As the United Nations General Assembly prepared to vote on the landmark Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, a significant shadow was cast by the staunch opposition of Canada. This article delves into the complexities surrounding the declaration, Canada’s controversial stance, and the broader implications for indigenous communities worldwide. The impending adoption of the declaration on September 13th, marked a pivotal moment in the global recognition of indigenous rights, yet the path to this point was fraught with political maneuvering and dissenting voices, most notably that of the Canadian government.
The UN Declaration: A Beacon of Hope for Indigenous Populations
The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples represents a comprehensive articulation of the minimum standards for the survival, dignity, and well-being of the indigenous peoples of the world. It is a non-binding instrument, meaning it doesn’t create legally enforceable obligations under international law in the same way as a treaty. However, its significance lies in its moral and political weight, serving as a guiding framework for states in their interactions with indigenous populations.
The declaration addresses a wide range of issues, including:
- Self-determination: The right of indigenous peoples to freely determine their political status and pursue their economic, social, and cultural development.
- Land and resource rights: The recognition of indigenous peoples’ rights to own, use, develop, and control the lands, territories, and resources they have traditionally possessed or occupied.
- Cultural rights: The right to maintain, protect, and develop their cultural heritage, traditional knowledge, and distinct customs.
- Non-discrimination: The guarantee of equal rights and protection under the law, free from discrimination based on their indigenous identity.
- Free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC): The right to be consulted and to give or withhold their consent before any project or activity that may affect their lands, territories, or resources.
For many indigenous communities, particularly those in developing countries, the declaration offers a vital tool to combat systemic discrimination, protect their lands and resources, and advocate for their rights in the face of government policies that often marginalize or even endanger them. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon emphasized the critical importance of the declaration, highlighting that discrimination against indigenous peoples contributes to disproportionately high rates of poverty and other social ills.
Canada’s Contentious Opposition
Despite its reputation as a champion of human rights on the global stage, Canada found itself isolated and criticized for its vigorous campaign to undermine the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Under the then-Conservative government, Canada argued that the declaration was fundamentally flawed, citing concerns about its vagueness and potential for misinterpretation.
A key point of contention for Canada centered on the declaration’s provisions regarding lands and resources. The government feared that these provisions could be interpreted as granting indigenous groups overly broad ownership rights, potentially jeopardizing existing treaties and settled land claims. A synopsis of Canada’s position, published on the Indian Affairs website, expressed concern that the declaration could be used "to support claims to broad ownership rights over traditional territories, even where rights were lawfully ceded through treaty."
Ted Yeomans, a spokesperson for the Minister of Indian Affairs, Chuck Strahl, further elaborated on Canada’s concerns, stating that "the wording is inconsistent with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, our Constitution Act, previous Supreme Court decisions, the National Defence Act and policies under which we negotiate treaties." The Canadian government maintained that no previous administration had supported the declaration in its current form.
However, this stance was not without internal dissent. Documents obtained by Amnesty International through Access to Information requests revealed that government officials within Foreign Affairs, Indian Affairs, and National Defence had advised the government to support the declaration. This internal conflict suggested that Canada’s opposition was driven more by political considerations than by genuine legal or constitutional concerns.
A "Crime" Against Indigenous Peoples?
The intensity of Canada’s opposition drew sharp criticism from indigenous leaders and human rights advocates around the world. Joseph Ole Simel, co-ordinator of the African Regional Indigenous Caucus, went so far as to describe Canada’s stance as a "crime" against indigenous peoples globally and within Canada itself. He argued that Canada’s opposition undermined its credibility as a promoter of democracy and human rights, particularly in developing nations.
Other critics pointed out the apparent hypocrisy of Canada’s position, given its historical role in the drafting of the declaration. Les Malezer, chairman of the Global Indigenous Peoples Caucus, noted that Canada had been a leading advocate for the declaration under the previous Liberal government, pushing for clarifications on land and resource issues but remaining a clear proponent of the overall document. The sudden shift in policy under the Conservative government was seen by many as a purely political maneuver, lacking in good faith and detrimental to the cause of indigenous rights.
Canada’s Allies in Opposition
Canada’s efforts to derail the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples involved aligning itself with other countries that had expressed reservations about the document. These included Russia and Colombia, both nations with complex histories of dealing with indigenous populations and resource extraction on indigenous lands.
While other countries, such as the United States, Australia, and New Zealand, had also voiced concerns about certain aspects of the declaration, Canada emerged as the most vocal and prominent opponent. This leadership role drew particular criticism, given Canada’s history and its self-proclaimed commitment to human rights.
The Global Perspective: Why the Declaration Matters
The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples is not merely a symbolic gesture; it represents a crucial step towards addressing the systemic injustices and inequalities faced by indigenous communities worldwide. It provides a framework for governments to engage with indigenous peoples in a respectful and equitable manner, recognizing their rights to self-determination, land, culture, and non-discrimination.
The declaration’s emphasis on free, prior, and informed consent is particularly significant in the context of resource extraction and development projects that often encroach on indigenous lands and territories. By requiring governments and corporations to consult with indigenous communities and obtain their consent before proceeding with such projects, the declaration aims to protect indigenous rights and prevent environmental degradation.
Moving Forward: The Implications of Adoption
Despite Canada’s opposition, the UN General Assembly was poised to adopt the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. While the declaration is non-binding, its adoption signaled a significant shift in the global landscape of indigenous rights. It provided indigenous communities with a powerful advocacy tool to hold their governments accountable and demand respect for their rights.
For Canada, the adoption of the declaration presented a challenge. The government had to decide whether to continue its opposition, risking further international condemnation, or to find a way to reconcile its concerns with the principles of the declaration. The declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, no thanks to Canada, would still go on.
The future of indigenous rights in Canada and around the world depended on the willingness of governments to engage with indigenous peoples in good faith and to implement the principles of the declaration in a meaningful way. The path forward required a commitment to dialogue, respect, and a recognition of the inherent rights of indigenous peoples to self-determination and a sustainable future. The UN Set to Adopt Native Rights Declaration, no thanks to Canada, became a rallying cry. UN Set to Adopt Native Rights Declaration, no thanks to Canada.