Part of a series on |
Indigenous rights |
---|
Rights |
Human rights · Racial Discrimination Self-determination · Forced assimilation Forced relocation · Cultural heritage Freedom of religion · Cultural diversity Land rights · Traditional knowledge Intellectual property · Language Land use planning · Right to Identity Conflict Resolution · Gender equality |
Governmental organizations |
UNPFII · ACHPR · AADNC · Arctic Council FUNAI · Council of Indigenous Peoples CDI · NCIP · Bureau of Indian Affairs |
NGOs and political groups |
Amazon Watch · AFN · CAP · COICA CONAIE · Cultural Survival · EZLN · fPcN IPACC · IPCB · IWGIA · NARF · ONIC Survival International · UNPO · (more) |
Issues |
Colonialism · Civilizing mission / Manifest Destiny Cultural genocide · Postdevelopment theory Bantustan · Indian reservation · Indian reserve |
Legal Representation |
ILO 169 · United Nations Declaration |
Related Categories |
Organizations · Politics · Books · Activists Publications · Documentaries · Movies |
The term indigenous people can be used in the context of with various concepts of indigeneity.
Key to a contemporary understanding of 'indigeneity' is the political role an ethnic group plays, for all other criteria usually taken to denote indigenous groups (territory, poverty, race, history, dependency on natural resources, etc.) can to a greater or lesser extent also be applied to majority cultures. Therefore, the distinction applied to indigenous ethnic groups can be formulated as: “a politically underprivileged group, who share a similar ethnic identity different from the nation in power, and who have been an ethnic entity in the locality before the present ruling nation took over power” (Greller, 1997).
The specific term indigenous peoples has a much more restrictive interpretation when it used in more formalised, legalistic and academic settings, associated with the collective rights of human populations. In these contexts, the term is used to denote particular peoples and groups around the world who, as well as being native to or associated with some given territory, meet certain other criteria (such as those expressed in the definitions detailed below). This article is concerned with the latter, and not the former, sense of the term.
There are various formulations of these defining characteristics in existence. Most are commonly drawn from a few widely-acknowledged authorities, in particular the Martínez Cobo – WGIP statement. These several definitions are nonetheless widely recognised and employed by international and rights-based non-governmental organizations, as well as among national/sub-national governments themselves —although this is decidedly not universal or free from dispute. The degree to which indigenous peoples' rights and issues are accepted and recognised in practical instruments such as treaties and other binding and non-binding agreements varies, sometimes considerably.
The status of the indigenous group in this relationship can be characterized in most instances as an effectively marginalized, isolated or minoritised one, in comparison to other groups or the nation-state as a whole. Their ability to influence and participate in the external policies that may exercise jurisdiction over their traditional lands and practices is very frequently limited.
This situation can persist even in the case where the indigenous population outnumbers that of the other inhabitants of the region or state; the defining notion here is one of separation from decision and regulatory processes that have some, at least titular, influence over aspects of their community and lands.
The presence of external laws, claims and cultural mores either potentially or actually act to variously constrain the practices and observances of an indigenous society. These constraints can be observed even when the indigenous society is regulated largely by its own tradition and custom. They may be purposefully imposed, or arise as unintended consequence of trans-cultural interaction; and have a measurable effect even where countered by other external influences and actions deemed to be beneficial or which serve to promote indigenous rights and interests within the wider community.
Thus many organizations advocating for indigenous rights, and the indigenous communities themselves, seek to particularly and explicitly identify peoples in this position as indigenous. This identification may also be made or acknowledged by the surrounding communities and nation-state, although there are some instances where the identity claim is the subject of some dispute, particularly with regard to recognizing assertions made over territorial rights.
Contents |
In 1972 the United Nations Working Group on Indigenous Populations (WGIP) accepted as a preliminary definition a formulation put forward by Mr. José Martínez Cobo, Special Rapporteur on Discrimination against Indigenous Populations:
This definition has some limitations which were subsequently noted by the organization. The definition applies mainly to pre-colonial populations, and would likely exclude other isolated or marginal societies. In 1983 the WGIP enlarged this definition (FICN. 41Sub.211983121 Adds. para. 3 79) to include the following criteria:
In 1986 it was further added that any individual who identified himself or herself as indigenous and was accepted by the group or the community as one of its members was to be regarded as an indigenous person (E/CN.4/Sub.2/1986/7/Add.4. para.381).
The draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples prepared by the DWIG does not provide a specific definition of indigenous peoples or populations. According to the Chairperson, Ms. Erica Irene Daes, Rapporteur of the Working Group, this was because "historically, indigenous peoples have suffered, from definitions imposed by others" (E/CN.4/Sub.2/AC.4/1995/3, page 3).
A definition as used by the International Labour Organisation (Convention No. 169, concerning the working rights of Indigenous and Tribal Peoples, 1989) applies to:
A description of Indigenous Peoples given by the World Bank (operational directive 4.20, 1991) reads as follows:
Indigenous Peoples of the Philippines (Tagalog: Katutubong Tao sa Pilipinas; Cebuano: Lumad or Tumandok; Ilocano: Umili a Tattao iti Filipinas) refers to a group of people or homogenous societies, identified by self-ascription and ascription by others, who have continuously lived as an organized community on communally bounded and defined territory, and who have, under claims of ownership since time immemorial, occupied, possessed and used such territories, sharing common bonds of language, customs, traditions and other distinctive cultural traits, or who have, through inroads of colonization, non-indigenous religions, and cultures, become historically differentiated from the majority of the Filipinos.[1]
The indigenous peoples also include peoples who are regarded as indigenous based on their descent from the populations which inhabited the country at the time of inroads of non-indigenous religions and cultures or the establishment of present state boundaries, who retain some or all of their own social, economic, cultural and political institutions, but who may have been displaced from their traditional domains or who may have resettled outside their ancestral domains.
|