| The theory of International Human Rights Law (thereinafter IHRL) is based on democracy, fairness, justice, equality and human dignity. The protection of the human family members is right-based one. The progress and development of human society can never be at the cost of the rights and interests of some members and some groups in the human family. Also, the progress and development of a people can never be at the cost of the rights and interests of other peoples. To achieve democracy, fairness, justice, equality and to maintain human dignity in human progress and development, the existing IHRL has established three law systems for protecting the peoples' rights according to their legal status and rights recognized by it: the first law system is the one that protects the rights of nations, which have the country boundary as their label; the second law system is the one that protects the rights of nations and peoples, which are in the subjection to alien, especially colonialist, subjugation, domination and exploitation; the third law system that protects the rights of the ethnic groups within a state, which have their own cultural distinctiveness and are usually called national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities (thereinafter minorities) in IHRL. Indigenous people can either protected by the second law system or protected by the third law system, but it is their such status that they can not be well-protected by IHRL. That is to say, because of their distinctiveness, they cannot in fact enjoy the rights given by the former and the latter cannot build a strong wall to shield them from their human rights violation.The distinctiveness of indigenous peoples lies in that within the states' jurisdiction, it is impossible for them to develop into a nation, that is, they can only exist in the world with the status of sub-nation or national minorities. But actually they are quite difference from non-indigenous ethnic minorities, especially those who because of various causes and reasons have immigrated or population-flown into a country and formed into different ethnic groups. What is their differences from the latter's characteristics is that they are territorially-concentrated to live on their ancestral lands that came down to them for generations, and that their distinctive culture has closely connected with the natural environment. This link with natural environment cannot cut and if this happens, their distinctive cultural will disappear or extinguished, even though they are physically survival. It means that as the cultural carrier the group exists in name only.Therefore, there gradually has come out the fourth law system in IHRL, that is, the special law system for protection of indigenous peoples' human rights. Although there are some international legislation in the form of various IHRL documents on the protection of indigenous peoples' rights. But there is in absence of a programmatic legal document, with guiding principles and which enshrines and confirms indigenous peoples' rights comprehensively. Not until " United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (thereinafter UNDRIP) " came into the world, has the fourth law system for protection of indigenous peoples basically completed. UNDRIP not only generalizes the rights confirmed for indigenous peoples by the existing IHRL documents, but also recognizes the legal status of indigenous peoples and confirms more rights for them by setting up the minimum standards of achievement, thus greatly raises the degree of protecting indigenous peoples by IHRL. UNDRIP is the milestone legal document in the history of IHR, as it stands for the development and perfection of the law system for protection of the peoples' rights in IHRL. The document is importantly meaningful and gives much food for thought. As it is legally valuable, both importance and study should be given to it.This dissertation focuses on several legal problems relating with indigenous peoples' rights and makes study and exploration on them. First, to analyses and discusses the concepts of nations, peoples, indigenous peoples and national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities in legal terms, as well as the status and rights they accorded by IHRL, in order to make clear the differences between and connections of the status and rights they enjoy. Second, to explore some of important rights of indigenous peoples such as their right to self-determination, their land right, their right to natural environment and their cultural right, by discussing the meaning, the applicative scope, the jurisdiction and legal ground of these rights in IHRL. Third, to conclude the ideas and opinions of this dissertation on these legal problems on indigenous peoples' rights by analyzing a great deal of literatures on the problems written and discussed the United States and the scholars in the academic field of IHRL.By this way of discussion, analysis and elaboration, this dissertation comes to the conclusion as following: though the provisions of UNDRIP are not jus cogens and have no legal binding on states, but they set up the minimum standards for protection of indigenous peoples and impose the obligations in morality and justice on states to protect indigenous peoples. These standards and norms, according to the international practices, will become international customary law and finally, in the future, become the legal norms that are jus cogens binding on states. However, UNDRIP represents not only the progress of the human rights deeds of the worldwide indigenous peoples, but also the new development in the field of IHRL. UNDRIP has significantly important legal meaning to the international protection of indigenous peoples, and the actual significance to the preservation of the biodiversity in global natural environment and cultural diversity in the human society. As for multinational or multiethnic states, particularly those containing indigenous peoples (no matter whether the state in which they live recognizes them or not), UNDRIP is a challenge to their policy, legal system and political arrangements, as well as their future relating policy-making and law-making. Multinational or multiethnic states, whether or not there are indigenous peoples, should take in the positive meaningful factors symbolized in UNDRIP, such as principles of fairness and justice, democracy and respect for human rights, equality and non-discrimination, good governance and good faith; the principles of cultural pluralism, respect for the rights of peoples and the dignity of peoples; the idea of harmonious interaction, coexistence and co-development