Monday, October 27, 1997
Day 1, Morning Session

1. Mr. John Pace (on behalf of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Ms. Mary Robinson): Opens the 3rd session of the Working Group established in accordance with Commission of Human Rights Resolution 1995/32 of March 3, 1995. Says the High Commissioner for Human Rights regrets not having been able to attend the opening session of the Working Group, however she will be present on Tuesday, November 4. Affirms Ms. Robinson has followed with great interest the work undertaken by the Working Group and other human rights forums relating to the protection of indigenous peoples. Invites the Working Group to elect the chairman for this session.

2. Representative of New Zealand: Proposes Mr. Jose Urrutia as chairperson, due to his extensive experience in area of human rights and due to his excellent chairing of the previous working group.

3. Mr. John Pace: Thanks the representative of New Zealand for their nomination. Asks if there are any objections to the nomination of Mr. Urrutia as the chairman. There are none.

4. Mr. Jose Urrutia, Ambassador of Peru: Expresses gratitude for the trust placed in him for the 3rd time by the Working Group established according to resolution 1995/32 of the Human Rights Commission. Reiterates his continued commitment to the work undertaken in consultation with government representatives and representatives of indigenous peoples. Intends to conduct the work in a spirit of open transparency in order to achieve common objectives, in particular the adoption of the United Nations draft declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples and populations. Underlines the fact that references to indigenous peoples and indigenous populations will be used interdependently without prejudice to the position of participants. Notes that the results of the two previous sessions have been taken into consideration to establish the method of work. Both reports clearly outline the various positions taken by delegates on the draft declaration. Consultations with both indigenous and country representatives show the Working Group should go beyond mere statements by reconciling opposing views and approving the articles. Asserts statements should be limited to those who have not yet made statements in the past. Notes that informal consultations will take place in order to foster a climate of trust and ensure rapid progress. Affirms the need to obtain tangible results to present to the Commission on Human Rights. Suspends the meeting in order to hold brief informal consultations. A detailed plan of work will be proposed this afternoon. The indigenous representatives will remain in the conference room to hold these informal consultations.

INFORMAL SESSION

5. Mr. Willie Littlechild: Notes that did not finish all agenda items during the weekend meetings, i.e., discuss treaty study or European commission.

6. Mr. Kenneth Deer, Co-Chairman: Agrees that there are items on the agenda that need to be covered during the meetings. Asks for general comments and gives the floor to Ms. Dalee Sambo.

7. Ms. Dalee Sambo: Asks whether a general statement should be drafted on the basis of Moana Jackson's statement made last year in caucus. Suggests to adapt and update the statement taking into account the comments and positions of the indigenous representatives.

8. Ms. Andrea Carmen: Wants to discuss further the Madrid meeting, the resolution and the continued strategy.

9. Mr. Aucan Huilcaman: Thanks chairman. Suggests that indigenous representatives work on a statement during the course of the day. States that there is a need for clarification on which statement is being used. Suggests that yesterday it was brought to attention that a statement from last year would be utilized. Calls for clarification to avoid any misunderstandings on the statement being used. States a belief that adjustments can be made and agreement reached by this afternoon.

10. Mr. Kenneth Deer, Co-Chairman: Explains that paragraph 20 and the final report attached to the statement made last year are of importance and need to be re-stated should the indigenous representatives want it to appear in the final report. It could therefore be re-drafted for this session.

11. Ms. Pauline Tangiora: Emphasizes her deep concerns about the possible alteration of Mr. Juan Leon’s statement given last year. Stresses that the statement should be used without alterations.

12. Mr. Kenneth Deer, Co-Chairman: Reminds Ms. Pauline that Juan did not make a personal statement, but instead, the indigenous representatives as a whole claim the statement as their own.

13. Ms. Pauline Tangiora: Notes the statement was strong and should be maintained as it was drafted last year.

14. Mr. Ahmad: Calls on indigenous representatives not to repeat the same statement as last year but to put it in a different way. Stresses the need to think how the statement can be used as it was signed by many indigenous organizations from all over the world.

15. Mr. Marcial Arias: Suggests that there is no complete agreement on the statement. States that a consensus can be reached if the entire group works together. Asks the co-chairman to explain the proceedings which took place yesterday to inform everyone of the progress made. Encourages all indigenous representatives to comment on the previous proceedings.

16. Ms. Helen Corbett: Supports the suggestion of the previous speaker to give a review of the week-end meeting as a lot of time was spent discussing this issue, in particular that of the caucus.

17. Mr. Juan Leon, Co-Chairman: Gives a summary of the weekend meeting for those indigenous representatives who have just arrived. The indigenous representatives had two full days of discussions, three main items were discussed, 1. The evaluation of the operational and policy issues which indigenous peoples have been dealing with over the last year. 2. The approach to be adopted at the IWGIP. 3. Definition of long term strategy: Item 1, They evaluated the position of indigenous peoples, and carried out an assessment of policy decisions taken by indigenous peoples over the last year to protect the integrity of the declaration; Item 2, Specific proposals were put forward. Policy decisions were taken to defend the declaration and its content, and to reject any change, emphasized that the indigenous representatives want the integrity of the declaration to be maintained. In relation to the operational approach it was suggested that a statement should be made to reflect the indigenous peoples position and reiterate policy decisions proposed. It was proposed that the statement would be signed by all groups here present, however he noted that not all indigenous representatives had signed the statement. There had been a proposal to draft another statement. Importance placed on starting a dialogue with governments, not a negotiation, but a dialogue in order to extract information and express the indigenous representatives point of view, and to have a chance to influence government representatives decisions. Emphasized the importance of dialogue to defend the concept of self- determination and indigenous populations. Dependent on information gathered through such a dialogue, there was a proposal to meet on Wednesday to define how indigenous representatives are going to act in light of information received. Mr. Urrutia proposed to deal with articles in clusters dealing with the less controversial ones first. Indigenous representatives however thought that it would be better to start the other way around, looking at the most controversial articles first. Mr. Urrutia was also requested to hold regular meetings with indigenous peoples, various regional representatives were appointed to attend the meetings with Mr. Urrutia. Those regions who have not put forward a regional representative, were urged to do so. To conclude, indigenous representatives stressed that they must remain firm and be well briefed, and whatever form statements take they should support the principle concepts of self determination and indigenous peoples.

18. Mr. Kenneth Deer, Co-Chairman: Thanks Co-chairman, Juan Leon, for a complete report. Asks if there are any corrections to the report. There are none.

19. ...: Wishes to comment on what has been discussed. Apologizes for being absent over the weekend sessions. Wishes to open discussion about the need for flexibility and wants to discuss how much flexibility will be allowed. States that negotiations will be necessary with governments, but the range of flexibility in those negotiations should be addressed before proceeding. Wants to know how the indigenous representatives can and will take part in the discussions. Suggests that if a general consensus can be reached that the group plan the agenda for the next two weeks.

20. ...: Notes that although there is no consensus a statement should be made updating last year's one. This has been the procedure until today and should be followed to remain consistent.

21. Mr. Kenneth Deer, Co-Chairman: Asks Dalee and Marcial to make a common statement.

22. ...: Thanks chairman. Calls for a consensus on last year’s work and states a belief that an agreement can be reached. States that last year’s work should be endorsed. Reads the statement from the previous year to the entire group for clarification. Suggests that the end of the statement be given special attention, but as a whole, the statement can be agreed upon.

23. Mr. Juan Leon, Co-Chairman: Says a statement should be made in line with the policy analysis made over the last two days.

24. ...: Urges indigenous representatives to move on and stop discussing the consensus statement, as it has already been decided that the statement will be drafted by Daily and Marcial. Calls on indigenous representatives not to waste time, and to move on to discussing possible approaches for the afternoon session.

25. Mr. Juan Leon, Co-chairman: Agrees to move on to the discussion to be presented by Mr. Urrutia. States that the agenda is not known. Opens the floor to anyone desiring to speak.

26. Mr. Kenneth Deer, Co-Chairman: Notes Mr. Urrutia has concluded the discussion with government representatives and can attend this informal meeting at 11h45. Says that the government representatives are giving Mr. Urrutia a free hand on how to set up the agenda. Asks if this is acceptable to the indigenous representatives. Notes that a program of work has already been presented by the indigenous representatives to Mr. Urrutia expressing the wish to discuss basic principles.

27. Ms. Andrea Carmen: Reiterates that indigenous representatives must present a consensus position, and insist that discussion starts with article 3 on self determination. Reminded indigenous representatives of what happened at the ILO Convention 169, stressed the importance of the chance to debate self determination openly at the beginning of the IWGIP. States that self determination is not negotiable and is the base of the declaration.

28. Co-Chairman: Thanks Ms. Carmen. Asks if there are any other comments. Gives the floor to Mr. Marcial Arias.

29. Mr. Marcial Arias: Suggests a closer look at the program as done over the weekend. Asks for a discussion of the differences in formal and informal meetings. Expresses concern about the status of the two types of meetings. Asks for a summary of the ideas agreed upon to ensure a proper discussion and full agreement before the arrival of Mr. Urrutia.

30. Mr. Juan Leon, Co-Chairman: Says that a summary of what has been agreed between indigenous delegates was made earlier. It has been decided to defend the integrity of the draft declaration and to start discussions with the principle of self-determination. It was also agreed to get in touch with government representatives to get a clearer picture of their position on some of the articles. The program of work could then be modified on Wednesday according to the information received from governments. Notes there has as yet been no decision taken on whether to have informal or formal meetings. It should be clear as to what is meant by these. Notes that a problem of participation by some delegates has been clarified.

31. Ms. Pauline Tangiora: Emphasized that have now been working for over 10 years on the declaration, spoke of their moral responsibility to retain the integrity of the declaration. Notes that only the bones of declaration are left, warns that the discussions regarding negotiation of the declaration are dividing us as indigenous peoples. States that there is no more room to negotiate, governments must be honest, as it is now a matter of moral principle.

32. ...: Proposes that the indigenous representatives listen to the summary of the proceedings between Mr. Urrutia and the governments. Suggests that waiting until after Mr. Urrutia speaks to discuss would help in moving on to other issues.

33. Mr. Willie Littlechild: Agrees with this suggestion. Notes that they should now move on to other issues.

34. Mr. Juan Leon, Co-Chairman: Notes that did not arrive at agreement on all points over the weekend, asks the representatives to listen carefully to each of the points made, and to remember to bear decisions made over the weekend in mind.

35. Kenneth Deer, Co-Chairman: Welcomes Mr. Urrutia, working group chairman, to the meeting. States that the indigenous representatives are aware that Mr. Urrutia has consulted with the governments. Asks Mr. Urrutia to present the outcomes of the consultations.

