|
WGIP Agenda Item 4c: Summary of Discussion |
|
Thursday, 03 August 2006 |
Overview of Agenda Item 4c: Indigenous Peoples and Conflict Prevention and Resolution
Agenda Item 4c of the WGIP concerned "Indigenous Peoples and Conflict Prevention and Resolution", in which the right to self-determination was highlighted as an important recognition and process in the context of conflict resolution.
Peace is not possible in an atmosphere of deceit
- Leonard Bennally, Dineh Nation
Indigenous peoples have their own conflict prevention mechanisms that privilege dialogue. Rosario Cumanagoto made a summary of indigenous practices, indicating that in case of failure to find a solution through dialogue, a ball game would be used and only as a last resort could unarmed combat be allowed, and that traditionally the winners did not seek the destruction of the losers culture, ego or existence.
Many speakers saw self-determination as an effective process for conflict resolution. Marielle Lansink, on behalf of the Association of West Papua Students observed that in the case of West Papua the mechanisms for a solution through self-determination were there, but had never been properly implemented. She also noted that they had their own NGOs for conflict mediation, which were sought out by international agencies and institutes for collaboration, but that the Indonesians only allowed Javanese NGOs or individuals to participate and that at times they had even participated under their name.
Abdoulaye Youssouf of Ikouss NTakarett saw the artificially drawn borders of states as the root of most conflicts; borders had been drawn this way upon decolonization so that colonising powers could maintain their hegemony. He suggested the role of the media in promoting conflicts should be monitored, giving the examples of the pro-Bagbo press in the Ivory Coast, and the attitude towards the Touareg in Mali. Media abuse for the purpose of inciting hatred and war should be considered war crimes and those responsible indicted and sent to the ICC.
Mario Agreda noted the armies in South America had indigenous soldiers and non-indigenous territories, and that while this was so, brothers could never stand together. He noted all relationships must be built on reciprocity.
Alim Bandara from Timnay Justice and Governance gave the example of what is not a good way of conflict resolution: the Philippines had negotiated the Lumad land away in order to obtain a peace deal with the Moro.
In peace talks in Northern India, initiatives to involve civil society in order to increase scope and understanding in participation were having positive results.
New Caledonia and Mohawk, peaceful occupation of that land but that States had resorted to brute force to enforce their will. Another point in common is that in both cases there is evidence of corruption, which is not investigated.
Ambassador Ronald Barnes urged, on behalf of a group of petitioners, that the Working Paper begun by Alfonso Martinez on the Sequels of Colonization be given continuity and be presented in 2007.
The International Indian Treaty Council noted the important tradition of treaty making as a means of conflict resolution, and that this was neither a relic of the past nor irrelevant to present day and that just as Native Americans kept their side of the bargain, it is reasonable that States should also comply with what they agreed.
The status of the Pacific Caucus noted some of the findings of the Special Rapporteur (SR) on the continued abuse of human rights, measured against existing standards, by States around the world. These abuses are not resolved year after year. The SR also noted the gap between official rhetoric, programs and legislation and the actual achievements. The Caucus pointed to a clear need for third party involvement in the resolution of conflicts: The HRC should be challenged to acknowledge, authorise and finance those structures necessary to mediate conflicts between States and Indigenous Peoples.
|
