Zapatista Army of National Liberation
The Zapatista Army of National Liberation referred to as the Zapatistas, is a far-left libertarian-socialist political and militant group that controls a large amount of territory in Chiapas, the southernmost state of Mexico. Since 1994 the group has been in a declared war against the Mexican state, against military and corporate incursions into Chiapas; this war has been defensive. In recent years, the EZLN has focused on a strategy of civil resistance; the Zapatistas' main body is made up of rural indigenous people, but it includes some supporters in urban areas and internationally. The EZLN's main spokesperson is Subcomandante Insurgente Galeano known as Subcomandante Marcos. Unlike other Zapatista spokespeople, Marcos is not an indigenous Maya; the group takes its name from Emiliano Zapata, the agrarian reformer and commander of the Liberation Army of the South during the Mexican Revolution, sees itself as his ideological heir. Nearly all EZLN villages contain murals with images of Zapata, Ernesto "Che" Guevara, Subcomandante Marcos.
While EZLN ideology reflects libertarian socialism, the Zapatistas have rejected and defied political classification, retaining its distinctiveness due in part to the importance of indigenous Mayan beliefs to the Zapatistas. The EZLN aligns itself with the wider alter-globalization, anti-neoliberal social movement, seeking indigenous control over their local resources land. Since their 1994 uprising was countered by the Mexican army, the EZLN has abstained from military offensives and adopted a new strategy that attempts to garner Mexican and international support; the Zapatistas describe themselves as a decentralized organization. The pseudonymous Subcommandante Marcos is considered its leader despite his claims that the group has no single leader. Political decisions are decided in community assemblies. Military and organizational matters are decided by the Zapatista area elders who compose the General Command. Ejército Zapatista de Liberación Nacional was founded on November 17, 1983, by non-indigenous members of the FLN guerrilla group from Mexico's urban north and by indigenous inhabitants of the remote Las Cañadas/Selva Lacandona regions in eastern Chiapas, by members of former rebel movements.
Over the years, the group grew, building on social relations among the indigenous base and making use of an organizational infrastructure created by peasant organizations and the Catholic church. The Zapatista Army went public on January 1, 1994, the day when the North American Free Trade Agreement came into effect. On that day, they issued their First Revolutionary Laws from the Lacandon Jungle; the declaration amounted to a declaration of war on the Mexican government, which they considered so out of touch with the will of the people as to make it illegitimate. The EZLN stressed that it opted for armed struggle due to the lack of results achieved through peaceful means of protest, their initial goal was to instigate a revolution against the rise of neoliberalism throughout Mexico, but since no such revolution occurred, they used their uprising as a platform to call the world's attention to their movement to protest the signing of the EU, which the EZLN believed would increase the gap between rich and poor people in Chiapas—a prediction affirmed by subsequent developments.
Gaining attention on a global level through their convention called the Intercontinental Encounter for Humanity and Against Neoliberalism, attended by 3,000 activists worldwide, the Zapatistas were able to help initiate a united platform for other anti-neoliberal groups. This project did not detract from the Zapatistas' national activism efforts, but rather expanded their existent ideologies; the EZLN called for greater democratization of the Mexican government, controlled by the Partido Revolucionario Institucional for 65 years, for land reform mandated by the 1917 Constitution of Mexico but ignored by the PRI. The EZLN did not demand independence from Mexico, but rather autonomy in the form of land access and use of natural resources extracted from Chiapas, as well as protection from despotic violence and political inclusion of Chiapas' indigenous communities. On the morning of January 1, 1994, an estimated 3,000 armed Zapatista insurgents seized towns and cities in Chiapas, including Ocosingo, Las Margaritas, Huixtán, Rancho Nuevo and Chanal.