36. Mr. Jose Urrutia: Says he briefed the governments on discussions held with indigenous delegates over the past two days and had an exchange of view. Notes that the problem of access by some indigenous peoples to the conference room is solved and Identity Cards are available outside the room. Explains discussions will start by a general debate and participation will be limited to those who have not yet had an opportunity to make a general statement. A list of speaker will be drawn and depending on the length of this list one or two sessions will set for this debate. Requests the statements remain brief and specific, directed at the issues outlined in the reports. Notes government representatives prefer the discussion to be carried out article by article although indigenous delegates expressed a preference for an exchange of view on principles. Suggests the Working Group could go through the articles referring to the principles underlying these articles. Says that government representatives agree to have an in-depth discussion of article 3 but would prefer to do so at the end of the week after having dealt with other articles.

38. Mr. Jose Urrutia: Proposes that the indigenous representatives begin with articles which will be easily agreed upon. Suggests that articles 15, 16, and 17 would be acceptable to begin discussion because the articles can be agreed upon in a timely manner. Calls for flexibility in the schedule, but strongly suggests that article 3 concerning self-determination be discussed at the end of the first week of meetings. Reemphasizes the need for flexibility, but again, suggests the postponement of article 3 discussion until the end of the week.

39. Co-Chairman: Asks Mr. Urrutia to repeat the articles suggested for beginning discussion for clarification.

40. Mr. Jose Urrutia: Says the list of articles proposed is based on last year’s report. They will be considered in the following order: articles 15, 16, 17, 18, 43, 5, 14, 44, 45, 1, 2 ,12 and 13. Article 3 will then be inserted at the appropriate moment, preferably after consideration of some of the other articles.

41. Co-Chairman: Asks about the order of articles.

42. Mr. Jose Urrutia: Confirms that frank and open dialogue will be encouraged during informal meetings. Suggests that each article be discussed to see if there is a consensus. States a belief that there will be differences of opinion. Says that it is important to look first at the principle contained within the article, and then at the article itself.

43. Ms. Dalee Sambo: Asks for reiteration of the fact that there will be no re-drafting, in this session, of any of the articles of the declaration.

44. Ms. Andrea Carmen: Understands that there will be informal meetings, when participation of indigenous peoples is on an equal footing basis with governments, and that no decision will be made to approve or amend any article in the declaration without the complete consensus of both indigenous peoples and state delegations. Asks for affirmation from Mr. Urrutia, that there has been no change in the structure of the session.

45. Ms. Dalee Sambo: States that with all due respect to Mr. Urrutia, issues must be discussed in regard to negative contributions made in the last year. Refers to proposed amendments suggested by the U.S. government which are damaging to the draft declaration. Suggests that the U.S. has not changed their stance since 1995 or 1996. Says that the damaging proposals undermine the language and weaken the text of the draft declaration. Questions how this serious issue will be handled during the course of these meetings.

46. Mr. Jose Urrutia: Says he has no knowledge of specific proposals to be made by States. Notes that such States are free to do so and delegates can then express their agreement or disagreement. Following such a discussion or exchange of view a consensus can then be achieved.

47. Mr. Jose Urrutia: Wishes to clarify that in exchanges of view the consensus will have to come from both sides, government representatives and indigenous peoples. As far as modification of the draft declaration is concerned it will depend on the progress made, at previous sessions, many proposals made a positive contribution to the declaration, strengthening the text. Proposals for slight modifications are normally aimed at improving text rather than wishing to weaken it.

48. Mr. Willie Littlechild: Asks for an explanation of the rationale behind the new clusters, and also asks why article 43 was moved. States that the informal sessions should not only be an opportunity to clarify the indigenous peoples positions, but more importantly it is also for governments to explain their reasons for opposition to the declaration.

49. Mr. Jose Urrutia: Thanks Mr. Littlechild. Says that government declarations may not be watering down the declaration. Expresses no personal opinion on the watering down of the declaration. Reminds that paragraph 3 has received lengthy consideration. Feels that if certain issues receive lengthy consideration, the working group will lose momentum. Supports a move forward to issues which can be agreed upon quickly. Says that it would show the Commission on Human Rights a willingness to move forward by the indigenous peoples. Also states that article 43 has no known controversial content.

50. Mr. Lazaro Pary: Notes the suggestion made is exactly the same as that made last year and that such a grouping of articles refrains from an in-depth analysis of the legal scope of these articles. If this procedure is adopted no progress will be made in this session as delegates will limit themselves to expressing their views on the various articles. Indigenous peoples agree that this year’s work should start with the articles and paragraphs that are the most controversial, such as self- determination, collective rights of indigenous peoples, protection of the right to land, the right to cultural and intellectual property, and protection of natural resources. Supports the view that they should first settle the problems which are the most difficult and those which are questioned by States. Says indigenous peoples have a flexible approach and are willing to negotiate, however the final document should be approved and adopted with the full support and participation of indigenous peoples. It is essential that discussions take place on an equal footing with States. Notes many government delegations have expressed positive views and constructive modifications. Underlines the importance of having to update the declaration in view of the changes that have occurred over the last fourteen years.

51. Mr. Jose Urrutia: In response to Mr. Pary’s statement, he is in absolute agreement with the last part of his statement, and it was exactly for that reason that his proposals were made. However as to the rest of Mr. Pary's statement, he would not agree that it is the same as in previous years as are not dealing with articles in clusters but individually.

52. Mr. Mick Dodson: Congratulates the chairman on his election. States that the proposed agenda to postpone discussion of article 3 and link the discussion of other articles together seems attractive. Suggests a caucus on the matter to come to full consensus on the proposal.

53. Mr. Jose Urrutia: Says when consensus on an article is achieved it will be adopted without further modifications by governments.

54. Mr. Marcial Arias: Refers to original proposal to begin discussion taking into account article 3. It appears that there are two proposals to start with less problematic or most problematic. Emphasizes that all indigenous peoples organizations have made a tremendous effort to come to this meeting, and it would be regrettable if such an important discussion were left until next week when not all organizations could participate. Notes that in all human rights meetings the last few days normally are not when important work is done. Notes that many governments have not rejected article 3 per se. Reiterates that article 3 is the real core of the declaration, whether start with the easiest or more difficult articles is irrelevant, must start with heart of the declaration. Wants to hear the governments reasons for not starting this way, notes that it is important that go into more depth regarding this issue. States his concern over the formal and informal meetings. Asks what the process is going to be and how the transition is going to occur. Asks how is it going to handle the participation of indigenous peoples in the formal meetings. Asks about future participation in meetings.

55. Mr. Jose Urrutia: Emphasizes that in the earlier consultations, governments have expressed their willingness to discuss article 3. Reminds the group that it was suggested that article 3 be discussed at the end of the first week, not the second week. Reiterates that if the proposed articles, 15, 16, and 17 are discussed first, then the discussion can begin on article 3 in a specific manner rather than an abstract manner at the end of the first week. Explains that during informal meetings a consensus will be reached. During formal meetings, governments can give insight to the issues which the indigenous representatives have agreed upon.

56. Mr. Kenneth Deer, Co-Chairman: Notes Mr. Urrutia will also chair informal meetings and there will be full interpretation during these. Asks for clarifications on the problem of free and unimpeded access to the Working Group.

57. Mr. Jose Urrutia: States that he spoke with the secretariat earlier and that there will be no difficulty regarding participation in meetings, and that indigenous organizations are not prevented from registering with ECOSOC.

58. Mr. Julian Burger, Secretariat: States that a number of organizations have not gone through the bureaucratic process for approval. Says there are seven or eight organizations in this situation, and expresses that these organizations have been given a provisional card to participate.

59. Mr. Kenneth Deer, Co-Chairman: Notes it does not solve the problem of those who have been refused access under Resolution 1995/32.

60. ...: Points out that the request to start with article 3 is made in good faith and after the experience of working for 3 years on ILO Convention 169 where the right to self-determination was redefined, through qualifiers at the end of the text. Presents copy of US proposal to the panel asks them to look at article 2, to highlight how it limits the right to self determination.

61. Mr. Jose Urrutia: Reminds that at the moment the group is discussing the organization of the work. Says that the discussion on U.S. delegation would be fitted into the program at some point. Suggests that starting on article 3 would hinder progress. Restates that governments are ready to discuss article 3. Strongly suggests that discussing and coming to consensus on other articles would establish a climate of trust and show progress. Says that starting with article 3 could lead to a lengthy discussion. Appeals to the indigenous representatives to look at the proposal positively. Suggests the indigenous representatives can set forward a positive symbol of goodwill if work progresses on issues which a consensus can be reached.

62. Ms. Andrea Carmen: Says indigenous representatives can demonstrate flexibility as for the program of work. Regrets there will be a limitation of comments on general principles and other general comments. Having to consider articles individually calls for time to make comments of a more general nature.

63. Mr. Jose Urrutia: Reaffirms that when he spoke of limiting statements he was talking about during general debates, he did not talk about limiting when it comes to discussion of articles. Need to give preference to those who have not had a chance to give their general statements. Not his intent to limit discussion on the detail of the articles.

64. Mr. Willie Littlechild: Asks Mr. Urrutia if indigenous representatives are simply observers in formal meetings. Questions if the formal meeting is to give approval to the consensus. States that there will be no reopening of discussions during formal meetings.

65. Mr. Jose Urrutia: Notes that no further discussion will be necessary during the formal session as consensus will have been reached during the informal sessions. The former will be limited to adoption of what has been agreed during the latter.

66. ...: Refers to the limitation of statements made during formal sessions. Notes that anyone wishing to speak should have the opportunity to do so independent of whether they have already taken the floor in previous sessions.

67. Mr. Juan Leon, Co-Chairman: Reminds meeting that they have only 10 minutes left. Must start to consider how the articles of the draft declaration are going to be handled, also statements by delegations who have not yet been presented. Asks whether they are going to continue to insist that they wish to start with article 3 on self determination.

68. Mr. Mick Dodson: Recommends the adoption of the proposal of the organization of the work as suggested by Mr. Urrutia. States that representatives will have ample opportunity to raise concerns about article 3 during general statements throughout all discussions. Implies that article 3 is the golden thread which holds the document together. States that there is nothing to prevent talk about article 3 during the discussions and calls for consideration of Mr. Urrutia’s proposal.

69. ...: Suggests indigenous representatives should accept the proposal made by States. When considering specific articles, however, the Working Group could start by considering article 3 which touches on one of the most serious issues.

