Governments opposed to self-determination for indigenous peoples have undermined the promises United Nations officials made in early December to six indigenous leaders who went on a hunger strike to protest the failure of the United Nations Working Group on the Draft Declaration on Indigenous Peoples to pass the declaration.
As part of the negotiating process that lead to the end of the hunger strike, which lasted from November 29 to December 2, Working Group Chairman Luis-Enrique Chavez of Peru promised the hunger strikers that he would include the following language in the Working GroupÂ’s final report:
At the beginning of the third week, a group of indigenous representatives strongly expressed their concerns about the process as they considered that it threatened undermining their fundamental rights. In order to call attention to their concerns, six indigenous representatives announced a hunger strike and spiritual fast. A number of indigenous representatives expressed their support. At the fourth day of the third week, indigenous representatives declared that their hunger strike and spiritual fast had come to an end.
Instead, within minutes of the end of the session, the United States, supported by Russia, Australia, and Canada, struck the language from the final report on the grounds that including the text would encourage further protests within other working groups and meetings. As one hunger striker, Adelard Blackman, later put it, "By striking the language they made it seem as if the hunger strike and the healing ceremony that ended it never happened."
Another contentious issue was whether the original text of the Draft Declaration, which indigenous peoples helped to write, would provide the starting point for future negotiations, or whether the Working Group chairmanÂ’s final report, which includes descriptions of the degree of state consensus on individual articles, would take precedence. The vice chairman of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights had promised the hunger strikers that the Sub-Commission Draft Declaration would be the basis for any new round of negotiations, but as the gavel came down, the Working Group report was adopted and indigenous leaders who tried to speak on this issue were cut off.
"From the point of view of indigenous peoples, there was so much disappointment and even despair at how things had turned out," said Andrea Carmen, executive director of the International Indian Treaty Council and one of the hunger strikers, in a report on the negotiations. "Many felt cheated and lied to by Mr. Chavez, and it was obvious to everyone that many things were going on sneakily and under the table. There was a sense of a total lack of control, an absence of participation and lack of a voice in the proceedings, and there was a lot of anger toward Mr. Chavez on how he had directed the deliberations. Â… It all just felt heavy, it was hard to breathe, hard to smile, it seemed bleak and desolate."
It will now be up to the United Nations Human Rights Commission, which has jurisdiction over the next round of negotiations, to determine which text to use. Expressing cautious optimism, Carmen observed, "If the vice-chair of the [Commission on Human Rights] was honest in saying to the hunger strikers that the Chairman's Text will not be acceptable, then it will most likely be the Sub-Commission text as it stands that will be presented to the [Commission on Human Rights.]" All eyes will be on commission when it begins its next annual session in March.