They freed the prisoners in the jail of San Cristóbal de las Casas and set fire to several police buildings and military barracks in the area. The guerrillas enjoyed brief success, but Mexican army forces counterattacked the next day, fierce fighting broke out in and around the market of Ocosingo; the Zapatista forces retreated from the city into the surrounding jungle. Armed clashes in Chiapas ended on January 12, with a ceasefire brokered by the Catholic diocese in San Cristóbal de las Casas under Bishop Samuel Ruiz, a well known liberation theologian who had taken up the cause of the indigenous people of Chiapas; the Zapatistas retained some of the land for a little over a year, but in February 1995 the Mexican army overran that territory in a surprise breach of ceasefire. Following this offensive, the Zapatista villages were abandoned, the rebels fled to the mo
United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues
The United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues is the UN's central coordinating body for matters relating to the concerns and rights of the world's indigenous peoples. "Indigenous person" means native, first people and aboriginal. There are more than 370 million indigenous people in some 70 countries worldwide; the forum is an advisory body within the framework of the United Nations System that reports to the UN's Economic and Social Council. The first indigenous to be elected to office at a United Nations meeting was Chief Ted Moses of the Grand Council of the Crees in Canada, in 1989; the creation of the Permanent Forum was discussed at the 1993 World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna, Austria. The Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action recommended that such a forum should be established within the first United Nations International Decade of the World's Indigenous Peoples. A working group was formed and various other meetings took place that led to the establishment of the permanent forum by Economic and Social Council Resolution 2000/22 on 28 July 2000.
The Forum is an advisory body to the Social Council. It submits recommendations to the Council on issues related to indigenous peoples, it holds a two-week session each year which takes place at the United Nations Headquarters in New York City but it could take place in Geneva or any other place as decided by the forum. The mandate of the Forum is to discuss indigenous issues related to economic and social development, the environment, education and human rights; the forum is to: Provide expert advice and recommendations to the Economic and Social Council and to the various programmes and agencies of the United Nations System through the Council. The Forum is composed of 16 independent experts, functioning in their personal capacity, who are appointed to three-year terms. At the end of their term, they can be re-appointed for one additional term. Of these 16 members, eight are nominated by the member governments and eight directly nominated by indigenous organizations; those nominated by the governments are elected to office by the Economic and Social Council based on the five regional groupings of the United Nations.
Whereas those nominated by indigenous organisations are appointed by the President of the Economic and Social Council and represent the seven socio-cultural regions for broad representation of the world's indigenous peoples. Members of the Permanent Forum, January 2017 to December 2019 To date, seventeen sessions have been held, all at UN Headquarters, New York: The Secretariat of the PFII was established by the General Assembly in 2002 with Resolution 57/191, it is based in the New York within the Division for Inclusive Social Development of the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. The Secretariat, among other things, prepares the annual sessions of the Forum, provides support and assistance to the Forum's members, promotes awareness of indigenous issues within the UN system and the public, serves as a source of information and a coordination point for indigenous-related efforts; the first International Decade of the World's Indigenous People "Indigenous People: Partnership in Action" was proclaimed by General Assembly resolution 48/163 with the main objective of strengthening international cooperation for the solution of problems faced by indigenous peoples in areas such as human rights, development and education.
The Second International Decade of the World's Indigenous People "Partnership for Action and Dignity" was proclaimed by the General Assembly at its 59th session, the programme of action was adopted at the 60th session. Its objectives are: Promoting non-discrimination and inclusion Full and effective participation in decision-making Re-define development policy from a vision of social equality Adopt targeted policies with emphasis on special groups Develop strong monitoring mechanisms and enhance accountability at all levels to protect the rights of indigenous peoples. To ensure diversity, the Forum's 16 Members are elected from different regions depending on who nominated them: The United Nations Regional Groups are used for the eight members nominated by governments and elected by the Economic and Social Council: African Group Asia-Pacific Group Eastern Europe Group Latin America and the Caribbean Group Western Europe and Other States GroupThe seven socio-cultural regions created by the Forum are used for the eight nominated by indigenous organisations and appointed by the President of the Economic and Social Council: Africa Asia Central and South America and the Caribbean The Arctic Central and Eastern Europe, Russian Federation, Central Asia and Transcaucasia North America The Pacific Note: Of the eight members nominated by indigenous organizations one must come from each of the seven regions, with one additional rotating seat among the first three first listed above.
Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Indigenous Peoples Climate Change Assessment Initiative United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues Establishment of a Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues - ECOSOC Resolution 2000/22 Statements during the 2006 Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues History of the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues State of The World's Indigenous Peoples - UN report, First Issue, 2009 Inter-Agency Support Group on Indigenous Issues Awareness raising film by Rebecca Sommer for the Secretariat of the UNPFII
Indigenous land rights
Indigenous land rights are the rights of indigenous peoples to land, either individually or collectively. Land and resource-related rights are of fundamental importance to indigenous peoples for a range of reasons, including: the religious significance of the land, self-determination and economic factors. Land is a major economic asset; the majority of indigenous peoples living in forest areas depend on the natural resources of their lands to fulfill their subsistence needs. Hunting, gathering of forest products, small garden plots still form the basis of their household economy; the security and permanence of their control and use of the natural resource base is more important to most indigenous groups than direct ownership of the land itself. The demand for ownership, in fact, derives from the need to ensure their access to these resources, so it is of particular importance to examine how the different national-level legal regimes handle this aspect of indigenous ownership. Land is an important instrument of inheritance and it is a symbol of social status.
The land is essential for people’s spiritual development. The land is sacred and everything they get from the land is a gift from their gods. Losing their land means a loss of contact with the earth and a loss of identity. Land is not only an asset with economic and financial value, but a important part of people's lives and belief systems. Indigenous land claims have been addressed, with varying degrees of success on the national and international level, since colonization; such claims may be based upon the principles of international law, common law, or domestic constitutions or legislation. Statutory recognition and protection of indigenous and community land rights continues to be a major challenge, with the gap between formally recognized and customarily held and managed land is a significant source of underdevelopment and environmental degradation. Indigenous land rights have been undermined by a variety of doctrines such as terra nullius; the foundational documents for indigenous land rights in international law include Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989, the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the American Convention on Human Rights.
Aboriginal title is the common law doctrine that the land rights of indigenous peoples to customary tenure persist after the assumption of sovereignty. Indigenous peoples may have certain rights on Crown land in many jurisdictions; the leading case for aboriginal title in Canada is British Columbia. Indigenous land rights were recognised in the Treaty of Waitangi made between the British Crown and various Māori chiefs; the Treaty itself has been ignored, but New Zealand courts have accepted the existence of native title. Controversies over indigenous land rights have tended to revolve around the means by which Māori lost ownership, rather than whether they had ownership in the first place; the foundational decision for aboriginal title in the United States is Johnson v. McIntosh, authored by Chief Justice John Marshall. Native Americans in the United States have been relegated to Indian reservations managed by tribes under the United States Department of the Interior's Bureau of Indian Affairs.
As the political systems of some Latin American countries are now becoming more democratic and open to listening and embracing the views of minorities these issues of land rights have come up to the surface of the political life. Despite this new “re-recognition” bit by bit, the indigenous groups are still among the poorest populations of the countries and they have less access to resources and they have lesser opportunities for progress and development; the legal situation of indigenous land rights in the countries of Latin America is varied. There is still a broad variation of indigenous rights and recognition throughout the whole continent. In the year 1957, the International Labour Organization, made the ILO Convention 107; this convention created laws and norms for the protection and integration of indigenous peoples in independent countries. All the independent countries of Latin America and the Caribbean of that time ratified this convention. Since the 1960s they started with the recognition of the first indigenous land claims since the colonial era.
In the year 1989 the ILO made the Convention 169. In this convention was the recognition of the close and important relationship between land and identity, or cultural identity important. Today this convention has been ratified by 15 Latin Caribbean countries; the years after the Mexican Revolution of 1910 saw agrarian reforms, in article 27 of the Mexican Constitution the encomienda system was abolished, the right to communal land for traditional communities was affirmed. Thus the ejido-system was created, which in practice should comprise the power of private investments by foreign corporations and absentee landlords, entitled the indigenous population to a piece of land to work and live on. Since the 1980s and 1990s the focus of Mexico's economic policy concentrated more on industrial development and attracting foreign capital; the Salinas government initiated a process of privatization of land. In 1992, as a condition for Mexico for entering the North American Free Trade Agreement with the US and Canada, art.4 and art.27 of the Constitution were modified, by means of which it became possibl
Bureau of Indian Affairs
The Bureau of Indian Affairs is an agency of the federal government of the United States within the U. S. Department of the Interior, it is responsible for the administration and management of 55,700,000 acres of land held in trust by the United States for Native Americans in the United States, Native American Tribes and Alaska Natives. The BIA is one of two bureaus under the jurisdiction of the Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs: the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Bureau of Indian Education, which provides education services to 48,000 Native Americans; the BIA’s responsibilities included providing health care to American Indians and Alaska Natives. In 1954 that function was transferred to the Department of Health and Welfare, it is now known as the Indian Health Service. Located in Washington, D. C. the BIA is headed by a bureau director. The current assistant secretary is Tara Sweeney; the BIA oversees 567 federally recognized tribes through 4 offices: Office of Indian Services: operates the BIA’s general assistance, disaster relief, Indian child welfare, tribal government, Indian Self-Determination, Indian Reservation Roads Program.