70. Mr. Lars Anders Baer, Saami Representative: Supports suggestion put forward by Mr. Dodson, believes that this proposal is an acceptable compromise.

71. ...: Expresses opposition to this proposal. States that Mr. Urrutia has not clarified his representations in formal and informal sessions. Expresses concern about the lack of discussion about veto power of the indigenous representatives during these proceedings. Refers to article 15 and the conventional rights of the child. Stresses the importance for the rights of the children to be protected. Suggests that Mr. UrrutiaÕs proposal cannot be accepted because article 3 is directly related to each of the other articles, including the article 15.

72. Mr. Kenneth Deer, Co-Chairman: States the meeting will be resumed at 15h00. The English and Spanish indigenous groups will meet at 14h00 to continue discussions and adopt solutions to be put forward to the Working Group at 15h00.

73. Mr. Lazaro Pary: Warns that Governments are trying to undermine the whole procedure. The proposal to deal with the easiest articles first is an attempt to block the procedure. Calls on indigenous representatives to insist that discussions start with the most crucial items on the agenda as it is essential to the survival of indigenous peoples.

74. Co-Chairman: Tells Mr. Pary that they are losing interpretation of his discussion. Proposes to meet in caucus at 2:00pm.

75. Co-Chairman: Says that a consensus had been reached and states that the group should remain steadfast to their previous consensus.

Tuesday, October 28, 1997
Day 2, Morning Session

1. Mr. Jose Urrutia, Chairman: Calls to order the second meeting of the Working Group established in accordance with the Commission on Human Rights Resolution 1995/32 of March 3, 1995. Adopts the agenda contained in the document EC... . According to item three of the provisional agenda the Working Group must also adopt the program of work. Explains that consultations have taken place with government and indigenous representatives. Notes a consensus has been reached on the way the Working Group intends to organize its work. The work will start in a formal session, so as to have general debate. Those who have not yet had the opportunity to express their point of view on the draft declaration will do so. Says the opinions of delegates that have already made statements have been recorded in the previous reports and are known to all. Requests representatives to be brief and concise so as to limit the length of the general debate. Hopes this will take place in one session. It will then be followed by an informal session during which the following articles will be discussed: articles 15, 16, 17, 18, 43, 5, 14, 44, 45, 1, 2,12 and 13. Notes the length of the discussion will depend on the time available. Says discussion on article 3 will be included in this sequence during meetings on Thursday and Friday and will be followed by the articles remaining to be discussed. Says informal sessions are there for everyone to express themselves freely in order to attain a common level of understanding. Formal sessions will be used to formalize agreements reached in consensus during informal meetings. Says discussions on each article will start with the principle contained in that article before discussing its wording. Trusts progress can be made. Asks if there are any comments. Approves the program of work. Calls on the first speaker to take the floor.

2. Mr. Mario Ibarra: Thanks chairman. Reminds the WGIP that in resolution 1995/35 the Commission on Human Rights established an open ended working group to elaborate on the declaration using as its base the document annexed to resolution 1994/45 of the Sub commission on the prevention of discrimination and protection of minorities. The resolution of the commission established that the declaration would be considered and adopted by the General Assembly during the international decade of indigenous peoples. The sources of inspiration for the accomplishment of the normative objects of this group were:

1. The UN charter;
2. All existing human rights instruments;
3. Humanitarian law;
4. Specific paragraphs in declarations from important UN conferences, e.g. the Rio and Vienna declarations;
5. General Assembly resolution 41/120;
6. Studies carried out by sub commission, and all activities ,workshops etc., that the UN has organized about indigenous peoples;
7. The wishes of the indigenous peoples for the subject of the declaration;
8. Positive experience gained through national law, agreements, negotiations, and any other forms of conflict resolution which are being developed;
9. Current legal and philosophical thinking which provide and ask for developments of international law also be considered;
Notes that the WGIP and the international decade of indigenous peoples are all progress, hopes that this standard setting exercise, in the long term will lead to a convention on indigenous peoples. Emphasizes that the draft declaration provides a wealth of minimum standards to ensure the physical and cultural survival of the worlds indigenous people. Reminds group that the draft declaration is inspired by other international law instruments, adopts provisions provided for in other instruments which deal with indigenous peoples, contains legal provisions of internal law and includes the legal and philosophical reflections of indigenous peoples. Says that the draft declaration is a matter of historical justice, it seeks to avoid the disappearance of indigenous cultures, to ensure indigenous peoples survival as part of the common heritage of mankind by incorporating groups who have been absent in the decision making of legislation which effects them. Finally, thinks that the draft declaration could be adopted at this session.
3. Mr. Lazaro Pary: Thanks chairman. Greets brothers. Expresses a great concern with the increasing "watering down" of the draft with abstract statements. States firm opposition to this "watering down" of the draft. Believes that indigenous people have overcome many barriers. Believes that the focus of the draft declaration should not be approached in a minimalist view, but focused instead in a way to improve, strengthen, and harmonize the provisions in all scopes that they may become consistent with international documents. Reminds that many years of work have taken place before a draft declaration for the rights of indigenous peoples was written. Expresses concern that despite technical revision, more engagement in discussion will postpone the rights of indigenous peoples into the third millennium. Stresses that participation by indigenous peoples during this decisive phase is imperative to ensure the rights of the indigenous peoples. Believes that the 1993 Vienna Declaration ensures the rights and freedoms of all peoples. States that under this resolution, the Working Party should ensure that indigenous peoples are given equal status to government representatives. Expresses that it is possible to break the fragile balance between government and indigenous peoples if all parties are not careful to avoid doing so. Expresses to the brothers and sisters that emotion alone will not suffice, but instead it is necessary to use cold and objective analysis as each issue is discussed. Believes that international awareness has occurred despite the lack of a document from the Working Group. Fears that governments can veto the Working GroupÕs decisions. Believes that indigenous peoplesÕ have suffered censorship in which certain statements have been restricted in their content, but also believes that the written work reflects the true wishes of the indigenous peoples. States that information has not been made available to the delegates in certain instances and that information was excluded by the Secretariat. Urges strongly that the first item of importance is the issue of self- determination. Concludes with a sincere purpose to make substantive contributions so consistency with international laws can be established. Believes that the Working Group has a historic and moral responsibility to ensure the adoption of the draft declaration.

4. Ms. Minnie Degawan, Cordillera Peoples Alliance (Asia): On behalf of the Asian indigenous organizations, congratulates the Chairman on his re-election. Hopes to break new ground and looks forward to the adoption of the draft declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples. Stresses that the present draft is the minimum standard. With the development of the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) and their corresponding impact on indigenous peoples it is not far-fetched to imagine that by the end of the decade there will be no more indigenous peoples in Asia. Urges all to adopt the draft declaration at this session. Expresses concern at the problems of participation that persist in this forum. Calls on the Human Rights Commission to recognize full participation and regrets that this problem has not been addressed. Notes many Asian indigenous organizations have come across problems of accreditation. Urges the Working Group to adopt a more dynamic and flexible approach.

5. Representative of the Comision Juridica para el Autodesarrollo de los Pueblos Originarios Andinos, and CAPAJ: Thanks and congratulates chairman, greets members of the working group. States that the IWG IP has a responsibility in drafting the declaration to fill the omission in international law, at the moment indigenous peoples are at a flagrant disadvantage when participating in the international community. Expresses hope that the draft declaration will be approved, stresses that the situation of indigenous peoples can not wait any longer, moreover the situation will be aggravated if international bodies do not take action to prevent the destruction. Reiterates that the draft declaration involves indigenous peoples contributions and heart felt feelings, and hopes that the draft declaration can be adopted at this session. States that if the draft declaration is adopted as a whole it would solve many legal contradictions in South America.

6. Mr. Aucan Huilcaman: Thanks chairman. Suggests that the third session of the Working Group plan for forward progress. Calls for the Working Group to adopt the draft declaration. States that indigenous peoples have been working for over a decade using their resources of time and money to see progress towards their fundamental rights. Believes that adoption will be positive for international law, States, and governments as well as the indigenous peoples. Believes adoption will complete international laws on the rights of indigenous peoples and will enable the vis-à-vis governments to push for fairer relations to correct unfair policies from States in previous years. States that work has continued for half of the decade, and despite a great amount of attention, the declaration is still in its beginning stages of discussion. Expresses concern that time is of the essence, and there is much work before the adoption can take place. Believes that the draft declaration should include new aspects to international law and contribute to international law overall. Hopes the draft declaration can help repair the damage done to indigenous peoples over the years. States that fundamental rights are not in competition with the governments. Believes that indigenous peoples have not enjoyed and been allowed to exercise their fundamental rights in the past. Urges governments to protect and defend their legal systems, but accept the fact that indigenous peoples’ rights have not been protected. Expresses that article 3 on self-determination will not be discussed at this moment, but stresses that the discussion indeed should have started with this important article. Recommends the Working Group adopt the draft declaration in its entirety without amendment.

7. Mr. Maleyer, Foundation of Aboriginal and Islander Research Action: Notes that this year his delegation has been joined by many new organizations and takes this opportunity to restate their common position. Congratulates the Chairman on his re-election and says he displayed great flexibility, skill and commitment during the current session. Says there is an increasing recognition of the importance of ensuring indigenous participation as equal partners in order to build the understanding and consensus necessary to adopt the draft declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples. The integrity of the declaration will depend on indigenous peoples securing such a consensus. Believes that it will be difficult to achieve but is confident in the delegates present here today. Stresses that the right to self-determination underpins the entire document and that qualifying this right is unacceptable. Welcomes the re-ordering of the program of work which allows for the consideration of this fundamental principle. The right of self-determination is the pillar on which all other articles rest. Says the provisions of the declaration can not be segregated and should be considered as a whole. Stresses that collective rights do not weaken individual rights, on the contrary they strengthen and complement these. The draft declaration is not the first international instrument to attribute rights to collectivities. Also of fundamental importance to indigenous peoples are the lands and resource rights. Notes that the declaration articulates minimum standards and thus represents the floor and not the ceiling of their aspirations and entitlements. Expresses confidence of the capacity of indigenous peoples to defend the integrity of the document. The declaration does not create new or special rights but builds on an existing body of international human rights law. Refers to the General Recommendation adopted by the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination which confirms that no decision relating to the rights and interests of indigenous peoples can be taken without their informed consent and which calls on State parties to recognize their right to own, develop, control and use their communal lands. Welcomes the opportunity to express their concern and discuss them with States. Refers to the constructive statement made last year by Canada. Urges States who have not contributed to the discussion to do so and engage in a dialogue to clarify what the right to self-determination means to indigenous peoples. Hopes the present session will advance discussion of the general principles and foster greater understanding and cooperation.

