RESOLVING OWNERSHIP OF THE BLACK HILL

RESOLVING OWNERSHIP OF THE BLACK HILLS

Tim Giago,* April 27, 2009

When U. S. Supreme Court Justice Harry Blackman wrote his brief on a case that had dragged on for 60 years before reaching his desk in 1980, a case dealing with the illegal taking of the Black Hills from the Sioux Tribes, he wrote in describing the role of the United States government in the theft of the Hills, “A more ripe and rank case of dishonest dealings may never be found in our history.”

Twenty-nine years have elapsed since the Court awarded the Tribes of the Great Sioux Nation $105 million in a case marked as Docket 74A. Although these tribes are among the poorest people in America (three of the reservations in the suit were among the top 10 of the poorest counties in America in the 1980 U. S. Census) they have refused to accept the monetary award.

For most of those years they have faced an unfavorable Republican regime and when they did get a Bill introduced by Senator Bill Bradley (D-NJ) in the early 1980s, the lack of a united front by the tribes caused Bradley to withdraw.

Many elders of the Sioux Nations believe that it now a most favorable time to introduce new legislation. President Barack Obama promised them during his campaign that he would not force a monetary settlement upon them. He is open to discussion on this most touchy of topics, at least touchy in South Dakota.

Attorney Mario Gonzalez, an Oglala Lakota, said that the time to negotiate a settlement is now, while there is a favorable administration in Washington, DC. His idea bears serious consideration by the leaders all the Sioux tribes involved in the settlement. Gonzalez suggests that the tribes nominate one of their strongest leaders, perhaps Rodney Bordeaux, President of the Rosebud Sioux Tribe, and then select a strong representative from each of the remaining tribes to put together a list of realistic demands and suggestions.

He believes that if the tribes found a powerful spokesman, former President Bill Clinton for example, to take their points of negotiation to President Obama, and once the negotiating points are discussed and approved, they could then introduce a bill to finally settle the Black Hills Claim. In this fashion all of the sticking points would have been decided and clarified with assistance from the President of the United States before introducing a bill to Congress.

Every tribe of the Sioux Nation would have to be in agreement on all of the negotiating points. Of course the return of some land and a monetary settlement would head up the negotiating points. And all of this would have to be done with an eye on the realistic evaluation of America as it stands in 2009.

One consideration that several prominent Lakota have put forward is that the Black Hills be considered as property of the Sioux Nation (I used the term Sioux Nation as it is written in all of the legal documents concerning the Black Hills) and that a lease or rental agreement be enacted that would provide annual income to all of the tribes and that a portion of the Hills under the control of the U. S. Forest Service be returned to the Tribes to be used as a religious sanctuary. In other words, the Sioux Nation would become the “landlord” over the Black Hills.

I believe Gonzalez and other prominent tribal members when they say that this is a window of opportunity that must not be wasted. My newspaper, Native Sun News, is presently running a survey that would give every Native American that is an enrolled member of the tribes involved in the Black Hills Claim, to vote. The survey is intended to let the United States government know once and for all the feelings of the People of the Sioux Nations.

The results of the survey will be announced on May 20, 2009 and without giving away the results, let me say that so far the votes are leaning heavily in favor of those who honestly believe that, “The Black Hills are not for sale.”

Much too often in the past the people involved in this settlement decision have been inexplicably divided. And that is hard to decipher because, in the long run, all of them are reaching for the very same goal. They just have a variety of ways to approach that goal and too often end up lining up behind someone who can only lead them to division and eventually defeat.

The most opportune time to strike is now and this will require a lot of rethinking of objectives and a strong pull towards communicating with those among the people with different views. The only way the Black Hills Claims Settlement will ever be resolved is if the people of the Sioux Nation finally unite behind a common theme and a common negotiating platform.

Through all of these years I have heard so many say, “The Sioux people are their own worst enemies.” We can only hope that this accusation is false, and if not, that it can be overcome. Perhaps the majority of Americans will support a reasonable bill if the tribes of the Great Sioux Nation can unite and also support it.

*Tim Giago, an Oglala Lakota, is the publisher of Native Sun News. He can be reached at editor@nsweekly.com.