Office of Justice Services: directly operates or funds law enforcement, tribal courts, detention facilities on federal Indian lands. OJS funded 208 law enforcement agencies, consisting of 43 BIA-operated police agencies, 165 tribally operated agencies under contract, or compact with the OJS; the office has seven areas of activity: Criminal Investigations and Police Services, Detention/Corrections, Inspection/Internal Affairs, Tribal Law Enforcement and Special Initiatives, the Indian Police Academy, Tribal Justice Support, Program Management. The OJS provides oversight and technical assistance to tribal law enforcement programs when and where requested, it operates four divisions: Corrections, Drug Enforcement, the Indian Police Academy, Law Enforcement. Office of Trust Services: works with tribes and individual American Indians and Alaska Natives in the management of their trust lands and resources; the Office of Field Operations: oversees 12 regional offices. Agencies to relate to Native Americans had existed in the U.
S. government since 1775, when the Second Continental Congress created a trio of Indian-related agencies. Benjamin Franklin and Patrick Henry were appointed among the early commissioners to negotiate treaties with Native Americans to obtain their neutrality during the American Revolutionary War. In 1789, the U. S. Congress placed Native American relations within the newly formed War Department. By 1806 the Congress had created a Superintendent of Indian Trade, or "Office of Indian Trade" within the War Department, charged with maintaining the factory trading network of the fur trade; the post was held by Thomas L. McKenney from 1816 until the abolition of the factory system in 1822; the government licensed traders to have some control in Indian territories and gain a share of the lucrative trade. The abolition of the factory system left a vacuum within the U. S. government regarding Native American relations. The Bureau of Indian Affairs was formed on March 11, 1824, by Secretary of War John C.
Calhoun, who created the agency as a division within his department, without authorization from the United States Congress. He appointed McKenney as the first head of the office. McKenney preferred to call it the "Indian Office", whereas the current name was preferred by Calhoun. In 1832 Congress established the position of Commissioner of Indian Affairs. In 1849 Indian Affairs was transferred to the U. S. Department of the Interior. In 1869, Ely Samuel Parker was the first Native American to be appointed as commissioner of Indian affairs. One of the most controversial policies of the Bureau of Indian Affairs was the late 19th to early 20th century decision to educate native children in separate boarding schools, with an emphasis on assimilation that prohibited them from using their indigenous languages and cultures, it emphasized being educated to European-American culture. The bureau was renamed from Office of Indian Affairs to Bureau of Indian Affairs in 1947. With the rise of American Indian activism in the 1960s and 1970s and increasing demands for enforcement of treaty rights and sovereignty, the 1970s were a turbulent period of BIA history.