8. Mr. Juan Leon, International Indian Treaty Council: Says that his organization wants to contribute thoughts on the draft declaration. States that the draft declaration is a consensus of hundreds of indigenous peoples from all over the world. Reaffirm their commitment to the adoption of the whole declaration, the contents of which are the basic principles, and the minimum acceptable standards for the protection of indigenous peoples. Emphasizes that the basic point of the declaration is contained in article 3 on self determination. States that art.3 is supported by other international instruments which provide for equal rights and notes that the right of self determination should be applied to indigenous peoples as the right is recognized as not one of states or countries but of peoples. Reaffirms that the concept “peoples” should not be altered to the theoretical detriment of the instrument. The use of “peoples” as a concept has already been accepted by the sub commission.. Hopes that representatives of States will make progress towards adoption of the declaration during this session and listen to the hopes and points raised by indigenous peoples who want only to attain their cultural, social, economic and political rights without any harm to any one else.

9. Mr. Elijah Harper, Representative of Assembly of First Nations: Thanks chairman. Congratulates the chairman on his re-election. Acknowledges the indigenous peoples and the government representatives attending the meeting. Explains the progress of First Nations in the struggle for indigenous peoples rights. Expresses the priority of Assembly of First Nations to facilitate the realization of self determination for indigenous peoples. Emphasizes the need to remain flexible in how self-determination is applied in different contexts. States that Assembly of First Nations was one of the first organizations to obtain consultative status with the UN Wants to encourage adoption of the declaration. Expresses the crucial importance of the document in ensuring the rights of indigenous peoples everywhere. Supports the contributions made to the draft declaration to date. Expresses a positive outlook for the future and encourages the Working Group to maintain the momentum of progress. States that the draft declaration is a bare minimum to maintain the fundamental human rights of indigenous peoples. Supports an improvement of the declaration through dialogue and clarification and asks people to remember that we live in a rapidly changing world. States that indigenous peoples must facilitate changes themselves. Recognizes progress made by the indigenous peoples of Canada with the Canadian governments. Explains how the indigenous people of Canada remained firm to their values and yet, still flexible as they consulted with the governments. Believes that indigenous peoples of Canada still have many dialogues to engage in with the governments, but shares the progress of Assembly of First Nations as an encouragement to the indigenous peoples to continue their struggle. States that the time is right to recognize the self-determination of indigenous people everywhere. Encourages all States to strive to engage in dialogue with indigenous peoples, as the Canadian government and Assembly of First Nations has undertaken. Urges forward progress on the clarification and adoption of the existing articles of the declaration. Urges the adoption and ratification of the intact declaration.

10. Mr. Roger Jocelyn, Amerindian Organization of French Guyana: Reconfirms on the threshold of the third millennium and following ten years of work within the United Nations forum their status as indigenous peoples having the right to self-determination and to develop their own political, economic, social and spiritual system. Recalls that indigenous peoples have worked to ensure their own existence but also against all forms of discrimination, to promote tolerance and to establish good relations between the indigenous peoples of the world. Says over recent years relations have been rapidly changing and have become more global. One can witness the development of two processes: standardization; and an increase of differences. Adds that in this context it is essential to promote indigenous standards and to recognize cultural diversity which is a fundamental value of the human being. If this is not recognized it will be extremely difficult for indigenous peoples to overcome the current increase of racism and xenophobia. Stresses that governments should meet the challenges of modern time and leave a material but also a moral inheritance for future generations based on indigenous values as well as western modern values. Says progress must be made to increase and facilitate participation in decision making bodies at the local, national and international level. Urges governments to adopt the draft declaration which represents a minimum standard. Appeals to all to establish a new basis for relations between indigenous peoples and governments.

11. Mr. Marcial Arias: Thanks chairman and echoes congratulations made by other indigenous peoples on his appointment. Presents a joint statement on behalf of the indigenous peoples of Central and South America, to give their view on the course of discussions. Wants to know the positions taken by governments on the fundamental right of self determination. Expresses their concern at the delay of the discussion on self-determination, as may now only be a formal one and may avoid any substantive discussion. Stresses that if recognition of the right to self determination is not forthcoming will have mutilated the progress made thus far. Reminds the working group that the fundamental concepts of peace, development and human rights, which were the basic principles for the establishment of the UN, can only be enjoyed if they have the fundamental right to self determination. States that indigenous peoples would like to ensure strict compliance of all states with the basic underlying principles of the UN, if these are not respected, then it is worrying for the development of international law. Furthermore avoiding the fundamental issue of self determination, is a flagrant abuse of the reform which the UN is supposed to be undergoing at the moment.

12. Mr. Hassan ID Balkassm: Addresses chairman, distinguished delegates and representatives of indigenous peoples. States that he is speaking on behalf of the African nations present at the Working Group. Stresses that the UN Charter opens with "We the peoples of the United Nations". Reads the second paragraph of article 1, "based on the respect of the principle equality and for the rights of the peoples and their self-determination." Says that the draft declaration is the result of more than 10 years of work done by indigenous peoples, government representatives, and organizations. Believes that a great deal of work has been accomplished to arrive at the present document. States that the General Assembly stated in 41/120 that the draft declaration was a step along the road to recognizing the rights of indigenous peoples and also stated that the draft declaration is the minimum standard. Says that everyone cannot accept the denial of human rights of indigenous peoples and states that to change the third article would infringe upon the United Nations principles. Suggests the Working Group adopt the draft declaration without amendment. Submits a petition signed by more than 300 non-governmental organizations and legal unionists, collected during three international conferences. Requests inclusion of the petition in a paragraph of the report. States that the petition calls for the adoption without any amendments. Says the petition includes addresses and telephone numbers of the individuals who signed. Urges again for the adoption of the draft declaration in its present form.

13. Mr. Oleg Egorov: Congratulates the Chairman of his re-election. States Human Rights issues are not an internal matter of every state but a concern of the entire international community. Human Right documents are sometimes the only hope for survival of certain peoples. Says developing countries often have no internal legal administrative mechanism to protect human or indigenous rights. Today indigenous peoples of the world rely on international legal instruments as their only hope for survival as peoples. Says many years of work and effort have been placed in the drafting of the present declaration which constitutes a minimum standard. It is only normal to hear those who are concerned and have the special knowledge. Stresses the declaration is established for the common human family. Encourages all to reach consensus and adopt the declaration at this session and without modification.

14. Representative of the International Working Group of Indigenous Affairs: Thanks chairman. Presents statement in affirmation of the draft declaration, and reports on progress made in India. Supports adoption of the declaration without any changes or amendments retaining its integrity. Thanks governments of Fiji and Denmark for their generally more positive attitude towards the declaration. States that although the Indian government continues to deny indigenous peoples existence, welcomes the progress made in extending some measure of self rule for the indigenous peoples of India and the peace initiative in the Naga homelands. Encourages that Indian government accepts that indigenous peoples issues require political solutions.

15. Mr. Mick Dodson, Indigenous Initiative for Peace: Greetings to all participants. Says that members of the Indigenous Initiative for Peace are indigenous peoples from all over the world. Explains that the founding members of this organization met in May, 1994 in Mexico City to consider their priorities for the remainder of the decade. Reports that at this meeting in 1994, the members concluded that one of their primary commitments was to urge the adoption without alteration of the draft declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples. States that article 3 is the fundamental, foundational article of the entire draft declaration, as reflected in every provision of the declaration. States that self -determination guarantees the cultural, political, social, and economic rights of indigenous peoples. Believes that progress will occur only if indigenous peoples are included in all agreements. Wishes to see an adoption of the draft document in order to remain consistent with the UN Charter and other international documents. Believes in peace, and believes that it is an achievable goal. Says that Indigenous Initiative for Peace has submitted an application to participate in the Working Group. Says that the application states the great need to achieve self -determination for all indigenous peoples. Believes that the current declaration begins a journey down the path to peace and encourages everyone to join in a collective effort to end war and begin a new and promising future for the world.

16. Ms. Mililani Trask. Na Koa Ikaika O Ka Lahui (Hawaii): Says the Ha Koa Ikaika O Ka Lahui is an NGO created specifically to provide Native Hawaiian indigenous peoples a vehicle to participate in these proceedings. This followed the restrictive and exclusionary United Nations procedures contained in the Commission for Human Rights Resolution 1995/32, which set forth the process for the participation of indigenous peoples in the Inter-Sessional Working Group. Says indigenous Hawaiians have participated for many years in the United Nations proceedings to ensure minimum standards under international law for the protection and recognition of the civil, political, social, economic, cultural and human rights of indigenous peoples. Notes that they participated prior and at the inception of the International Labor Organization process. The Hawaiian peoples voiced at that time the position that an unqualified right to self-determination is the basis for establishing minimum international legal standards. All are unified in this position. Regrets that States limited this principle in the ILO Convention 169 and thus denied indigenous peoples a broad protection under international law. Indigenous Hawaiians continue to seek changes in the United Nations process for indigenous participation in the Inter-Sessional Working Group in order to ensure that those most impacted and affected can defend and attain full political, civil and economic rights. Calls on the draft declaration to be considered as a whole. Says that in order to ensure the cultural survival of indigenous peoples they must be free to exercise their unqualified rights to self-determination. By virtue of this right indigenous peoples will be able to determine their political status and pursue their economic, social and cultural development. Says that for native Hawaiians and all indigenous peoples the notion of collective rights has always been the traditional view. In some cases nations have recognized these collective rights by referring to the territories and natural resources as trusts and land assets. The lands of indigenous Hawaiians were expressly placed in trust to preserve them for future generations. Notes that if domestic law recognizes that these rights are collective it is contradictory for the same nations to assert that indigenous peoples and cultures should only have protection for individual rights. Stresses that they have come to Geneva in good faith to defend the Draft Declaration in its entirety. Says that they have repeatedly requested that Article 3 be debated first, as they don’t believe indigenous peoples can come to a consensus on the provisions in the Draft Declaration unless consensus is first reached on this critical issue.

17. Representative of the International Commission for the Indigenous Rights of Peoples of South America: Conveys his greetings. Reiterates that 1997 is the 20th anniversary of indigenous peoples participation in the UN. Over the last 20 years indigenous peoples have come into the gaze of international community, groups became country wide organizations, indigenous peoples made the world see their vitality, and showed through their life styles a more consistent approach in relation to nature. Reminds that the drafting took many years, and now have the final text before us for adoption. Propose that draft declaration be ratified as it stands with out change, and assume legal acceptance as soon as possible. Emphasizes that self determination is crucial and warns against undermining this principle. Although the draft declaration has defects if continue to reformulate, it will never be finished. The draft declaration is the result of the work of one generation, and involves the work of many who are no longer with us. Notes that there are states still in opposition; and other states who recognize self determination. Mentions that such recognition has led to improvements in the whole society of those states. Says that the wind of history is behind us, and is the basis for survival of all mankind. Hope that States will help us to adopt the declaration as it stands.

