The UNDRIP and the legal significance of the right of indigenous peoples to self-determination: a human rights approach with a multidimensional perspective

Journey to Justice: The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in the Context of West Papua

“…Doing so has achieved the networks' goals of influencing the international community to adopt a new norm on Indigenous rights, leading to the development of UNDRIP in 2007. This global norm provides a shared scheme to create a better world and a more sustainable future for indigenous peoples' survival, dignity, and well-being worldwide (Cambou, 2019). Nevertheless, in Indonesia, even though the Indonesian government has pledged to adopt UNDRIP into domestic law, the government still tends to obfuscate when identifying the concept of Indigenous peoples.…”

“…Many states worry that the recognition of self-determination rights will threaten the state's own sovereignty. The basic principle of self-determination is to accommodate the participation of indigenous peoples in decision-making processes that affect them (Cambou, 2019). Lenzerini (2019) argues that the implementation has varied significantly around the world, ranging from full acceptance to modification and even outright rejection.…”

How to Be Indigenous in India?

“…During the revision process leading to the adoption of ILO 169, the chair announced that 'no position for or against self-determination was or could be expressed in the Convention, nor could any restrictions be expressed in the context of international law' (ILO, Provisional Record 1989, para 42). For some, this is a 'fatal failure' (Malezer 2020, p. 297) and for others, the apathy necessitates the gleaning of selfdetermination from some other instrument, preferably the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) (Cambou 2019;Dorough 2020). We have already seen before how autonomy in Article 3 does not include the scope for secession, impelling the Adivasi towards arcane responses to co-exist with the state like Pathalgadi.…”

Disentangling the conundrum of self-determination and its implications in Greenland

“…On this basis, each state has the responsibility within its borders to have a representative government mechanism. Although it took some time for states to follow the HRC's interpretation, today a consensus exists on this complementary view of self-determination, which expands the scope of the right to self-determination beyond the decolonisation context (Cambou, 2019). However, the paradigm underlying self-determination that has been put into practice circumscribed the interpretation of the right of "all peoples" to the more restricted meaning of the right of "the population of all states", regardless of the indigenous, minority or ethnic background of the concerned population.…”

“…Beyond mere political self-government and autonomy, indigenous self-determination also provides the right for indigenous peoples to participate, if they so choose, in the political, economic and social cultural life of the state and to control their land and resources. It also includes their rights to maintain and develop contact with their own members and other peoples within and across state borders, particularly for those divided by international borders (Cambou, 2019). On this basis, the International Law Association argues that "indigenous peoples have an international legal right to a unique 'contemporary' form of self-determination, giving them the right to engage in 'belated nation-building', to negotiate with others within their states, to exercise control over their lands and resources, and to operate autonomously" (International Law Association, 2010, p. 11).…”