>>>—–àß——<<<

AN OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT-ELECT BARACK OBMA OM LEONARD PELTIER

AN OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT-ELECT BARACK OBMA OM LEONARD PELTIER

Harvey Arden, December 23, 2009

Dear President-elect Obama:

A Great Act of Mercy by you can help heal the still raw wounds of Indian people and their continuing confrontation with the ‘Dominant Society’ of the United States. I don’t know if you know the  Leonard Peltier case personally; nor will I argue it here.  Please talk to Secretary Bill Richardson and Sen. Inouye about this great injustice now in its 33rd year; they both know it well. Leonard was 31 when he was framed; he’s now 64. A poll a couple of years ago asked thousands of people, “Who Is the Greatest American Indian in History?” The winner, yes, was Leonard Peltier. Crazy Horse, as I recall, was 2nd; Sitting Bull, 3rd.  All Lakota (’Sioux’) incidentally.

Mr. President-elect, I ask from my deepest heart that you grant a brief audience to me and Chief Arvol Looking Horse, 19th-Generation Keeper of the Sacred White Buffalo Pipe of the Great Lakota Nation, so that we may deliver a message to you on behalf of millions of good souls around the earth who plead for Leonard’s freedom, who see Leonard’s freedom as The Sign that Democracy and Love and Prayer and Justice still have a meaning in America.

I ask to read to you from Leonard’s book Prison Writings: My Life Is My Sun Dance, of which I am privileged to be the editor.  A wondrous stage play My Life Is My Sun Dance has been produced from Leonard’s words to rave audiences, and we will be delighted to bring the soon-to-tour words-and-music production to the venue of your choice, for you to experience the power and poetry and compassion of it. It wrings the soul.

I would welcome the presence of  VP-elect Biden, Sec.-designate Hillary Clinton (and Bill, of course), Gov. Bill Richardson, Sen. Inouye, your new FBI director and any other persons you’d like to be on hand.  I also ask to have Leonard Peltier himself standing beside me in the Oval Office as I read his words—words Leonard would read to you himself if his locked jaw would allow him to. Leonard also asks me to invite Mumia Abu Jamal–another political prisoner, to whom we also ask you to grant executive clemency. Freeing these two men would be an act of intrinsic greatness, I daresay a Holy Act.

Mr. President-elect, we await your strong hand in bringing these enormous and glaring injustices  to an end.

Respectfully,

(signed) Harvey Arden

Washington, DC, 12/23/2008

!!!!!!!

DECLARATION OF THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON EXTRACTIVE INDUSTRIES

DECLARATION OF THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON EXTRACTIVE INDUSTRIES

AND INTERNATIONAL INDIGENOUS CONFERENCE ON EXTRACTIVE INDUSTRIES

Manila, the Philippines, March 23-25, 2009

Reprinted from, “Declaration of the International Conference on Extractive Industries released, News From Indian Country, March, 2009, http://indiancountrynews.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=6057&Itemid=1.

When all the trees have been cut down,

When all the animals have been hunted,

When all the waters are polluted,

When all the air is unsafe to breathe,

Only then will you discover you cannot eat money - Cree prophecy

Treat the earth well, it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. - Chief Seattle

We, Indigenous Peoples and support organisations from 35 countries around the world and representing many more Indigenous Nations, have gathered together in this International Conference on Extractive Industries and Indigenous Peoples. As Indigenous Peoples we have a unique cosmic vision, diversity of languages, histories, spirituality and territories which have existed since time immemorial. However, we now find ourselves within the borders of States which have established norms and laws according to their interests.

On account of this situation, we have suffered disproportionately from the impact of extractive industries as our territories are home to over sixty percent of the world’s most coveted mineral resources.  This has resulted in many problems to our peoples, as it has attracted extractive industry corporations to unsustainably exploit our lands, territories and recourses without our consent. This exploitation has led to the worst forms of, environmental degradation, human rights violations and land dispossession and is contributing to climate change.

Environmental degradation includes, but is not limited to, erosion of our fragile biological diversity, pollution of land, air and water, and destruction of whole ecological systems. Extractive industries, and particularly those relating to fossil fuels, also have significantly contributed to the climate change that is destroying our Mother Earth.

Human rights violations range from violations of Indigenous Peoples’ right to self-determination (which includes the right to determine one’s own economic, social and cultural development), rights to lands, territories and resources, as well as displacement and violations of the most basic civil and political rights, such as arbitrary arrests and detention, torture, enforced disappearances and killings.