18. Ms. Pauline Tangiora: States that there is an acknowledgment of Mr. Urrutia's leadership in helping the Working Group to adopt the draft declaration. Appeals to the Working Group to adopt the draft because there are indigenous peoples suffering daily while negotiations continue. Says that the draft declaration is a minimum standard, but the draft must be adopted in order to protect indigenous peoples. Urges imperative dialogue with States, but says that indigenous peoples should not be classified as subjects to the States if any fair progress is to be made. Recommends for States to not only listen, but be brave enough to accept this declaration in order to move forward toward respect for all peoples.

19. Representative of the Association for International Peace: Welcomes the fact that an understanding is being built between indigenous peoples and governments. Says that governments have traditionally tended to turn a deaf ear to demands of indigenous and other peoples. This policy of indifference is unreasonable and calls for many unanswered questions. Condemns the fact that many indigenous peoples are retained under their authority by force and that land rights have not been respected. Asks simply for indigenous peoples to be considered as fully fledged citizens and human beings.

20. Representative of the People's Republic of China: Reiterates their position, the Chinese government in drafting has always taken a positive attitude and hope that progress can be made in this session. Stresses that it is important to clearly define the term indigenous peoples. The declaration is an international instrument, and all such instruments should clearly state the subject of its protection, without such a definition application will be difficult. Aware that divergent views exist on the concept of indigenous peoples. States that the declaration is only the beginning for the protection of indigenous peoples, and hopes that in the near future it is possible that could draft a Convention for the protection of indigenous peoples rights. Reiterates that if the question of application could be settled now it would rid us of obstacles for future work and promote progress in the future. Emphasizes that indigenous peoples must be recognized by their resident country, self definition is inoperable, and would cause the declaration to lose its significance.

21. Mr. Jose Urrutia: States that the representative from the People’s Republic of China is the last speaker for the morning session. Adjourns the meeting and reminds the Working Group that informal sessions will begin in the afternoon.

Tuesday, October 28, 1997
Day 2, Afternoon Session

INFORMAL SESSION

1. Mr. Jose Urrutia, Chairman: Calls to order the first informal meeting of the third session of the Working Group established in accordance with the Commission on Human Rights Resolution 1995/32. Says the Working Group will start by discussing Article 15 of the draft declaration. Stresses that this is a completly informal meeting. There is consequently no need to place names on the speaker’s list, a simple raise of the hand will be sufficient to intervene. Explains this is to enable a more flexible set up to help make swift progress. Calls for a frank and open discussion on this Article and others that follow. Suggests, as agreed earlier, to start by considering the principle which underpins Article 15.

2. Mr. Willie Littlechild: Seeks clarification regarding the work plan, notes that the proposal of the clusters only covers 13 Articles. Says that last year the preamble was not on the agenda, asks whether this year are going to discuss only 13 Articles or is the plan to discuss all Articles including the preamble, or are some being left until next year.

3. Mr. Jose Urrutia, Chairman: States that during his consultations with governments it was determined to work on the Articles in the fashion which was discussed in the morning session. Believes that it was agreed upon during the previous session to move forward with the listed Articles. Proposes that after covering the thirteen mentioned Articles, the group can move on to Article 3 discussion. Suggests that after Article 3 discussion has been completed, the Working Group will move on to other Articles as time allows.

4. Representative of New Zealand: In response to the problem raised, suggests to make a start and see where they get to. Welcomes the approach the Chairman has proposed. Believes that a discussion in an informal session will foster a greater understanding. Agrees with first considering the principles underpinning the Article and those of concern to the delegates present. Such a discussion will then make it easier to adopt the wording of the Article. Supports the principles of equal education and opportunity of outcome for all. The practical application of this is to ensure that all citizens have access to an education system . Acknowledges the importance and value of education systems developed by indigenous peoples in ways that support language and identity. Stresses the importance of having indigenous children have access to education in their own language and cultural context where possible. Believes that education of indigenous adults is encompassed in the Article. Calls for a useful and productive discussion.

5. Mr. Ted Moses: Seeks clarification regarding the organization of work, and the order of Articles. Supports Littlechild in his comments, regarding the preamble and emphasizes that must look at all of the declaration. States that the working group has not concluded discussion on other Articles which appear to be excluded from our deliberations. Does not understand why proposed to deal with only half the declaration while the other half is being excluded. Suggests that should spend more time on contentious issues such as Article 3. Emphasizes that all provisions relate to each other and are not separable, the declaration is not split into parts although understands that it may be dealt with in clusters.

6. Representative of the United States: Congratulates the chairman on his re-election and expresses a confidence that a strong declaration will be adopted under his leadership. States that nondiscriminatory education is important to all people and declares the US support of this ideal. Believes that States have a responsibility to maintain minimum educational standards for its citizenry. Expresses that indigenous peoples should have the right to operate their own educational facilities, employ indigenous persons as teachers, and implement their own curriculum subject to State educational standards. Says that indigenous peoples should have the right to instruction in their own language. Encourages indigenous peoples to write curriculum which reflects their own culture. Encourages everyone to discuss the general principles laid out in Article 15. Expresses appreciation of the strong leadership of Mr. Urrutia.

7. Mr. Jose Urrutia, Chairman: Responding to the problem raised by Mr. Moses says the Working Group will consider as many Articles as time allows. An agreement was reached following consultations and will be followed to ensure swift progress during the upcoming weeks. Emphasizes that Article 3 has not been edged out or circumvented and that two whole sessions have been set aside to discuss it on Thursday and Friday. No one is trying to avoid discussion of certain aspects of the draft declaration. States that positive comments have already been heard and encourages a fruitful dialogue on the Article 15.

8. Mr. Suhas Chakma: On Article 15 the right to education for indigenous children. States that the use of the colonialist language has been used to destroy the unique culture of indigenous peoples, for this reason education in their own indigenous languages is very important. Stresses that indigenous children continue to be denied education in their own language as do not have the right to self determination, reiterates that Article 15 is hinged on the right to self determination contained in Article 3. Notes that the drafting of the declaration has been painstaking and difficult, reiterates that understanding and mutual respect is required to not hinder progress.

9. Representative of Canada: Thanks chairman and expresses delight in seeing Mr. Urrutia chair the Working Group once again. States that the delegation is happy to be beginning a review of each Article, and invites frank and open dialogue between the governments and indigenous representatives. Suggests an approach in how to look at this Article and subsequent Articles. Suggests to first discuss major principles found in each Article, and then look at principles related to the Article. Suggests that after reviewing the basic principles, that the Working Group turn to how the principles are reflected in the Article itself. Believes that the Working Group can start with the issues of nondiscriminatory education in Article 15. Believes that access to nondiscriminatory education should be given to indigenous peoples as it is given to other members of the international community. States a belief that the second principle of Article 15 is the indigenous control of their own educational systems. Suggests that the final principle of the Article is the obligation of the States to ensure appropriate resources. States that Canada supports these principles. Believes it is worth discussing whether other principles can be found within the text. Stresses the need to address the issue previously mentioned about adult education. Recognizes that this declaration is meant to apply to a diverse group of international peoples, including all indigenous peoples. States that there is a diversity of situations that will come into play. Supports the view that indigenous individuals should have an adequate opportunity to have education provided to them in their own language. States that Canada has 53 different indigenous languages. Asks for comments from others on how to include provisions for these diversities within the Article 15. Asks how the issue of limited resources will be taken into account as the Working Group looks at the educational rights of indigenous peoples. Looks forward to hearing the views of other participants about these factors and how the draft can be worded to include these specific factors.

10. Ms. Dalee Sambo: Reiterates some of the comments made by indigenous and State representatives. Desires to initiate discussion about the draft declaration, particular Articles but also the general principles behind these. Notes that the preambular paragraphs of the declaration are indeed the general principles which underlie the whole of the text. They are the philosophical foundation of the declaration and represent the very spirit and intent of the declaration as a whole. Says Article 15 relates to preambular paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 14 and 15. It is important to recognize that the declaration is comprehensive in nature and should be understood as a whole. Notes the underlying principle of Article 15 is the fact that all indigenous peoples have the right to establish and control their own education system. Indigenous peoples, through the right to self-determination, have the right to determine the form of education they wish to establish in their community with its specific cultural content. Such a control is necessary to ensure the continuation of the indigenous language, the indigenous world perspective as well as their distinct cultural values, practices, views on the land and territories. This cannot be segregated from other Articles and from the preambular paragraphs. Appreciates the comments made by States on equality of access to education and non-discrimination. What is needed, however, is to move beyond existing Human Rights instruments. Says they should also discuss the measures States ought to take to provide adequate resources to indigenous peoples for education. There have been a number of attempts to diminish obligations underlined in the declaration. Reaffirms the language in the Article relates to all of the declaration and relates to all the obligation States have to indigenous peoples . Urges States and others to think of these Articles as a whole keeping in mind the fundamental principles contained in the preambular paragraphs.

11. Representative of Norway: Support principles contained in Article 15 and support the wording, however suggest that some of the wording could be improved propose that it could be more similar to other international instruments, such as the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Suggests that the term ‘indigenous children’ could be changed to ‘indigenous persons’ which would have a wider implication. Support the inclusion of the principle of para.29 of ILO 169 Convention in art.15.

12. Ms. Mililani Trask: Questions how the term "indigenous peoples" is being used during this session. Holds the view that the education of indigenous children must be executed in a manner which reflects the true culture of the indigenous people. States that indigenous people must educate their children on their own land. States that indigenous peoples should be able to teach their children to hunt, fish, pray, and worship on their own land. Reiterates the need to approach this draft document as a whole, not in part. States that Article 15 stresses the need for cultural methods of teaching and learning. Questions how States will license indigenous elders to teach their children the things which are an integral part of their culture. Expresses that a consensus cannot be reached on the Article 15. Repeats there is no consensus on the underlying principles of this important Article.

13. Mr. Hassan ID Balkassm, North Africa: States human dignity is the source of all rights and the non-enjoyment of the right to education is a threat to this principle. Several Constitutions do not recognize the right of indigenous peoples to their own identity and education. Says education can be a double-edged saw, it can be used to liberate oneself, to feel ones dignity but it can also be used in a humiliating way forcing integration and eliminating indigenous cultural identity. Refers to actions taken against indigenous peoples of North Africa which have led to the total destruction of the indigenous culture. Stresses that they have no access to education in their own language. Recalls the situation of the 3 million indigenous peoples of North Africa living in Europe who do not have access to education in their own language. Requests to maintain the Article as it is without any amendments.

