http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/248543

Backpedalling on native rights

Aug 22, 2007 04:30 AM
Carol Goar

Canada is one of seven countries blocking the quest for a universal
declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples. The other holdouts are
Colombia, Guyana, Suriname, Russia, Australia and New Zealand.

Most members of the United Nations would like to see the charter, which has
been under discussion for 20 years, adopted by the General Assembly at its
fall session.

Sixty-seven states are co-sponsoring it. The UN Human Rights Council
approved it last summer (over Canada's objections). Former foreign affairs
minister Lloyd Axworthy calls it a test of "Canada's influence as a
credible and influential voice for the protection of human rights."

As the vote approaches, native and human rights groups are appealing to
Ottawa not to thwart the declaration. They've sent an open letter to Prime
Minister Stephen Harper urging him to uphold the rights of the world's most
marginalized and vulnerable people.

"Canada must abandon its campaign against the declaration before further
harm is done to the safety and well-being of indigenous peoples worldwide
and to Canada's reputation as a principled defender of human rights," the
signatories say. They include Phil Fontaine, national chief of the Assembly
of First Nations; Beverly Jacobs, president of the Native Women's
Association of Canada; Alex Neve, secretary-general of Amnesty
International Canada; Ed Bianchi, aboriginal rights co-ordinator for a
church consortium called KAIROS and a number of regional chiefs.

The government's position is that the declaration is too vague to be
effective.

It also maintains that some of its provisions could be interpreted in ways
that are inconsistent with Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The Department of Indian and Northern Affairs cites six specific concerns:

The declaration might be used to support aboriginal claims to territories
already ceded by treaty.

It might interfere with Canada's approach to settling land claims, which
balances the rights of aboriginal peoples against the interests of other
Canadians.

It might be interpreted to give aboriginal peoples a veto over defence
activities.

It confers on indigenous people a right to conserve and protect the
environment, which is not recognized in international law.

It provides no guidance about the financing of aboriginal self-government.

And it fails to state clearly that federal and provincial laws are
paramount on matters of overriding national importance.

This is nonsense, Axworthy says. International human rights declarations
have never been legally binding. Moreover, this one has an explicit clause
– included at Canada's insistence – stating that it must be interpreted in
accordance with existing domestic laws.

Until recently, Canada was one of the leaders in rallying support for the
declaration.

In the early years of the negotiations, some states wanted nothing to do
with it, fearing it would give indigenous peoples rights and powers that
would undermine their authority and drain their budgets.

Canada worked tirelessly to bring these countries on board, explaining and
defending the concept of aboriginal self-determination. Craig Benjamin of
Amnesty International sat in on some of those talks. "Canada was
instrumental in breaking the deadlock between state governments and
indigenous peoples. We acknowledged the right to self-government. We said
we don't find it threatening."

Shortly after Prime Minister Stephen Harper was elected, Canada's stance
changed.

It voted against the declaration – with Russia – at the UN Human Rights
Council on June 29, 2006. It is now lobbying other countries to join its
call for a re-negotiation of all the substantive provisions of the
document. So far, it has found six allies. Several African countries are
wavering.

"We have grave concerns that Canada is encouraging states with appalling
records on human rights to take positions against the recognition and
protection of indigenous people's human rights," the petitioners say in
their public letter to Harper.

There is still time for Canada to change course.

For more than a century, we have failed our original citizens abysmally. We
have ignored their needs and stunted their development.

The least we can do now is offer them the tools to do better.