UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (Apr 2010)
Human rights learning often occurs best when specific issues arise either in the school community or beyond that attract attention and can be explored using a human rights lens. The controversy surrounding the Government’s announcement on 20 April that New Zealand now supports the
UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples is one such opportunity.
Since its adoption by overwhelming vote of the UN General Assembly in 2007 the Declaration has been of particular significance for Aotearoa given the place of tangata whenua in our society, and the way the Declaration echoes and reinforces articles 2 and 3 of the Treaty of Waitangi.
Possible inquiry questions for students:
• Why was it thought necessary to develop a ‘declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples’? Which human rights (from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights) have frequently been unrecognised and violated when it comes to indigenous peoples? Why might this be so?
• What is the relationship between the Declaration and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights? What is generally the difference between UN declarations and UN treaties?
• Why was New Zealand one of four countries that voted against the adoption of the Declaration in September 2007? Which articles of the Declaration caused concern? Why did the Government decide to support the Declaration in 2010? How have interpretations of the significance of the Declaration varied?
The following teaching points may be useful:
• Rights declarations – while often not binding in law – have played a huge role in the development of human rights, ranging from the 1688 English Declaration of Right, the 1776 US Declaration of Independence, the 1789 French Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen, the 1924 League of Nations Declaration on the Rights of the Child, to the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights which is the cornerstone of the international human rights framework. They have inspired generations of people, and have developed moral force, often acquiring, through use, the force of law. UN declarations often represent a significant milestone in a process that results in human rights treaties – which are binding in international law for those countries that sign and then ratify them.
• Of course indigenous people had human rights before the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, but the Declaration spells out what human rights mean in practice given the particular situation of indigenous peoples. In many countries indigenous populations are vulnerable because of a failure to understand and respect key elements of their culture; for example, their customary occupation and use of land may not be recognised by later settler administrations and law, or use of their language may be suppressed.
• Like other UN declarations, the Declaration was not ‘signed’. It was adopted by the UN General Assembly by an overwhelming vote on 13 September 2007. New Zealand was one of only four countries voting against, mainly because of fears of what ‘self-determination’ may mean.
• The New Zealand Government has now signalled its support for the Declaration. Representing New Zealand in New York, Dr Pita Sharples said the decision ‘restores [New Zealand’s] mana and our moral authority to speak in international fora on issues of justice, rights and peace’.
• As the 21 April
NZ Herald editorial argued, New Zealand ‘comes closer than most to meeting the aspirations espoused in the UN declaration’.
Teachers wishing to explore some of the reasons for the development of a specific declaration on the human rights of indigenous peoples may find the following links useful:
Wikipedia: Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Survival International, including
‘Avatar is real’, say tribal people University of Minnesota Study Guide on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Making the Declaration Work – an insiders’ account of the development and significance of the Declaration
Last Updated (Monday, 31 May 2010 10:41)