FPIC : FREE PRIOR INFORMED CONSENT : DOCTRINE
DEFINING : CONSECUTIVELY SETTLED SOVEREIGN PEOPLES (CSSP) : INDIGENOUS ABSOLUTE MONARCHIES
ADDENDUM : **** ALLODIAL TITLES **** : DECLARATION
Welcome.This website provides historical and contemporary guidance to political resources as defined within the FREE PRIOR INFORMED CONSENT Doctrines through custom and tradition; and, as recognized and respected within the Inter-Governmental Organizations of SOVEREIGN NATION STATES / ABSOLUTE MONARCHIES via CSSP / CONSECUTIVELY SETTLED SOVEREIGN PEOPLES.
UNITED NATIONS NATIONS UNIES
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL AFFAIRS
Division for Social Policy and Development
Secretariat of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues
WORKSHOP ON FREE, PRIOR AND INFORMED CONSENT
(New York, 17-19 January 2005)II.
The Principle of Free, Prior and Informed Consent in International and Domestic Law and Practices
A. International Level:
7. International Labour Organisation’s Convention on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries - 169/1989 refers the principle of free and informed consent in the context of relocation of indigenous peoples from their land in its article 6. In article 6, 7 and 15, the convention aims at ensuring that every effort is made by the States to fully consult with IPs in the context of development, land and resources.
8. Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent procedure for certain hazardous chemicals and pesticides in international trade, 1998 (Enforced in February 2004) applies to banned or severely restricted chemicals; and severely hazardous pesticide formulations that may impact on human health and the environment. This Convention was developed on the works undertaken by the UNEP and FAO in the operation of voluntary prior informed consent procedure, as set out in the UNEP amended London guidelines for the Exchange of Information on Chemicals in International Trade and the FAO International Code of Conduct on the Distribution and Use of Pesticides. (It does not refer to IPs).
9. UN Draft Declaration on the Rights of IPs (UNDD) (Sub-Commission resolution 1994/45, annex) is an emerging instrument on the rights of indigenous peoples that explicitly recognizes the principle of FPIC in its articles 1, 12, 20, 27 and 30. UNDD refers to the Ips’ right to determine and develop priorities and strategies for the development or use of their lands, territories and other resources, including FPIC from state in connection with development and utilisation of surface and subsurface resources such as:
(a). Article 10 on forced relocation;
(b). Article 12 on culture and intellectual property;
(c). Article 20 vis-à-vis legislative and administrative measures taken by the States
(d). Article 27 with regards to indigenous peoples’ lands, territories and
(e). Article 30 with development planning.
10. UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) made observation and general recommendations on State obligations and indigenous rights under convention and calls upon States to “ensure that members of indigenous peoples have rights in respect of effective participation in public life and that no decisions directly relating to their rights and interests are taken without their informed consent” (GR XXIII 51 concerning IPs adopted at the Committee’s 1235th Meeting, 1997).
11. In 2000, in its concluding observation on Australia’s report, the CERD reiterated,
“its recommendation that the State party ensure effective participation by indigenous communities in decisions affecting their land rights, as required under article 5C of the Convention and the General Recommendations XXIII of the Committee, which stresses the importance of ensuring the “informed consent” of indigenous peoples/.”
12. In 2001, the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights on report of Columbia in relation to traditional lands (E/C.12/I/Add. 74, para. 12) in its concluding observation, noted “with regret that the traditional lands of indigenous peoples have been reduced or occupied, without their consent, by timber, mining and oil companies, at the expense of the exercise of their culture and the equilibrium of the ecosystem.” It subsequently urged “to consult and seek the consent of Indigenous peoples concerned prior to the implementation of timber, soil or subsoil mining projects and on any public policy affecting them (ibid., para.33).
13. UN Workshop on Indigenous Peoples, Private Sector Natural Resource, Energy
and Mining Companies and Human Rights, held in Geneva from 5-7 Dec. 2001 discussed the prin ciple of FPIC and recognized the need to have a universally agreed upon definition of the principle. The participants reached a basic common understanding of the meaning of the principle, as the right of indigenous peoples, as land and resource owners, to say “no” to proposed development projects at any point during negotiations with governments and/or extractive industries (E/CN.4/Sub.2/AC.4/ 2002/3, para. 52).
14. The Convention on Biological Diversity 1992 in its article 8(J) calls on
“to respect, preserve and maintain knowledge, innovations and practices of indigenous and local communities………..and promote their wider application with the approval and involvement of the holders of such knowledge, innovation and practices”.
The Cartagena Protocol on Bio-Safety (2000) to the Convention on Biological Diversity also recognizes FPIC applies in the transboundary movement, transit, handling and use of all living organisms.
1]. Marcus Colchester, Forest Industries, Indigenous Peoples and Human Rights, Dec. 2001, FPP, UK. Fergus Mackey, A Guide to Indigenous Peoples’ Rights in the Inter-American Human Rights System, Octobe 2001, FPP, UK.
Introduction Courtesy Of
SHQWI'QWAL Ralph Charles Goodwin YUXWULETUN