14. Representative of Australia: Congratulates chairman on his appoint and pledges the full cooperation of Australian delegation to the IWGIP. States that the great value of the declaration, is that it is an instrument specifically to protect the rights of indigenous peoples. Emphasizes that they are fully supportive of the underlying principle of Article 15. Mentions that the Prime Minister has expressed personal sorrow for the past policies which occurred in Australian history, when generations of indigenous children suffered forced removal from their families. Affirms that a number of State and Territory Parliaments have expressed regret at hurt caused, regrets for the role of the government in the policy and reaffirmed their support for reconciliation. Pleased to report that today's Australia has a different education policy to bring about equity in education, involving indigenous peoples in education decision making. Notes that in the text of this Article more work needs to be done on articulation of principles, right to access on a non-discrimination basis and education in their own languages. States however that the proposal to provide education in culture and language for indigenous peoples outside their own communities, requires more discussion. Supports principles underpinning Article 15, and are ready to work on wording so that it reflects the principles.

15. Mr. Tomas Alarcon: Thanks chairman. Expresses support for the previous statements made by others that Article 15 should be accepted in its entirety. Says Article 15 encourages cultural diversity and calls for States to improve their educational programs, especially their intercultural education programs. States that trades are not part of the official public education program in his country. Expresses the belief that public education contradicts the principles which indigenous peoples live by, including the respect for Mother Earth. States that the respect for Mother Earth should be a guide to the education of indigenous children. Says that indigenous children have become socially frustrated which has led to juvenile delinquency. States that children are suffering from homelessness and hunger. Believes that the children suffer because their education is not compatible with their indigenous origin. Believes standardized education has not met the needs of indigenous children. States an opinion that Article 15 is very valuable in moving toward new more progressive educational standards.

16. Representative of Colombia: Congratulates and supports the Chairman on his re- election. Believes the principle underlying Article 15 is that of guaranteeing the cultural identity of indigenous peoples and equality of democratic rights in general. Recognizes that discrimination has throughout history occurred against indigenous peoples in the sector of education. Agrees with the suggestion of other delegations that Article 15 should be expanded to cover all indigenous peoples i.e. adults as well as children. Endorses the rest of the wording, as far as a specific reference is made to children. Says that access to education and enjoyment of this right also covers the way in which States and governments impose a whole cultural system on indigenous peoples. The responsibility of the State is to provide resources and funds and to ensure that the structure of the education system is adapted to the cultural needs of indigenous peoples. It is more than a question of education in their own language and their cultural settings. States have to make the necessary modifications to their own sectors so as to promote, support and provide appropriate education to indigenous peoples. Says Colombia upholds this and would like to see it supported by others. Refers to the wording already suggested last year (contained in the Working Group report, document ECN4/1997/102, P. 31) concerning the cultural autonomy which should be granted to indigenous peoples in the education sector.

17. Ms. Matilda House: On behalf of the indigenous delegation of Australia, stress that Article 15 can not be severed from deliberation of Article 3. Reiterates that the preamble provides the legal and philosophical basis in which the whole declaration should be interpreted, quotes the paragraph on equality. Says that Article 15 contains two principles, and that both are well established in existing international instruments. However notes that indigenous children continue to be denied access to education, the stolen generations inquiry revealed how indigenous children were forcibly removed pursuant to policy and legislation, and denied any meaningful education. Indigenous children who were removed provided with education only up to year 10. Notes how in all countries there exist significant disparities between indigenous children’s and non indigenous children’s education and funding. Reiterates that having own education institutions is based on recognition of the right to self determination. Stresses that indigenous peoples have the right to control all aspects of the education of their children. Regarding resource implications of Article 15, in Vienna it was finally settled that there can be no hierarchy of rights and all rights must be respected, not dependent on their cost. At the last session a number of delegations expressed their support for Article 15, urges all delegations to accept the language of Article 15, and adopt it in its present form.

18. Representative of Brazil: Thanks chairman and congratulates him on his election. Expresses support for the progress that can be made in the informal sessions. States that Brazil’s delegation supports the general principles of Article 15 and states that Brazil believes all forms and levels of education, including bilingual education are important and should be available to indigenous peoples. Says that the discussion thus far strengthens Brazil’s conviction. States that 170 different linguistic groups exist in Brazil. Believes that it would be difficult to provide bilingual education to all 170 groups. States that Brazil offers support to all forms of education, including bilingual education. Suggests that perhaps the wording on specific topics such as the issue of how to provide educational support to all linguistic groups can be clarified at some point.

19. Representative of Sweden: Expresses appreciation for the re-election of the Chairman and the skillful way in which he resolved the problem on work methods. Supports the underlying principles of Article 15. Says would prefer a reference to indigenous persons or individuals rather than children. Article 15 should reflect the right of indigenous peoples to manage their own education system in their own language. Supports an inclusion that such institutions meet minimum standards established by the competent authorities of the State. Notes further reflection should be given to the wording concerning access by indigenous children living outside their community to education in their own language.

20. Ms. Andrea Carmen: Contributes reflections on the underlying principles of Article 15 and the fundamental right of indigenous peoples to self determination in regard to education. Voices its firm commitment to the adoption of the current text, as a cohesive whole, in its totality. Calls for a consensus on the current text without modifications, and for adoption of the declaration without delay. Stresses the use of the term indigenous peoples without any qualifications, can accept no qualification of the term indigenous peoples in its meaning in Article 15 or anywhere else in the declaration. Requests that the final report to the commission take note that, consent to the current text can not be given if any limitation is made to the term indigenous peoples. Calls for the adoption of the current text with no amendments. Emphasizes that Article 3 recognizes the right to self determination, and provides the necessary legal, moral and practical basis for application of all other Articles, with this Article and the unqualified use of indigenous peoples throughout the text. Stresses that the basic rights and freedoms of indigenous peoples are not and will never be negotiable.

21. Mr. Ratnaker Bhengra: Thanks chairman. Thanks chairman for the manner in which the informal session is being conducted and suggests that the flexibility in the discussions are needed at this stage of negotiation. Suggests that there should be no changes or deletions in the present draft declaration. States that previous discussions clearly indicate that indigenous children have the right to education at all levels and in all forms. Summarizes Article 15. Suggests that all three paragraphs of the Article are linked together. States that indigenous children will ascend superiority and descend inferiority. States that indigenous people have been denied education historically and even now. Suggests that States should take appropriate measures to provide resources, but emphasizes that dependency on the State is not encouraged. Believes that indigenous peoples must have ownership of their education. Believes that States should not use the issue of resources as an obstacle to this Article. Believes that States should not object to supplying resources.

22. Ms. Tauli Corpus: Says it is important to maintain positive discrimination in order to breach the gap between indigenous peoples and the others. Emphasizes that there are no schools in many indigenous communities and the children often have to work for the shear survival of the family. This can only resolved by a policy of positive discrimination, especially to those most disadvantaged. Says an other underpinning principle is to consider education in a holistic framework of indigenous development. Increasingly governments have to reduce their budgets as a result of difficult economic conditions and the education sector is generally one of the first affected by these cuts. In some cases education is given up to the private sector and this drastically diminish the government possibility to ensure equal education for all. Endorses the Article and all the principles underpinning it, including the right to self-determination, and the corresponding right to manage their own education system. Notes the Article can not be considered separately from other Articles and from the preambular paragraphs. Adds that it can be divorced from the social and economic situation of indigenous peoples.

23. Mr. Hjalmar Dahl, representative of Inuit Circumpolar Conference: States that the right to education is fundamental and is recognized in many other international instruments. Stresses that indigenous peoples have the right to control all aspects of their education which includes culture, content and language of instruction. Supports Article 15 in its present form, and as a part of the whole declaration.

24. Mr. Ron Barnes: Gives greetings from his organization and congratulates the chairman on his election. States that education of indigenous peoples is distinct and different from other forms of education. Believes that indigenous peoples’ ideals clash with what some States wish to teach. Expresses that some States wish to teach indigenous children to accept the ideals and standards of their government. Believes that the preambular text provides support to the draft declaration as a whole. Agrees with Ms. Mililani Trask in her statement and further states that to qualify for an educational license only indigenous peoples can qualify their traditional teachers. States that indigenous peoples must not have to qualify to the standards of the States.

25. Representative of Denmark: Congratulates the Chairman on his re-election and thanks him for the confidence and consensus he has been able to establish to start this constructive dialogue. Attaches great importance to this issue and hopes to reach a consensus in order to adopt the draft declaration. Article 15 concerns the right of indigenous peoples to have equal access to education in their own language and cultural context as well as to manage and control their own education system. Supports fully the principles underlying Article 15 and does not see any reason to change the wording of the Article.

26. Representative of Finland: Expresses full support for normative substance of Article 15. Mentions that in the Sami Homeland, in the northern part of Finnish Lapland, teaching of and in the Sami language is provided at a number comprehensive schools and gymnasiums. Also, outside the Sami Homeland, Sami is taught at four comprehensive schools. States that the Office on Education and Instruction Material which recently has been transferred from the Board of the County of Lapland to the Finnish Sami Parliament, is responsible for preparing curricula for Sami language teaching and for Sami text books. Notes that the second sentence on paragraph one may be redundant, however is merely a drafting matter.

27. Mr. Lars Anders Baer: Emphasizes the general principles of the rights of education as outlined in international standards. Summarizes Article 15 and expresses full endorsement of this Article in compliance with international educational standards.

28. Representative of Bangladesh: Welcomes the Chairman back to the chair. Says that it will be necessary to look at elements and Articles of the draft declaration in the context of their scope of application. Believes however that discussion on the wording will come later on. Article 15 consists of a number of elements including non-discriminatory access to equal education for all indigenous peoples and the right to establish and control their own education system in their own language. In order to resolve incongruity in the drafting of the first two sentences one can talk about all indigenous peoples, including children. Expresses concern as to what exactly is put in the Article. It is necessary to ensure that the wording does not provide an opportunity for hampering access to job opportunities and higher education. Believes that if there is no wording in the Article providing for a linkage between the traditional indigenous education system and the national education system it could provide for disimparement. Expresses concern that the Article does not take into account the reality and provide for opportunities to evolve, in particular for the urbanized indigenous peoples. Refers to statements made earlier today concerning the adoption of the Article without amendments. Stresses that this text should not be adopted without thorough scrutiny and analysis.

