Summary Remarks made by Henry L. Mac-Donald JD, LL.M. at the Seventh Meeting of Negotiations for the Draft American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples,
Brasilia, Brazil,
March 21 – 25, 2006.

On Article XXXI

………“Since this is the first time I am speaking today, let me first of all thank the Government of the Federal Republic of Brazil for inviting and welcoming us here in Brasilia. My delegation is aware that the Brazilian Government has always been a passionate supporter of this drafting process and would like to thank them for their professional leadership on the matter.

Suriname believes that many indigenous and tribal peoples in the American Hemisphere do not enjoy their full human rights and is committed to helping improve this situation. We believe that this (draft) Declaration could be an important hemispheric tool to help recognize and protect the rights of indigenous as well as tribal peoples; however we are somewhat concerned that this draft Declaration seeks to create new collective rights, exclusively to indigenous peoples.

Human rights are universal and equal to all individuals. As equality is one of the fundamental principles underpinning human rights, we are not comfortable with the notion that some groups in society should benefits from human rights (it is individually or collective) that are not available to others. We believe that there are real dangers in this approach, which could create the circumstance to pick and choose which human rights should be respected and recognized for certain groups. Furthermore, the opinion of specific rights being exercised only collectively can also leave individuals within the groups vulnerable and without protection.

With regard to Article under consideration (Article 31), my delegation would like the concept of “spirituality” being addressed and recognized by this draft. We recognize that spirituality in this situation is more then the freedom of religion by itself.

Indigenous and tribal people have always possessed a unique and special spiritual relationship with the ground (land) and in that respect it would be an offense to deny these peoples this fundamental right.

My delegation is also somewhat worried about the wording “to adopt” in the USA proposal. The Government of Suriname has no power what so ever to adopt legislation or to guarantee the approval of certain legislation, it is the National Assembly (the Parliament) that has the sole power to adopt legislation in my country. The Government can only promote or encourage the adoption of certain legislative measures, therefore we would like to propose, as a possible solution of this matter, to include the word “promote” before the term “the adoption”……….

On Artikel XXXV

………“As we all know that the OAS has been, and still is according to the first Chapter of its Charter entitled: “Nature and Purposes” a prime political organization. History testifies that the OAS has strengthen democracy in many of its members states (including Suriname), promote peace, justice and solidarity in the American Hemisphere as well as promote and protect human rights in all its members states.

This OAS has always conducted its practices according to the core principles rules and customs established by international law. One of these customs is the use of certain terminology in specific international instruments. Meaning to say: International customs teaches us that there is specific “Convention language”, we may also say “Charter language”, as well as “Declaration language”, “Resolution language” etc.

Indeed, these internationally recognized customary rules and regulations are not written in stone and this Organization has often skillfully manipulated known international customary procedures. This has happened in a view occasions and strictly for political reasons.

Although my delegation understands that we may once again prefer to use strict and robust “Convention language” in this (Draft) Declaration, primarily for political reasons, we strongly feel that we should also at least endeavor to respect international customary rules, because we too have the duty to obey, as much as possible to the practices established and recognized by international law.

We would therefore like to offer the following suggestions:

• “to replace the word “recognized” by “set forth” or “contained”
• “to substitute the words “minimum standards” with “standard of achievement”

On Articles I, II en III
(The Right to Self-Determination)

………“Under international Law the right of self-determination is addressed in Article 1 of both the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. This common Article 1 is understood in international law under certain particular circumstances to include the right to secession and full independence.

Since we are currently discussing a new understanding of the right of self-determination in the context of a Nation State, we must elucidate accurately what is meant by the term “self-determination” when it relates to indigenous peoples.
Without clarifying this vital term the new Declaration will risks creating confusion, uncertainty and leaving it widely open to endless interpretation which would on the long run render it worthless.

It is therefore very important to propose and recommend clear text that distinguishes Article 3 of this (Draft) Declaration from the common Article 1 of both Conventions mentioned before. In so doing Article 3 of the (Draft) Inter American Declaration on Indigenous Peoples should bring clarity and substance to the work of this Working Group and its intentions. It should provide both States and indigenous peoples with a crystal clear blue print for a more harmonious and fair relationship, so that this new instrument can be of real and practical benefit to indigenous and tribal peoples in our Hemisphere”.

Our principal goal is to affirm that indigenous peoples are not only equal in humanity, but is also to empower them to chart and steer their own destinies through self management over their local and internal matters, in close collaboration with the States in which they reside. We are therefore looking to a final instrument that all States can easily implement in a meaningful way.

We are committed to a Declaration that all members States and the American Hemispheric community as a whole can fully live up to as a new vigorous, but most of all forward looking standard of achievement………

Copyright © 2005 Embassy of the Republic of Suriname & GlobeScope, Inc.