The rise of activist groups such as the American Indian Movement worried the U. S. government. As a branch of the U. S. government with personnel on Indian reservations, BIA police were involved in political actions such as: The occupation of BIA headquarters in Washington, D. C. in 1972: On November 3, 1972, a group of around 500 American Indians with the AIM took over the BIA building, the culmination of their Trail of Broken Treaties walk. They intended to bring attention to American Indian issues, including their demands for renewed negotiation of treaties, enforcement of treaty rights and improvement in living standards, they occupied the Department of Interior headquarters from November 3 to November 9, 1972. Feeling the government was ignoring them, the protesters vandalized the building. After a week, the protesters left. Many records were lost, destroyed or stolen, including irreplaceable treati
Violence is "the use of physical force so as to injure, damage, or destroy." Less conventional definitions are used, such as the World Health Organization's definition of violence as "the intentional use of physical force or power, threatened or actual, against oneself, another person, or against a group or community, which either results in or has a high likelihood of resulting in injury, psychological harm, maldevelopment, or deprivation."Globally, violence resulted in the deaths of an estimated 1.28 million people in 2013 up from 1.13 million in 1990. Of the deaths in 2013 842,000 were attributed to self-harm, 405,000 to interpersonal violence, 31,000 to collective violence and legal intervention. In Africa, out of every 100,000 people, each year an estimated 60.9 die a violent death. For each single death due to violence, there are dozens of hospitalizations, hundreds of emergency department visits, thousands of doctors' appointments. Furthermore, violence has lifelong consequences for physical and mental health and social functioning and can slow economic and social development.
In 2013, assault by firearm was the leading cause of death due to interpersonal violence, with 180,000 such deaths estimated to have occurred. The same year, assault by sharp object resulted in 114,000 deaths, with a remaining 110,000 deaths from personal violence being attributed to other causes. Violence in many forms can be preventable. There is a strong relationship between levels of violence and modifiable factors in a country such as concentrated poverty and gender inequality, the harmful use of alcohol, the absence of safe and nurturing relationships between children and parents. Strategies addressing the underlying causes of violence can be effective in preventing violence, although mental and physical health and individual responses, etc. have always been decisive factors in the formation of these behaviors. The World Health Organization divides violence into three broad categories: self-directed violence interpersonal violence collective violenceThis initial categorization differentiates between violence a person inflicts upon himself or herself, violence inflicted by another individual or by a small group of individuals, violence inflicted by larger groups such as states, organized political groups, militia groups and terrorist organizations.
These three broad categories are each divided further to reflect more specific types of violence: physical sexual psychological emotionalAlternatively, violence can be classified as either instrumental or reactive / hostile. Self-directed violence is subdivided into suicidal self-abuse; the former includes suicidal thoughts, attempted suicides – called para suicide or deliberate self-injury in some countries – and completed suicides. Self-abuse, in contrast, includes acts such as self-mutilation. Collective violence is subdivided into economic violence. Unlike the other two broad categories, the subcategories of collective violence suggest possible motives for violence committed by larger groups of individuals or by states. Collective violence, committed to advance a particular social agenda includes, for example, crimes of hate committed by organized groups, terrorist acts and mob violence. Political violence includes war and related violent conflicts, state violence and similar acts carried out by larger groups.
Economic violence includes attacks by larger groups motivated by economic gain – such as attacks carried out with the purpose of disrupting economic activity, denying access to essential services, or creating economic division and fragmentation. Acts committed by larger groups can have multiple motives; this typology, while imperfect and far from being universally accepted, does provide a useful framework for understanding the complex patterns of violence taking place around the world, as well as violence in the everyday lives of individuals and communities. It overcomes many of the limitations of other typologies by capturing the nature of violent acts, the relevance of the setting, the relationship between the perpetrator and the victim, – in the case of collective violence – possible motivations for the violence. However, in both research and practice, the dividing lines between the different types of violence are not always so clear. State violence involves upholding, forms of violence of a structural nature, such as poverty, through dismantling welfare, creating strict policies such as'welfare to work', in order to cause further stimulation and disadvantage Poverty as a form of violence may involve oppressive policies that target minority or low socio-economic groups.