among human diverse societies and cultures; the advocacy of respect for indigenous traditional knowledge, culture and customs, etc. At least, Multinational or multiethnic states should not pay no attention to the challenge UNDRIP has brought about and give responsive considerations to it.To achieve the purpose of the study, the structure of this dissertation consist of three parts, that is, introduction part, text part and conclusion part. The introduction part describes the meaning of the study, the information on the subject study status quo, the study outline and the main methods and ways to do the study, and induces the main problems discussed and the innovations sought by the dissertation . The conclusion part sums up the elaborations and gives out the opinion and suggestions. The text part is the core and the most important part of the dissertation, composed of twelve chapters, with each respectively independent but logically connected. The main content of each chapter summarized as following:Chapter 1 differentiates the concepts of "peoples" and "nation" in legal terms in IHRL and elaborates that the two legal terms are two different but interrelated concepts. A nation is a large community of peoples who have established their modern government and political system, while a people is a sub-national community. But they both are recognized by IHRL as the subject of the right to self-determination, namely, both of them are the right-holders or the beneficiaries of self-determination of the right to self-determination. In the discourse of IHRL, the concept of peoples is always closely associated with the right to self-determination, a basic human right that can be claimed on the international level.Chapter 2 comprehensively analyses the system of IRHL, considering it as an evolutionary and perfective system, as with the development of the human social life, human beings needs more rights to guarantee their own existence and development. Meanwhile, all human rights and fundamental freedoms are indivisible and interdependent. According to the conception of modern human rights, the concept of collective right has been generally accepted in the international community. Collective human rights are the human rights and fundamental freedoms enjoyed by particular human groups, especially by ethnic groups. In much more general, collective human rights indicates the rights of peoples, as the rights of peoples take up the core position in collective human rights. The collective rights which have been proclaimed, confirmed and elaborated by IRHL documents are the equal right, the right to self-determination, the right to sovereignty over the natural wealth and resources, the right to environment, the right to peace and security, etc.Chapter 3, after analyzing various terms, concepts and definitions, points out that all those who identifies themselves and are called as indigenous peoples have the same characteristics . Indigenous peoples are categorized as such because of their "indigenousness". The so-called "indigenousness" can be included as being preemptory in time; geographically, living in a particular relatively fixed area; having historical continuity with particular societies, especially the pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies that developed on their territories; sticking to the traditional culture which is closely dependent on natural environment. There is no definition of indigenous peoples in UNDRIP, but the lack of definition should never constitute the obstacle to the protection of and indigenous peoples and the resolution of their problems by IHRL and the UN mechanism. As a legal term, the concept of indigenous peoples has its broad and narrow senses. As far as the type is concerned, the worldwide indigenous peoples are sub-national peoples. Indigenous peoples in broad sense fall within the scope of the beneficiaries of the rights proclaimed and confirmed by UNDRIP and can be categorized into three kinds.Chapter 4 analyzes the form and evolution of the indigenous problems and gets to their root of the matter. Historically, indigenous peoples' existence and development were interrupted by the invasion, subjugation and colonization by the western colonialism, particularly in the modern history. At the present time, their existence and development have been once again threatened by industrialism-oriented modernization and globalization. They have been struggling to survive and develop in the history and in reality and seek for their own space to exist and develop under the various pressures and threats. Indigenous problems seemingly involve the existence and development of indigenous peoples, but in essence, they involve indigenous human rights problem. Non-respect for indigenous peoples' dignity as peoples leads to non-respect for their rights as peoples, and finally entails that they have lost their prerequisite and basic guarantee for existence and development. They need urgently states and the international community recognize their identity and status as peoples having uniqueness of their own, as well as their collective and individual rights as such.Chapter 5 considers that anthropologists are the most authoritative to have voice in the indigenous problems, after analyzing the connection between indigenous peoples and anthropology. Their connection lies in the fact that indigenous peoples has shaped anthropology and the latter has truly recorded the circumstances of the indigenous peoples and made its own academic contribution to introduction of indigenous culture. In the recent years, anthropologists are active in assuming the social and moral responsibility for indigenous culture and its creator, that is, indigenous peoples. With the efforts made together by indigenous peoples and anthropologists, indigenous problems have been put on the important agenda for consideration by the international community, thus making the indigenous problems enter the view of IHRL protection.Chapter 6 discusses the active role exerted respectively by both indigenous peoples and international community in struggle for indigenous peoples' rights. Having understood the indigenous peoples' values and contributions to the human society, the problems that the indigenous human rights should be seriously treated and resolved were put on the agenda of the international legislation. UN's attitude, understanding and way of resolution to the indigenous problems have been made much progress. UN has set up a series of mechanisms to resolve the indigenous problems. On one hand, these mechanisms help to hear the complaints from indigenous peoples, and on the other