Page 37 - Rights beautiful : collection of Professor Saneh Chamarik

Rights Beautiful Collection of Professor Saneh Chamarik

(v) Environment integrity;
(vi) Intellectual property rights;
(vii) Recognition of customary law and practice;
(viii) Farmers’ Rights.
The two, (i) and (ii), in particular are technically ambivalent
regarding the question of jurisdiction. While the CBD confirms the
sovereign rights of States over indigenous peoples’ lands, territories, and
natural resources, both the ICESCR and ICCPR stress the rights of all
“peoples” in plural number to self-determination and to freely dispose
of their natural wealth and resources. So under the circumstances,
indigenous peoples are concerned, quite justifiably, that such sovereign
rights might just as well be extended and encroaching upon their
traditional knowledge, innovations, and practices. On the other hand,
the view in favour of minorities is opposed by national governments
for fear of the national integrity and their own sovereign rights being
eroded thereby. All in all, then, as far as the international agreements
with legal binding are concerned and under the existing structure of
power relationships, there is bound to be a gap and insoluble contradictions.
In this perspective, it makes sense for a new initiative being taken
from within the United Nations in a long process of consultation with
indigenous leaders, and that resulted in the DDRIP with a fairly
comprehensive framework to work with. Though not legally binding,
it is meant to serve as the standard international document and thus the
basis for any further discussions and negotiations concerning indigenous
peoples that are to follow suit. Its principal features of indigenous peoples’
rights are well summarized in the above-mentioned IUCN study, and
therefore to be cited in full here for the benefit of fellow participants as
well as community leaders in general: 7

7
Ibid. p. 28.
OFFICE OF THE NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION OF THAILAND 31