The'war on drugs', for example, rather than increasing the health and well-being of at risk demographics, most results in violence committed against these vulnerable demographics through incarceration and police brutality War is a state of prolonged violent large-scale conflict involving two or more groups of people under the auspices of government. It is the most extreme form of collective violence. War is fought as a means of resolving territorial and other conflicts, as war of aggression to conquer territory or loot resources, in national self-defence or liberation, or to suppress attempts of part of the nation to secede from it. There are ideological and revolutionary wars. Since the Industrial Revolution the lethality of modern warfare has grown. World War I casualties were over 40 million and World War II casualties were over 70 million. Violence includes those acts that result from a power relationship, including threats and intimidation, neglect or acts of omission; such non-physical violence has
In the 19th century, manifest destiny was a held belief in the United States that its settlers were destined to expand across North America. There are three basic themes to manifest destiny: The special virtues of the American people and their institutions The mission of the United States to redeem and remake the west in the image of agrarian America An irresistible destiny to accomplish this essential dutyHistorian Frederick Merk says this concept was born out of "a sense of mission to redeem the Old World by high example... generated by the potentialities of a new earth for building a new heaven". Historians have emphasized that "manifest destiny" was a contested concept—Democrats endorsed the idea but many prominent Americans rejected it. Historian Daniel Walker Howe writes, "American imperialism did not represent an American consensus. Whigs saw America's moral mission as one of democratic example rather than one of conquest."Newspaper editor John O'Sullivan is credited with coining the term manifest destiny in 1845 to describe the essence of this mindset, a rhetorical tone.
The term was used by Democrats in the 1840s to justify the war with Mexico and it was used to divide half of Oregon with the United Kingdom. But manifest destiny always limped along because of its internal limitations and the issue of slavery, says Merk, it never became a national priority. By 1843, former U. S. President John Quincy Adams a major supporter of the concept underlying manifest destiny, had changed his mind and repudiated expansionism because it meant the expansion of slavery in Texas. Merk concluded: From the outset Manifest Destiny—vast in program, in its sense of continentalism—was slight in support, it lacked national, sectional, or party following commensurate with its magnitude. The reason was; the thesis that it embodied nationalism, found in much historical writing, is backed by little real supporting evidence. There was never a set of principles defining manifest destiny, therefore it was always a general idea rather than a specific policy made with a motto. Ill-defined but keenly felt, manifest destiny was an expression of conviction in the morality and value of expansionism that complemented other popular ideas of the era, including American exceptionalism and Romantic nationalism.
Andrew Jackson, who spoke of "extending the area of freedom", typified the conflation of America's potential greatness, the nation's budding sense of Romantic self-identity, its expansion. Yet Jackson would not be the only president to elaborate on the principles underlying manifest destiny. Owing in part to the lack of a definitive narrative outlining its rationale, proponents offered divergent or conflicting viewpoints. While many writers focused upon American expansionism, be it into Mexico or across the Pacific, others saw the term as a call to example. Without an agreed upon interpretation, much less an elaborated political philosophy, these conflicting views of America's destiny were never resolved; this variety of possible meanings was summed up by Ernest Lee Tuveson: "A vast complex of ideas and actions is comprehended under the phrase "Manifest Destiny". They are not, as we should expect, all compatible, nor do they come from any one source." Journalist John L. O'Sullivan was an influential advocate for Jacksonian democracy and a complex character, described by Julian Hawthorne as "always full of grand and world-embracing schemes".
O'Sullivan wrote an article in 1839 that, while not using the term "manifest destiny", did predict a "divine destiny" for the United States based upon values such as equality, rights of conscience, personal enfranchisement "to establish on earth the moral dignity and salvation of man". This destiny was not explicitly territorial, but O'Sullivan predicted that the United States would be one of a "Union of many Republics" sharing those values. Six years in 1845, O'Sullivan wrote another essay titled Annexation in the Democratic Review, in which he first used the phrase manifest destiny. In this article he urged the U. S. to annex the Republic of Texas, not only because Texas desired this, but because it was "our manifest destiny to overspread the continent allotted by Providence for the free development of our yearly multiplying millions". Overcoming Whig opposition, Democrats annexed Texas in 1845. O'Sullivan's first usage of the phrase "manifest destiny" attracted little attention. O'Sullivan's second use of the phrase became influential.
