Indigenous People. Definitions and Concepts from the approach of International Law. (original) (raw)

DEFINING OR IDENTIFYING INDIGENOUS PEOPLES

The article is purpose of this article is too simple, a contribution the debate of the defining Indigenous people. No universal definition has come out, as UN declaration was not followed by all states. To work for Indigenous people, everyone defines as classical research design says so. No research paradigm counts and considers that one name or definition cannot appropriately address the world's 5000 Indigenous people, when the only (the Fifth Paradigm) Indigenous Research Paradigm (IRP) is concomitant with the people. Seeing all the contribution, locally, internationally, scholarlyit is assumed that Indigenous is the shining issues, and starts from the definition. This paper is not anti with the global debate, but, an antipasto for our research relation, which is reciprocal and reflexive, and for future research. The position is evident, conceptually and practically, that as an iconoclast argument, we have made the space for the indigenous people for their voicewhich is absolutely not definitional or identical rather identifying themselves with their own pace. This paper, at first, showing the ground of manking indigenous architecturewith philosophical and empirical-since the very beginning of the modern age. Then we explained the role palyed by the inrer Governmental organizations (IGOs) and Other Non Governmental Organizations NGOs. We analyzed then the shift of terminologies in addressing (We read controlling) Indigenous people, tribal people to ethnic people. Before drawing own argument, not conclusion, we saw the status of Indigenous people in few countreis. Thus our voice is people's voice and argument is not a conclusion, however an argument, and we are to establish from our part with the Rakhain People of Bangladesh.

WHO IS INDIGENOUS? DEFINITIONS OF INDIGENEITY

This article is based on indigenous research focusing on indigeneity and membership in indigenous group at the individual level. The position and rights of indigenous peoples gained a foothold at the political arenas of the world and in international agreements since the turn of the 1990s when indigenous peoples and minorities were started to be distinguished from each other. Indigenous peoples were considered to have collective rights regarding control over certain areas colonized by the mainstream population at a certain point of history. The aim is first to review the different membership criteria within different Indigenous groups in the world, and then to emphasize the definition of Sámi in Finland and its individual-level challenges. As a result of this paper, it seems that the individual-level indigenous identity does not necessarily correspond with the membership in indigenous group. When indigenous identity is not being accepted for one reason or another it violates the international declarations for indigenous peoples and may cause challenges both at individual and societal levels within indigenous communities.

Indigenous Peoples under International Law: An Asian Perspective

2012

This thesis analyzes Asian understandings of the definition of indigenous peoples in international law. The rights of indigenous peoples have emerged strongly in the international domain, culminating in 2007 with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Yet, the question of definition and identity of indigenous peoples remains uncertain and indeterminate, at least from an Asian perspective.

PROTECTING THE RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES IN INTERNATIONAL LAW

International Relations and International Law Journal, 2020

This research paper investigates a broad understanding of the concept of protecting the rights of Minorities and Indigenous peoples as one of the development practices in international law. In particular, the research will deal with the protection and rights of Indigenous peoples which is already enshrined in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Consequently, it is regarded to be a legal document of these communities in order to develop themselves and protect their rights as regards land, resources and others. The another aim of this paper is to critically discuss the issue concerning the rights of lands and property of indigenous peoples, and also according to international provision whether state can launch economic project on the territory of indigenous peoples without their consent. Further, the study showed that the UN international instruments also helped for the protection of indigenous people and minority rights. However, still the international order needs certain enhancement in the international covenants and international organizations role in this regard is very crucial.

The Inherent Rights of Indigenous Peoples in International Law

2020

This book highlights the cogency and urgency of the protection of indigenous peoples and discusses crucial aspects of the international legal theory and practice relating to their rights. These rights are not established by states; rather, they are inherent to indigenous peoples because of their human dignity, historical continuity, cultural distinctiveness, and connection to the lands where they have lived from time immemorial. In the past decades, a new awareness of the importance of indigenous rights has emerged at the international level. UN organs have adopted specific international law instruments that protect indigenous peoples. Nonetheless, concerns persist because of continued widespread breaches of such rights. Stemming from a number of seminars organised at the Law Department of the University of Roma Tre, the volume includes contributions by distinguished scholars and practitioners. It is divided into three parts. Part I introduces the main themes and challenges to be ad...

Indigenous peoples: Indigeneity, indigeny or indigenism?

In: Christoph Antons (ed.), "Routledge Handbook of Asian Law", pp. 362–377, 2017

The terms ‘indigenous people(s)’ and ‘indigeneity’ are multiply ambiguous. Their use without further qualification obscures key differences between the various real-world circumstances that they are typically applied to. This leads to confusion when the label ‘indigenous’ is employed in formal deliberations over political, cultural and land rights. To achieve clarity, some further distinctions need to be observed, most importantly between ‘indigeny’ and ‘indigenism’, between ‘tribal’ and ‘indigenous’, and between ‘indigeny’ and ‘exogeny’. Indigeny (the continued habitation of the same specific places that one’s familial ancestors always lived in) differs qualitatively in its cultural, economic and psychological consequences from all other circumstances that are labelled ‘indigenous’. Most of the latter arise within the tacitly exogenous context that underpins modernity, which is made possible by not living continuously where one’s ancestors lived. These usages are examples of ‘indigenism’ in its several varieties, rather than indigeny. The exogenous framework emphasises formal rationality and codified legal systems, which makes it difficult for the ‘native-title’ concerns of truly place-linked indigenous people to be argued for and judged fairly in court. Without due care, therefore, indigenist arguments may sometimes act against the interests of true place-linked indigenes. Further confusion results from the conventional use of ‘indigenous’ as a synonym of ‘tribal’, which brings together two distinct and sometimes antithetical social circumstances under a single label, since it is also authentically applicable to many peasant populations. Treating both tribespeople and peasants in an undifferentiated manner as simply ‘indigenous’ peoples misrepresents their distinct life-circumstances, especially with regard to matters of religion, language and mode of attachment to land. Examples drawn from several different Asian countries demonstrate the varying and sometimes antithetical ways in which the idea of ‘indigenous peoples’ has been applied – or ignored – and hence the necessity to employ it with more care than has usually been the case.