Our cultural diversity has also been grossly eroded because of the destruction of biological diversity and lands, territories and resources by extractive industries upon which our cultures are based. This erosion of our cultural diversity is also a result of the imposition of colonial systems and the settlement of non-Indigenous Peoples.

Corporations enter into our territories with the promise of “development” through employment, infrastructure building and payment of governmental taxes. Despite these promises, there still exists a situation of dire poverty in those living close to extractive industry projects. This situation has fuelled conflicts between Indigenous Peoples and the State and extractive industry corporations, as well as causing divisions within the Indigenous communities themselves.

On 6-16 May 1996, a first “Mining and Indigenous Peoples Conference” held in London produced the “Indigenous Peoples’ Declaration on Mining”. This declaration highlighted conflicts occurring between our communities and corporations. It reiterated that Indigenous Peoples need to be the decision makers on whether or not mining should take place in their communities and under what conditions this may occur.

Almost 13 years have passed since this conference was held, but overall our situation on the ground has not noticeably improved. The opportunities and threats since the 1996 conference include:

* The welcome adoption of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UN DRIP) by the UN General Assembly on 13 September 2007;

* New UN mechanisms for the protection of the rights of Indigenous Peoples, such as the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous people, and the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples;

* A greater interest on the relationship between human rights and corporate behaviour, including the work of the UN Special Representative of the Secretary General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises;

* The recognition of corporate social responsibility and a claimed willingness on behalf of corporations to negotiate agreements directly with Indigenous Peoples, although so far much of this seems to be more on paper or promises, as opposed to practice;

* The climate change crisis, coming about mainly because of dependence of the current economy on fossil fuels. These resources are mined on our land and many of our peoples are disproportionately affected by such activities; and

* The global financial crisis, caused by the unregulated liberalisation of finance.

Based on the foregoing observations, we assert that:

* Indigenous Peoples are rights holders, with an inextricable link to their lands, territories and resources which they have traditionally owned, occupied or otherwise used or acquired, and should not be treated merely as stakeholders. We have a right to self-determination of our political condition and to freely choose our economic, social and cultural development (UN DRIP Article 3);

* Our rights are inherent and indivisible and seek recognition not only of our full social, cultural and economic rights but also our civil and political rights;

* All doctrines, policies and practices based on the presumed superiority of colonial  peoples and worldviews should be condemned;

* We contribute to the diversity and richness of the cultures that make up humanity and believe that we can teach valuable lessons to the rest of the world through our values and world views in how to tread gently upon the earth;

* Destruction of Indigenous Peoples sacred sites and areas of spiritual and cultural significance by extractive industries must stop;

* The vulnerable position of women and youth with regard to the impacts of extractive industries, including loss of livelihoods, violence and impacts on health and well-being must be recognized;

* The development model premised on unsustainable consumption and production, and corporate globalisation, which fuels the entry of extractive industries onto our lands must be rejected;

* Respect for the preservation of life on earth, and our right to food, must have precedence over extractive industry projects;

* Extractive industry projects must not take precedence over our right to land – regardless of whether our rights are based on legal recognition or usufruct rights;

* There must be an immediate end to the criminalization of community resistance, the violent intimidation, harassment, and murder, of our leaders, activists and lawyers who are working for the defence of our lands and lives;

* Extractive industry projects must not take precedence over the human right to water. Water is especially important in our lives and is sacred to us. In addition the major reserves of fresh water are found in our territories;

* The right to water is a fundamental human right which must be recognized. We therefore condemn the conduct of the World Water Council which demotes the right to water a “basic need”;

* Negotiations about climate change should not be conducted by States and international organisations unless there is full and effective participation of Indigenous Peoples. Furthermore, mitigation and adaptation measures related to climate change must be designed and implemented in keeping with Indigenous Peoples’ rights;

* The failure to hold extractive industries to account in host and home countries must be addressed and mechanisms for accountability and enforcement must be created immediately; and

* Implementation of interstate infrastructure initiatives – such as the South American Regional Infrastructure Initiative (IIRSA) – that lead to mega-projects on our lands and territories without first obtaining our free prior and informed consent (FPIC) are destructive to our cultures and survival, and a denial of our right to self determination.