29. Representative of Mexico: Congratulates chairman on his appointment. Reiterates desire to work actively so that the declaration can be adopted as soon as possible. Echoing other delegates proposes that paragraph 1, Article 15 could be strengthened by referring to education for all indigenous peoples not just children.

30. Mr. Rod Towney: Thanks chairman. States that Article 3 pertaining to self- determination relates directly to Article 15 as it does to the entire document. Article 3 ensures the economic, social, and cultural development of the indigenous peoples. States that indigenous peoples must have the access to chose State education and the freedom to develop their own educational standards. Suggests that it would be beneficial for the indigenous peoples to be allowed to determine what is taught to their children in the future. Suggests that the draft declaration be adopted. Looks forward to hearing the views of other governments on this important Article.

31. Representative of Argentina: Congratulates the Chairman on his re-election and thanks him for his help in making progress and promoting transparency. Supports the spirit and content of Article 15. Refers to the reform of the Argentinean legislation providing indigenous peoples with bilingual and inter-cultural education. This reform has provided for the coverage of indigenous issues and cultures in the education system and for education in the language of indigenous peoples. States that it is the role of the government of Argentina to set out the education plan of the country in order to ensure the education of all Argentinean children. Notes that it can be inferred in the present text that the State is excluded from the education system managed by indigenous peoples. Expresses concern at the sentence concerning access by indigenous children living outside their community to education in their own language.

33. Mr. David Silacan: States that proposals to additions or deletions of any words of Article 15 are not acceptable. States that poor educational opportunities presently exist for nomadic peoples. States that Article 15 sets the standards that are needed to provide appropriate education to nomadic people. Asks that the minimal standards set forth in Article 15 be adopted.

34. Mr. Lazaro Pary: Refers to the position expressed by Ms. Sambo and Chief Moses to the effect that the Working Group is repeating the same exercise as last year. Stresses that the source of the draft declaration is found in the preambular paragraphs. The desire of all is to make progress and find solutions to specific questions in the Articles. Says indigenous education implies a completely different approach than that used by western education systems. Education is an instrument for increasing awareness, knowledge of everything around us and is a tool for liberating people. Asserts that the way in which the education is dispensed to indigenous peoples should be changed. States need to provide new educational material to the children so they can contribute to restoring their history and traditions. Refers to the Argentinean statement saying there are more languages than peoples speaking them. Denounces the fact States always refer to their Constitution and questions the use of discussing issues of education and land in these circumstances.

35. Mr. José Urrutia. Chairman: Requests Mr. Pary to remain brief.

36. Mr. Lazaro Pary: Calls for all indigenous peoples to have collective and individual rights to integral and diversified levels of education in their own language, to enjoy the right to formulate their policy and create their own establishments. Requests States to recognize education as their greatest responsibility providing sufficient resources and material for the application of the declaration, including for access to education in their own language by children living outside their communities.

37. Representative of El Salvador: Congratulates chairman on his appointment. States that his government endorses and supports Article 15 and the provision of education to all society. Expresses importance to refrain from discriminating and to promote the diverse cultures within its borders for the benefit of the whole of society.

38. Mr. Jose Urrutia: Adjourns the meeting.

Wednesday, October 29, 1997
Day 3, Morning Session

INFORMAL SESSION

1. Mr. Jose Urrutia, Chairman: Calls to order the second informal meeting of the third session of the Working Group established in accordance with the Human Rights Commission Resolution 1995/32. In accordance with the work plan adopted, the Working Group will continue consideration of the principles contained in Article 15 of the draft declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples.

2. Representative of Switzerland: Congratulates chairman on his re-appointment and says that appreciates efforts made to create a constructive working atmosphere. Believes that the right to education is one of the most central rights of the declaration, and is necessary to protect the culture of indigenous peoples. Fully supports the general thrust of Article 15 and its underlying philosophy. Proposes that, as other delegations have already suggested, replace the term ‘child’ with the term ‘persons’ in the first paragraph to give wider application, and also to mention the ‘right of access’ to education. Stresses the importance of a minimal amount of coordination between the states education system and the education system of indigenous peoples.

3. Mr. Ted Moses: Thanks chairman for recognition. Has comments on issues raised by the representative of Bangladesh during yesterday’s session. Asks to postpone comment until the representative of Bangladesh is present.

4. Mr. Marcial Arias: Thanks the Chairman. Says that he has been trying to find the contradictions on the principles underlying Article 15 but has found none. Recalls the statement of the government of Canada that clearly indicated the principles underlying the article, the obligations of States and the right of indigenous peoples to control and manage their own education system. Notes some governments have indicated that they are already applying this policy without encountering problems with indigenous peoples. In some cases policies establishing bilingual and inter-cultural systems of education have been followed. States that the Working Group is now becoming familiar with the principles underlying this Article and they should therefore keep the article as it stands. Says that the Working Group should move on to consider the principles underlying other articles to progress in this meeting. Points out that self-determination underpins this article and has in some cases already been attained in certain countries. It should be adopted however for those who do not yet enjoy this right. Refers to the statement of the representative of Bangladesh and expresses some puzzlement as to what he said. Stresses that there is a consensus on the general principles underlying Article 15, the Working Group should therefore move on.

5. Representative of the Russian Federation: Thanks and congratulates chairman on his appointment. Reiterates that the position of the Russian Federation was defined in previous meetings of the working group and has not changed. Confirm that have no objections to Article 15 of the declaration.

6. Mr. Willie Littlechild: Thanks the Chairman. Reiterates as other indigenous representatives have in earlier sessions that Article 15 is directly related to all of the important underlying principles of Article 3, and of Treaty 6 rights to education as understood under international law.

7. Juan Leon Alvarado, Maya People of Guatemala: Refers to the statements made by the representative of Colombia, the Russian Federation and some States that expressed doubts on the substance of Article 15. Says that an important and interesting process is underway in Guatemala which is made up of a majority of Maya people. An agreement has been reached between indigenous peoples and the State on the need to change the design and organization of the State education system. Notes that indigenous peoples can now speak on an equal footing with the State. They have agreed to establish a multi and pluri-cultural education system and negotiation are taking place on the how they are going to administer the system. Understands that States want to provide an education to all their citizens and remain a vigilant monitor. Notes that in the case of Guatemala the State and indigenous peoples cooperate to design the content of the teachings. Adds the State will provide resources for the development of this new education system as indigenous peoples do not have the necessary resources. On these basis it is possible to extend this model to other parts of the world. Stresses that it is important to leave the article as it stands and that any modifications, according to some of the suggestions made earlier, will modify content. It is important to retain the word children as it is they who will carry on the traditions and views of the indigenous communities. Expresses satisfaction at the present flexibility with which these issues are being discussed. Asserts that States should not be afraid of the statements made by indigenous peoples as their only aim is to progress in the dialogue.

8. Mr. Therese Jocelyn: Thanks chairman. Speaks on behalf of indigenous peoples of French Guyana, says that there has been a violation of indigenous peoples rights, stresses that even the basic minimum human rights standards are not recognized. Stresses that the imposition of states language onto indigenous peoples has violated their rights, the assimilation of indigenous peoples has made indigenous languages disappear, disintegrating the culture of our peoples, which he describes as a cultural genocide. Reiterates that any language is the expression of a relationship with the world. Says that the reservations invoked seem strange as they are in violation of international standards which are laid down in various international instruments. Says that indigenous peoples do not want a parallel education system but an individual education system. Urges governments to contribute to the consensus to adopt the draft declaration as a minimum standard for protection of indigenous peoples. Emphasizes that is a challenge to be met by governments of the world to educate children for our future.

9. Mr. Aucan Huilcaman: States that Article 15 of the draft declaration relates specifically to the cultural development of the indigenous peoples. States that Article 15 is based on the International Covenant on Economic and Social Rights which ensures equal and full rights for all peoples. Believes that to ensure equal educational rights for indigenous peoples, they must be given the power to govern their own education system. States that in order to guarantee that their cultural heritage and knowledge is passed on to their future generations, indigenous people must have educational control over the curriculum. Expresses that Article 15 reflects the indigenous peoples’ belief in a need for human diversity. Says that problems arise when domestic, State run systems of education try to teach indigenous children. Stresses that States have not allowed the proper cultural education of indigenous children and that discrimination against the indigenous peoples is found throughout State education systems. Believes that if the indigenous peoples have control over their own educational system that new forms of colonialism can be stamped out. States that Article 15 is aimed specifically at children which require protection. Clarifies that the article specifically states "children" and not "persons" as some governments would prefer because children are viewed as individual subjects of law, yet part of the whole of their population. Believes, therefore, that the article encompasses all indigenous people of all generations. Stresses again the need for special protection of the children, and states that Article 15 recognizes the rights of the indigenous child. Concludes with a recommendation that Article 15 be accepted without amendment.

10. Mr. Ted Moses: Referring to the debate that has taken place on the protection of collective rights feels very strongly that they should be an integral part of Article 15. Collective rights in the sector of education have historically been the subject of abuse and must therefore be protected. Notes that collective rights include individual rights. Believes the right of indigenous children to have access to education in their own language and culture should be protected. Refers to the right which exits in Canada for education of the French Canadians in their own language and culture. Notes that in Canada indigenous peoples have not had this right protected. Says he has been victim of the Canadian policy of depriving indigenous peoples the right to speak their own language. The government followed a policy of assimilation, removing the Indians from their land and territories, placing them in a new environment and forcefully subjecting them to a language that was not their own. Concerning the reference to appropriate resources, it is a fundamental paragraph as without it the article becomes rhetorical. It is only with such resources that the article can be effectively implemented. Explains he speaks from experience and knows how difficult it is to implement what is outlined in the article without funds. States he has no difficulty with the wording of Article 15 as it covers all the topics mentioned above. Proposes its adoption. Referring to comments made yesterday by the representative of Bangladesh, with respect to the 120 million indigenous peoples not sharing the same aspirations concerning the declaration. Says that particular State has attained self-determination, it can determine its policies, the use of its resources and so one. Affirms indigenous peoples would like to enjoy certain protections and the use of their resources. Says he would usually object to such a statement but he will not. Explains indigenous peoples do not have the same aspirations as States however they should not be denied the right to seek recognition and the protection of certain of their rights. States indigenous peoples do not aspire to secession as others may do, but only to a full and unqualified right of self-determination. Calls upon the 120 million indigenous peoples of Bangladesh to support the indigenous peoples of the world to seek this recognition and protection.