hand, in the process of the negotiation on UNDRIP, they act as a bridge between indigenous peoples and states, the both stake-holder sides, for them to well communicate. With the efforts made by indigenous peoples, international civil society, together with UN's relating mechanisms, UNDRIP at last has come into being as the representative achievement of the indigenous peoples human rights deeds.Chapter 7 explores the theories about problem of indigenous peoples' legal status. UNDRIP has established Indigenous peoples' legal status, thus resolved the problem. According to UNDRIP, indigenous peoples are recognized as peoples and entitled to the corresponding legal status. That is to say, indigenous peoples have the status of international personnel and their collective rights as peoples are protected by IHRL. And under the particular conditions, they can become the quasi-subject of International Law. Based on this legal status, indigenous peoples are entitled not only to all kinds of rights provided by "Bill of International Human Rights", but also other peculiar rights, such as the right to self-determination, the right to sovereignty over their natural wealth and resources, and the right to conclude treaty and agreement, etc.Chapter 8 by analyzing the various theories about the right to self-determination and the right to self-government or autonomy, elaborates that the right of indigenous peoples to self-determination does not entail including the right to secession from the country where they live. On one side, the importance of promoting and protecting the right of indigenous peoples to self-determination should be emphasized, on the other side, emphasis should be given that such promotion and protection should be beneficial to the political and social steadiness of the country where they live. Only if the government is a legitimate and democratic one, having full representation of all the peoples including indigenous peoples, the right of indigenous peoples to self-government or autonomy, that is, the side of internal self-determination is fully guaranteed and fulfilled, in such circumstances, if indigenous peoples insist on exercising the side of external self-determination, it is impossible for them to get recognition and support by the international community.Chapter 9 deals with the importance of indigenous peoples' land right and their right to natural environment. But there exists various manifestations of violations to their land entitlement and their right to environment. So the legal basis and solutions should be found out to maintain these rights. Indigenous land rights and their right to natural environment are indigenous peoples fundamental rights and the prerequisites of obtaining the necessities for their existence and development, and maintaining their cultural uniqueness. Therefore these rights should be given priority for consideration and emphasis. Intrusion on the indigenous land and violation of indigenous natural environment is not merely a long-term historical problem, but a actual problem that has taken place and is taking place. Although IHRL has made response to this, it relies on states and indigenous peoples to take a multitude of measures to maintain the rights of indigenous peoples to lands and natural environment.Chapter 10 elaborates the concept and value of indigenous peoples' cultural heritage and traditional knowledge and discusses the principles of and approaches to indigenous cultural rights. Considering that indigenous peoples' cultural heritage and traditional knowledge are vital to indigenous peoples themselves and that their cultural heritage and traditional knowledge are at stake with destruction and disappearance, the principle of the common heritage of humanity, the principle of cultural diversity, the principle of indigenous peoples being the main beneficiary, etc. should be persisted, and all the social strength should be mobilized to actively, positively and conscientiously to maintain the cultural right of indigenous peoples.Chapter 11 discusses the right of indigenous peoples to natural environment. The discussion is related to the actual conditions and the value of the exercise of the right, the framework of the system and the program of action about the protection of the right in IHRL. The right to environment has been confirmed by a series of international law documents in IHRL and International Environment law and is now considered as an indivisible part of "the new generation of the human rights". These international 1a documents has formed a series of protection standards and principle framework, within which being faced with the problem of environment, in the use and development of natural wealth and resources., indigenous peoples have the right to free and informed consent, the right to participation, the right to avoidance of adverse impact, the right to share the benefit, the right to get fair and equal compensation for damage, the right to ask for restoration of the polluted and destructed environment, etc.Chapter 12 concludes the achievement in protection of the national minorities rights in China and introduces the Chinese government's basic attitude to and position on the international human right protection. China has creatively established the national minorities regional autonomy regime, which conforms with the reality and conditions of China. The new-typed national relationship with the characteristics of equality, solidarity, friendliness and mutual aid has been established, and the remarkable accomplishments has been got in the field of protecting the national minorities human rights. In addition, China has been active to participate in the international cooperation and the international campaign to protect the national minorities human rights. In a line of international human right campaigns, China sticks to the correct position, opposes colonialism, apartheid and racial discrimination, and has done a great deal of work for the international community in the national minorities human right deeds. UNDRIP which China voted for is useful for us in understanding the new idea, tendency and approach, etc. of human rights protection and will give us some enlightenment in all dimensions. However, still we will take our ways as dominant factors, choose and follow what is good, work toward the further perfection of our ethno-national legal system and regional national minorities autonomy regime, increasingly arise the level of national minorities human rights protection, and make the Chinese characteristic contribution to the maintenance of international human rights deeds .
|
PDF Full Text Request