the World Heritage Committee’s 34th Session in Brasilia (25 July – 3 August 2010), the Committee inscribed two sites on the World Heritage List although questions had been raised regarding Indigenous peoples’ participation in the nomination processes and their free, prior and informed consent: the Northwest Hawaiian Islands Marine Monument (‚Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument‛) and the Ngorongoro Conservation Area in Tanzania.The latter was re-inscribed as a cultural World Heritage site, because of its significance as an archaeological site, not because of the significance of the Maasai culture. We are concerned that the Committee’s recognition of only the archaeological values, and not the living cultural values of the Indigenous residents, may exacerbate the already existing imbalances in the management framework for the Ngorongoro Conservation Area and lead to additional restrictions on the livelihoods of the Indigenous residents and further infringements on their rights.

7. This year, at its upcoming 35th Session in Paris (19-29 June 2011), the World Heritage Committee will be considering several nominations of sites that are located in Indigenous peoples’ territories. These include (among other sites):

 ‚Western Ghats‛ (India);

 ‚Trinational de la Sangha‛ (Republic of Congo / Cameroon / Central African Republic);

 ‚Kenya Lake System in the Great Rift Valley‛ (Kenya).

All three of the mentioned sites are nominated under natural World Heritage criteria alone, without giving due consideration to the Indigenous cultural values connected to these areas and Indigenous peoples’ roles as stewards of these places. Moreover, all of the mentioned nominations were prepared without meaningful involvement and consultation of the Indigenous peoples concerned and without obtaining their free, prior and informed consent.

2. Recommendations :

We urge the Permanent Forum to call on the World Heritage Committee:

a. to defer all World Heritage nominations of sites in Indigenous peoples’ territories if it cannot be ensured that the Indigenous peoples have been adequately consulted and involved and that their free, prior and informed consent has been obtained;

b. to defer the nominations of ‚Western Ghats‛, ‚Trinational de la Sangha‛ and ‚Kenya Lake System in the Great Rift Valley‛, and call on the respective State parties to consult and collaborate with the Indigenous peoples concerned, in order to ensure that their values and needs are reflected in the nomination documents and management plans and to obtain their free, prior and informed consent;

c. to endorse the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and use it as the basic reference framework when making decisions about World Heritage sites in Indigenous territories, together with the UNDG Guidelines on Indigenous Peoples’ Issues;

3. References :

1. Article 32(2) of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UN Doc. A/RES/61/295, Annex), adopted by the UN General Assembly on 13 September 2007, states: ‚States shall consult and cooperate in good faith with the indigenous peoples concerned through their own representative institutions in order to obtain their free and informed consent prior to the approval of any project affecting their lands or territories and other resources<‛

2. Art. 41 of the Declaration requires UN Agencies and other intergovernmental organizations to ‚contribute to the full realization of the provisions of this Declaration‛ and to establish ways and means of ‚ensuring participation of indigenous peoples on issues affecting them.‛

3. Art. 42 calls on UN Agencies to ‚promote respect for and full application of the provisions of this Declaration and follow up the effectiveness of this Declaration.‛

4. According to the Programme of Action for the Second International Decade of the World's Indigenous People (UN Doc. A/60/270), adopted by the UN General Assembly on 16 December 2005, one of five objectives of the Decade is: “Promoting full and effective participation of indigenous peoples in decisions which directly or indirectly affect their lifestyles, traditional lands and territories, their cultural integrity as indigenous peoples with collective rights or any other aspect of their lives, considering the principle of free, prior and informed consent.” (para. 9ii). The Programme of Action also states that “programmes and initiatives relating to indigenous cultures should follow the principle of free, prior and informed consent of indigenous peoples. Particular caution should be exercised when elaborating tourism and national park projects in indigenous territories.” (para. 19) In regard to World Heritage nominations, the Programme of Action states: “UNESCO is urged to establish mechanisms to enable indigenous peoples to participate effectively in its work relating to them, such as the… nomination of indigenous sites in the World Heritage List and other programmes relevant to indigenous peoples.” (para. 16, emphasis added)

5. United Nations Development Group Guidelines on Indigenous Peoples Issues, February 2008, p. 18: “conservation efforts on indigenous lands, including the establishment of new and management of existing protected areas, have to take place with the free, prior and informed consent and full participation of the communities concerned.”

NEXT : Annexure: Minutes of the Meetings of the WGEEP

To be continued

JAI HIND

VANDE MATARAM