Given the above, in order to ensure respect for the rights recognized in the UN DRIP, as well as the ecological integrity of our planet and communities, we call for:

* A stop to the plunder of our lands, territories and resources;

* A moratorium on further extractive industry projects that affect or threaten our communities, until structures and processes are in place that ensure respect for our human rights. The determination of when this has been realized can only be made by those communities whose lives, livelihoods and environment are affected by those projects;

* Due process and justice to victims of human rights violations who are resisting extractive industries;

* Review of all on-going projects that are approved without respect for our FPIC and self determination rights; and

* Compensation and restitution for damages inflicted upon our lands, territories and resources, and the rehabilitation of our degraded environments caused by extractive industry projects that did not obtain our FPIC.

We call on Indigenous Communities and their Supporters:

* To create an international mechanism working on extractive industries and Indigenous Peoples aimed at sharing information, education, advocacy and the defence of our rights;

* To coordinate research on mining companies, processes and investment sources to empower communities, build strategic plans and ensure recognition and respect for our rights;

* To assert their right to control the authorization of projects, and where FPIC has been given, the conduct of extractive activities in indigenous lands and territories through the use of indigenous customary laws;

* To create a mechanism to compile legal precedents from relevant court decisions on Indigenous Peoples and extractive industries;

* To build relationships with non-indigenous groups concerned with the problem of extractive industries, nationally and internationally, to find common ground; and

* To establish a International Day of Action on Extractive Industries and Indigenous Peoples

We call on Civil Society Organisations:

* To increase their support, and solidarity in a manner that is sensitive to the issues of Indigenous Peoples;

* Especially conservation and other NGOs, not to impose themselves or their views upon us, but respect our legitimate leadership and also seek the FPIC of communities before intervening; this also applies to academics including anthropologists; and

We call on Companies:

* To respect international standards on rights in all jurisdictions, especially the minimum standards as set forth in the UN DRIP, which includes in particular, the right to lands, territories and resources and attendant right to FPIC. This also applies to consultants;

* To submit to independent and credible monitoring;

* To be accountable for the environmental disasters, destruction and human rights violations as a result of their operations;

* To employ proven technology and adhere to the precautionary principle at all levels and in each project;

* To recognize the specific vulnerability of indigenous women to the negative impacts involved with extractive industries;

* To ensure full transparency in all aspects of their operations, and especially to ensure affected communities have full access to information in forms and languages they can understand; and

* To conduct and implement environmental, social, cultural and human rights impact assessments to the highest international standards ensuring independent review and participation of indigenous peoples;

We call on Investors:

* To ensure that policies in relation to investments in indigenous territories reflect the rights articulated in the UN DRIP, and that the ethical index listings  used should base their investment recommendations on third party information, as opposed solely to information from the company in which they may invest and

* Not to invest in fossil fuel related projects.

We call on States:

* Smpecifically those States that have not done so yet, to adopt the UN DRIP and ratify International Labour Organization (ILO) 169, and for those States who have to uphold the rights articulated therein;

* To establish, in consultation with Indigenous Peoples, clear mechanisms and procedures at national levels for the implementation of international juridical instruments, specifically the UN DRIP, ILO 169 and International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD);

* To review laws and policies on extractive industries that are detrimental to Indigenous Peoples, and ensure consistency with the UN DRIP and international instruments protecting Indigenous Peoples rights;

* To recognize and enforce  the rights Indigenous Peoples to FPIC as laid out in UN DRIP, in accordance with our customary laws and traditional practices;

* To recognize and ensure the demarcation and titling of our ancestral lands;

* To recognize our customary laws and traditional mechanisms of conflict resolutions;

* To support the efforts of Indigenous Peoples to develop economic alternatives to extractive industries, in order to alleviate the poverty that creates false dependencies on extractive industries;

* To abolish hedge funds and all forms of private equity that are not transparent and well regulated, and which distort the price of minerals;

* To legislate and regulate thorough processes for independently conducted environmental, social, cultural and human rights impact assessments, with regular monitoring during all of the phases of production and rehabilitation;

* To protect indigenous activists, human rights defenders and lawyers working on human rights issues, and where the State is the violator we demand an end to the violations against our peoples;

* To ban particularly harmful extractive practices, including riverine tailings disposal, gas flaring, effluent discharges, submarine tailings disposal, mountain top removal and large scale open-pit mining. Given the risks posed by climate change, serious re-consideration should be given to the construction of tailings containment in low-lying coastal areas and in areas exposed to increasingly severe weather events and

* To ensure that their development cooperation policies and programmes respect Indigenous Peoples rights’, in particular in the context of extractive industries and our right to FPIC.

