TAAMOG supports the government position in relation to the draft UN - Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

http://www.stabroeknews.com/index.pl/article?id=56528558

TAAMOG supports the government position in relation to the draft UN
Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
Stabroek News, Monday, September 10th 2007

Dear Editor,

I wish to refer to your newspaper article under the caption 'Some parts
of draft UN Indigenous Rights Declaration out of sync with constitution
- Ministry' in your issue of 18.8.07.

The Amerindian Action Movement of Guyana (TAAMOG) fully supports the
position taken by the government in relation to the draft UN
Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

There is absolutely no doubt that some of the substantive articles of
the draft Declaration need to be clarified, understood and redrafted
for their practical implementation.

Article 3 of the draft Declaration states that "Indigenous Peoples have
the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely
determine their political status and freely pursue their economic,
social and cultural development." Can any indigenous expert in Guyana
say what this article in the draft Declaration really means?

And moreso define what is meant by self-determination? Mr Robert T
Coulter, an indigenous lawyer attached to the Indian Law Resource
Center of the USA said in his publication The Draft UN Declaration on
the Rights of Indigenous Peoples: What is it? What does it mean? March
24, 1994 that "The concept of Self-determination is a complex and
evolving one that has never had an absolutely fixed meaning." I do feel
that this is the reason why the government sees the need for clarity on
the contentious provisions in the draft Declaration and the government
is not wrong.

In fact the government's need for clarity on the controversial
provisions in the draft Declaration is justified since, what the
Declaration really says and what it will mean in practice are not well
understood even by many of those who were actively involved in the
process of developing these new human rights standards (Page 1 of
Robert T. Coulter's 1994 publication).

But while the draft Declaration is a powerful elaboration of basic
human and social values, its full meaning can only be realized and
become clearer as a result of continued debate and discussion at the UN
level. And this is so because ultimately it is the member nations of
the United Nations that will decide whether they will adopt, reject or
change the Declaration.

This therefore further reinforces government's position on
clarification, since the meaning of self-determination may well
continue to be uncertain and ambiguous in the Declaration.

And this may also go for the self-government and autonomy which the
Declaration declares.

The possibility exists that the contentious provisions of the draft
Declaration will be redefined or redrafted by the member nations of the
UN even though indigenous people had a great deal to say in creating
and reshaping the draft Declaration.

The fact that a Declaration of Rights is not a binding legal instrument
or agreement, but merely the beginning of creating human rights law it
is widely assumed that a universal convention on the Rights of
Indigenous Peoples will be developed by the UN based upon the
Declaration and its amendments.

Yours faithfully,

Peter Persaud