On December 27, 1845, in his newspaper the New York Morning News, O'Sullivan addressed the ongoing boundary dispute with Britain. O'Sullivan argued that the United States had the right to claim "the whole of Oregon": And that claim is by the right of our manifest destiny to overspread and to possess the whole of the continent which Providence has given us for the development of the great experiment of liberty and federated self-government entrusted to us; that is, O'Sullivan believed that Providence had given the United States a mission to spread republican democracy. Because Britain would not spread democracy, thought O'Sullivan, British claims to the territory should be overruled. O'Sullivan believed. O'Sullivan's original conception of manifest destiny was not a call for territorial expansion by force, he believed that the expansion of the United States would happen without the direction of the U. S. government or
Indigenous and Tribal Populations Convention, 1957
Indigenous and Tribal Populations Convention, 1957 is an International Labour Organization Convention within the United Nations, established in 1957. Its primary focus is to recognize and protect the cultural, religious and social rights of indigenous and tribal populations within an independent country, to provide a standard framework for addressing the economic issues that many of these groups face. Today this Convention, C107, is considered outdated in the protection of indigenous rights by the ILO organization. In 1989, the Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 was written with the purpose of revising it; the new convention has been ratified by twenty countries, including some that denounced the 1957 convention. In the body of the more recent convention, we read, " Considering that the developments which have taken place in international law since 1957, as well as developments in the situation of indigenous and tribal peoples in all regions of the world, have made it appropriate to adopt new international standards on the subject with a view to removing the assimilationist orientation of the earlier standards ".
The convention applies to members of a tribal population whose social and economic conditions are at a less advanced stage than other sections of the nation state and have their own customs and traditions. These tribal populations are people who are regarded as indigenous as they are the descendants of the original inhabitants of the region "...at the time of conquest, or colonization..." and who live more in common with their historical traditions and tribal institutions, than with the institutions of the nation state to which they belong. "Self-identification as indigenous..." is the criteria to which this convention would apply. The convention requires that the nation state work with indigenous groups to create a legal framework for protecting the legal rights of the indigenous groups; these actions include ensuring that the indigenous individuals have the same rights as the non-indigenous, to recognize and help preserve the traditions and cultural identity of the indigenous groups. Further actions include helping to remove economic gaps between the indigenous and other members of the nation state.
The convention maintains that indigenous and tribal peoples shall enjoy human rights and freedoms without discrimination, including gender discrimination. The nation state will adopt protections for the "...safeguarding the persons, property, labour and environment of the peoples concerned." These measures are not to be in conflict with the wishes of the people concerned, such safeguards will not be at the expense of the general rights of citizenship of the indigenous peoples. These articles support articles 1-4, giving methods for carrying out the general policy of the convention; the indigenous and tribal populations shall have right of ownership over lands that they populations have traditionally occupied. 1. The indigenous and tribal populations shall not be removed without their free consent from their historical territories except regarding national laws, national security issues, national economic development, or for the health of the indigenous populations.2. If removal of these populations is necessary, they shall be given lands of equal quality to the lands occupied by them, suitable to provide for their present needs and future development.3.
Persons thus removed shall be compensated for any resulting loss or injury. 1. Traditional customs of the transfer of land ownership rights shall be respected by the nation state "...within the framework of national laws and regulations... and do not hinder their economic and social development."2. "Arrangements shall be made to prevent persons who are not members of the populations concerned from taking advantage of these customs or of lack of understanding of the laws on the part of the members of these populations to secure the ownership or use of the lands belonging to such members". National state farm programs shall provide the necessary land needed for the indigiouns groups to provide "...the essentials of a normal existence", "...promote the development of the lands which these populations possess." This clause deals with the rights of access to full and occupationally safe employment, without fear of discrimination, under the same conditions as of the rest of the population, provides for the right to join legal trade unions, with access to "medical and social assistance..." and adequate housing.
"Persons belonging to the populations concerned shall enjoy the same opportunities as other citizens in respect of vocational training facilities." If there are no vocational training programs in place for this population, the government will provide them. After a careful study of the economic environment and the "...stage of cultural development" and practical needs of the indigenous population, the government shall provide vocational training programs for them. These special training facilities shall be provided for "...only so long as the stage of cultural development of the populations concerned requires them," until they are replaced by the facilities provided for other citizens. 1. Handicrafts and rural industries shall be encouraged for economic development in a manner which will enable these populations to raise their standard of living, "...in a manner which preserves the cultural heritage of these populations and improves their artistic values and particular modes of cultural expression."
Government social security programs shall be extended to all wage earners and other persons belonging to these populations. Governments will provide adequate health services for the populations concerned, based on studies of their social and cultural conditions. Equal educational opportuniti