We call on Civil Society Organisations:

* To increase their support, and solidarity in a manner that is sensitive to the issues of Indigenous Peoples;

* Especially conservation and other NGOs, not to impose themselves or their views upon us, but respect our legitimate leadership and also seek the FPIC of communities before intervening; this also applies to academics including anthropologists; and

We call on Companies:

* To respect international standards on rights in all jurisdictions, especially the minimum standards as set forth in the UN DRIP, which includes in particular, the right to lands, territories and resources and attendant right to FPIC. This also applies to consultants;

* To submit to independent and credible monitoring;

* To be accountable for the environmental disasters, destruction and human rights violations as a result of their operations;

* To employ proven technology and adhere to the precautionary principle at all levels and in each project;

* To recognize the specific vulnerability of indigenous women to the negative impacts involved with extractive industries;

* To ensure full transparency in all aspects of their operations, and especially to ensure affected communities have full access to information in forms and languages they can understand; and

* To conduct and implement environmental, social, cultural and human rights impact assessments to the highest international standards ensuring independent review and participation of indigenous peoples;

We call on Investors:

* To ensure that policies in relation to investments in indigenous territories reflect the rights articulated in the UN DRIP, and that the ethical index listings  used should base their investment recommendations on third party information, as opposed solely to information from the company in which they may invest and

* Not to invest in fossil fuel related projects.

We call on States:

* Specifically those States that have not done so yet, to adopt the UN DRIP and ratify International Labour Organization (ILO) 169, and for those States who have to uphold the rights articulated therein;

* To establish, in consultation with Indigenous Peoples, clear mechanisms and procedures at national levels for the implementation of international juridical instruments, specifically the UN DRIP, ILO 169 and International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD);

* To review laws and policies on extractive industries that are detrimental to Indigenous Peoples, and ensure consistency with the UN DRIP and international instruments protecting Indigenous Peoples rights;

* To recognize and enforce  the rights Indigenous Peoples to FPIC as laid out in UN DRIP, in accordance with our customary laws and traditional practices;

* To recognize and ensure the demarcation and titling of our ancestral lands;

* To recognize our customary laws and traditional mechanisms of conflict resolutions;

* To support the efforts of Indigenous Peoples to develop economic alternatives to extractive industries, in order to alleviate the poverty that creates false dependencies on extractive industries;

* To abolish hedge funds and all forms of private equity that are not transparent and well regulated, and which distort the price of minerals;

* To legislate and regulate thorough processes for independently conducted environmental, social, cultural and human rights impact assessments, with regular monitoring during all of the phases of production and rehabilitation;

* To protect indigenous activists, human rights defenders and lawyers working on human rights issues, and where the State is the violator we demand an end to the violations against our peoples;

* To ban particularly harmful extractive practices, including riverine tailings disposal, gas flaring, effluent discharges, submarine tailings disposal, mountain top removal and large scale open-pit mining. Given the risks posed by climate change, serious re-consideration should be given to the construction of tailings containment in low-lying coastal areas and in areas exposed to increasingly severe weather events and

* To ensure that their development cooperation policies and programmes respect Indigenous Peoples rights’, in particular in the context of extractive industries and our right to FPIC.

We call on the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (PFII):

* To request that the UN Indigenous Peoples Expert Mechanism conduct a study, with the participation of Indigenous Peoples, on the impact of extractive industries on them, by consolidating all recommendations, observations and decisions of UN Treaty and Charter bodies pertaining to the subject and identifying the measures taken by States to adhere with these;

* To request that UN mechanisms, agencies and bodies promote the elaboration of mechanisms and procedures for States to implement to minimum standards set forth in the UN DRIP, including in particular the right to FPIC;

* To establish procedures which provide indigenous communities with the opportunity to request the relevant UN agencies to assist them in the monitoring and provision of independent information in FPIC processes;