11. Mr. Mikhail Todychev, Shor People: Thanks chairman, and says that are pleased to see him in the chair, and hope that under his guidance the working group will be made aware of the danger of protracting further on the draft declaration and stresses that many indigenous peoples (gave the example of indigenous peoples in Russia) are on the brink of disappearance. States that Article 15, the right to education is crucial for indigenous peoples many of whom are on the brink of ethnic, and sometimes physical disappearance. Stresses that indigenous peoples survival hinges on the survival of language. Notes that in Russia indigenous peoples did not have the opportunity to study in their own language, and moreover did not have anything written on their history until 1929 when the government began to give attention to education and the study of different languages of the region. Recognizes the financial constraints which the Russian government is facing, making it difficult to grant rights under Article 15. States with concern that indigenous peoples in the Russian federation do not have the right to participate in the reform of the education system beginning today, and warns that it might have a negative effect on the education of indigenous peoples. Notes that there is a problem of staff resources, and also that education is becoming increasingly more expensive. Reiterates that it is important that the working group discuss the articles and reach a consensus as soon as possible, agrees with other representatives of indigenous peoples that it is not desirable to have any changes to the draft declaration. Does not agree with the changes put forward by the Swiss delegation to change the term ‘child’ to ‘persons’. Says that have gleamed the impression that are edging towards a consensus on the principle of Article 15, by governments and indigenous peoples, therefore suggests that the working group move on to discuss other articles.

12. Ms. Violet Ford: Thanks chairman. States that she grew up in an Inuit community in Canada and could not communicate with the elders of the community because of a language barrier. Expresses regret in not having communication with the elders as a child. Believes that individuals cannot survive as whole human beings without a full knowledge of their own culture. Declares support of the Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples as presently worded and urges adoption to ensure the rights of indigenous peoples.

13. Representative of Venezuela: Congratulates the Chairman on his re-election. Agrees with the substance and the wording of Article 15. Believes however that it can be improved and expanded providing further clarification. Says the wording indigenous children would be improved if it were replaced by the term indigenous person. The purpose of education is to reach all strata of the population and all ages. Believes the general wording could be improved by merging the first two sentences. This could be done in the following way “indigenous peoples have the right to access all levels and forms of education of the state as well as to establish their own education system and institutions in their own language”. Another drafting could be as such “indigenous peoples living outside their community also have the right to access all levels and forms of education etc.”.Agrees with the proposal made by Switzerland to include a reference with the need to coordinate the general education system of the State to make it compatible with the education system of indigenous peoples. Such a reference could read as follows “in the organization of the education system referred to (indigenous system), coordination and compatibility will be sought with the general education system of the State”.

14. Mr. Julian Burger, Secretariat: Informs the working group that the US indigenous representatives are invited to meet with US delegates, immediately following the closure of the morning session, at the back of the room.

Wednesday, October 29, 1997
Day 3, Afternoon Session

INFORMAL SESSION

1. Mr. Jose Urrutia. Chairman: Calls to order the third informal meeting. In accordance with the work plan and after many consultations asks delegations if there are any concrete proposals on Article 15. As there are none, suggests to proceed to an exchange of views on the principles contained in Article 16.

2. Representative of Venezuela: Thanks chairman. In response to question, states that the secretariat has received their amended draft of Article 15.

3. Representative of Colombia: States that the delegation from Colombia submitted a proposal for Article 15 orally in yesterday’s session. Submits this proposal in writing during this afternoon session.

4. Representative of Bangladesh: Asks whether the Working Group will be going back to look at the wording of government proposals on Article 15.

5. Mr. Jose Urrutia, Chairman: Says that has been informed by many delegations that need more consultations before they can submit their proposals.

6. Mr. Juan Leon: Reaffirms a wish to not modify the text in any way. Maintains the position to accept the present document.

7. Mr. Jose Urrutia, Chairman: Says he will be happy to hear any statements after having looked at the government proposals in order to continue the fruitful dialogue on that article. Suggests to look at the principles contained in Article 16. Opens the floor for comments.

8. Representative of New Zealand: States that New Zealand strongly supports the principles of Article 16. Believes that Article 16 stresses the importance to reflect the unique cultures and values of the indigenous peoples in education and public information. Suggests that the topic of public information would be better dealt with in Article 17. States that New Zealand’s objective is to eliminate prejudice and discrimination, as reflected in New Zealand’s laws and international law. Proposes that States take measures to eliminate prejudices and foster understanding among all peoples. Expresses support for the underlying principles of Article 16.

9. Representative of Canada: Thanks chairman. States that like New Zealand also wishes to focus on principles in Article 16. States that it contains two principles: the dignity and diversity of indigenous peoples be appropriately reflected in education and public information; and that States should take measures in consultation with indigenous peoples concerned to prevent discrimination. Affirms that Canada supports both principles. Proposes that the first principle presents a goal to achieve, suggests that it would be more appropriate to state that it is a goal, also suggests that could consider Article 16 and Article 17 together. Support principle which underlies Article 16, but notes that States cannot guarantee the elimination of discrimination. Therefore, suggest that wording should state that consideration be given to combat prejudice or to take action aimed at the elimination of discrimination. That would be an objective which they would support.

10. Representative of the United States: Strongly supports the principles contained in Article 16. Says it is essential that States make all efforts, in partnership with indigenous peoples, to combat and eradicate intolerance, discrimination and prejudice against indigenous peoples. Agrees it is important to encourage educational programming reflecting indigenous cultures, traditions and histories. Affirms States should take measures, in consultation with indigenous communities, with the goal of eliminating discrimination and promoting good relations between indigenous peoples.

11. Representative of Mexico: States that the Mexican delegation fully agrees with all of the principles in Article 16. Believes that Article 16 can be adopted as it stands. Extends an invitation to others to discuss, but repeats the belief that Article 16 can be accepted in its present form.

12. Ms. Andrea Carmen: Speaks in favor of the adoption of the article in its current text without modification or qualification. Appreciates the statement made by the government of Mexico that echoes the views of indigenous peoples from many parts of the world. Regarding the underlying principles, stresses the importance of the term indigenous peoples in the article. States it is of great importance the principle and terminology remain intact. Adds that the right of indigenous peoples to exercise their traditions, culture, histories and aspirations can not be distinguished from self- determination and the right to own, develop and use traditional land and territories. Says the draft declaration should be seen as a coherent whole and not article by article.

13. Representative of Australia: Supports the two key principles embodied in Article 16, to improve awareness, and to endeavor to combat discrimination. States that Australia already works towards these principles and gives examples, refers to different federal laws to combat racial discrimination, human rights education programs containing indigenous peoples rights, policy to promote better understanding of indigenous peoples cultures, and funds to address a major anti- discrimination campaign. Suggests that the text may be strengthened proposes that it should reflect the limits of States, they can encourage, strive and endeavor to eliminate discrimination but to express it more forcefully may be more than States can achieve.

14. Representative of Norway: Thanks the chairman. States that Article 16 reflects the already well established principles found in international instruments. Expresses that the delegation of Norway strongly supports these principles. States that the delegation from Norway is ready to adopt Article 16 with the current language.

15. Representative of Bangladesh: Article 16 contains two elements, the right to have the dignity and diversity of the culture of indigenous peoples reflected in all forms of education and public information and measures taken by states to eliminate prejudice and discrimination. Says both are very positively worded in the article and are crucial in promoting cultural diversity. Notes however that both relate to the municipal context. Stresses indigenous peoples around the world are increasingly marginalized in the face of globalization. Suggests that effective measures be taken by States but also in concert with the relevant international organizations. Says the article ought to reflect the international context.

16. Representative of Colombia: Expresses agreement with underlying principles of Article 16, think that the wording of the article should remain, affirm their support for Article 16.

17. Representative of Argentina: Thanks the chairman. Expresses support for the principles of Article 16. Believes that the text in its current form can be accepted on the understanding that there should be no converse discrimination and equal treatment for all groups.

18. Mr. Lazaro Pary: Says that when the Chairman concluded observations on Article 15, he asked to speak but was not given the floor. Questions the methodology followed and asks how a tangible progress can be made in this way. Says although the Working Group has spent three days hearing general statements no concrete proposals have been heard. States Article 16 is backed by a number of human rights instruments. It is broadly acceptable in the sense dignity and diversity of the cultures, traditions and histories of indigenous peoples ought to be respected and protected. Adds it should be promoted in the sense indigenous peoples have the right to self-determination. Concerning the second paragraph of the article, refers to article 2 of the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination. States it is a very clear cut provision that condemns any form of discrimination. Says however that in a time of increasing globalisation exclusion and xenophobia are more apparent than ever. Calls for the adoption of the article in its present form.

19. Mr. Jose Urrutia, Chairman: Expresses his regret to Mr. Pary, explains that he did not know that he was asking for the floor, apologizes for not letting him speak on Article 15.

20. Representative of Costa Rica: States that agree completely with wording of Article 16, particularly paragraph 2 which is very much in keeping with the policy in Costa Rica.

21. Mr. Guy McElroy, Chickasaw Nation: Extends congratulations to the chairman on his appointment and wishes the participants of the Working Group well in their endeavors to adopt the draft declaration. Thanks Mexico, Norway, Colombia, and Costa Rica for their support of Article 16. Expresses a special thanks to the United States for its recognition of the principles contained within Article 16. Hopes that at the appropriate time the entire draft declaration will be adopted.

22. Mr. Mick Dodson: Thanks the chair. Article 16 contains two essential principles outlined in the first and second paragraph that are both well established in existing international instruments. Says both of these seem very acceptable. Congratulates all States who have unreservedly endorsed this Article. Calls for all States to adopt the article in its present form.

23. Representative of Chile: Thanks chairman and says that delighted at his re-appointment, wishes him every success in this very difficult task, and state that can count on their full cooperation. Supports the principles contained in Article 16. Has no major difficulties with the content however propose that could be strengthened by the inclusion of certain elements of the ILO Convention 169. Reiterates their support for the principles contained in Article 16.

24. Representative of Sweden: Thanks chairman. States that Article 16 principles are fundamental. States that Sweden is ready to adopt the article as it now stands.

25. Representative of Switzerland: Says Switzerland fully supports Article 16 which reflects a number of international human rights instruments. Proposes the adoption of the article as it stands

26. Representative of Brazil: Expresses full support for the principles contained in Article 16.

27. Representative of India: Thanks the chairman and joins other delegations and indigenous representatives in congratulating the chairman on his re-election. Assures the chairman that India fully supports hastening the adoption process. States that India has no problems with Article 15 or 16. Supports all of the language in Article 15. Suggests a rewording of Article 16. Believes that rather than using the word "segments" in the last line, the document shoul