* To support the Indigenous Peoples’ proposal that there be an international Mother Earth Day, and encourage all UN agencies, mechanisms and bodies to do likewise;

* To demand the full and effective participation of Indigenous Peoples in all discussions and decisions pertaining to international agreements and conventions that address issues of biological diversity and or climate change;

* To emphasize the need to address the direct and indirect impacts of extractive industry on climate change, including those associated with mitigation measures;

* To emphasize the need for the widespread diffusion of information and critical debate between Indigenous Peoples about the ongoing mechanisms and negotiations relative to carbon trading and the carbon market;

* To request that the Special Representative to the Secretary General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other businesses, John Ruggie, and other UN organisations, bodies and agencies, promote the enactment of legislation in home states of transnational corporations that provides for extraterritorial jurisdiction in relation to their activities;

* To recommend that the World Bank Group update its operational directives and safeguard policies pertaining to Indigenous Peoples to include the right to FPIC, as required under the UN DRIP;

* To recommend that the World Bank Group immediately stop funding, promoting and supporting fossil fuel related projects and large scale mining projects on indigenous lands, and provide a set timeline for ending of all such funding;

* To recommend that the World Bank stop influencing the design of national policies in developing countries in a manner that promotes the interests of transnational mining corporations over the rights of indigenous communities;

* To recommend that the World Health Organisation consider conducting a study on the impact of cyanide and heavy metals on the right to health of communities impacted by mining;

* To address the urgent need for the genuine recognition of indigenous religious, cultural and spiritual rights, including their sacred sites in the context of extractive projects and

* To recommend that all bilateral agreements should guarantee that indigenous peoples’ human rights are respected.

Media Contacts: Julie Cavanaugh-Bill: wsdp@igc.org. This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it 063 – 908-642-7069 (Western Shoshone Defense Project) or Brian Wyatt 61 417 970 413 or Carolyn Betts 0400 854 067 (National Native Title Council).

<><><><><><><>

CLOSING STATMENT OF THE INTERNATIONAL INDIGENOUS PEOPLES’ FORUM ON CLIMATE CHANGE

CLOSING STATMENT OF THE INTERNATIONAL INDIGENOUS PEOPLES’ FORUM ON CLIMATE CHANGE

High Level Segment – 14th Conference of the Parties, Agenda Item 8 and CMP Agenda Item 9, UN Framework Conference on Climate Change, Pozna, Poland, December 12, 2008

Presented by Mr. Tom Goldtooth, Indigenous Environmental Network

Mr. Chair and Distinguished Delegates,

The Shared Vision of this Climate Change Convention must observe and implement the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples adopted by the UN General Assembly in 2007. As the UNFCCC is a process under the umbrella of the UN system, the denial of full and effective Indigenous peoples’ participation in the UNFCCC discussions is an affront to those rights granted only a year ago. It is urgent that the UNFCCC be amended as soon as possible to make its process and provisions consistent with the spirit and intent of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and allow Indigenous peoples to express their views on all aspects of the Convention.

More specifically, language in the annex of the SBSTA 29, Agenda 5 document that merely mentions “full and effective participation of indigenous people (without the “s”)” is insufficient and offensive and creates a major obstacle for recognizing Indigenous peoples’ rights in any REDD scheme. Can full and effective participation even exist if rights are denied? The omission of a concrete reference to Indigenous Peoples with an “S”, omission of the word, our rights and the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in the REDD document could cause gross and systematic human rights abuses including forced displacements. We recall the UN-REDD Framework Programme that was launched by the UN Secretary General at the General Assembly’s 63^rd Session acknowledges in its Framework Document that REDD could undermine Indigenous peoples and local communities’ rights to the usage and ownership of their lands and marginalize communal-use rights. The International Indigenous Peoples Forum on Climate Change stand by our demand for an immediate suspension of all REDD initiatives and carbon market schemes. Cut emissions at source – No REDD.

Mr. Chair, as the Convention moves forward, we call to your attention the human rights violations caused by the Clean Development Mechanisms (CDM) and other carbon trading and carbon offset regimes. During this Convention you have witnessed growing concerns questioning the legitimacy of CDM. Any further expansion of the CDM is an excuse to avoid real emissions reductions. The CDM and the carbon market are instruments that commodify the atmosphere, promote privatization and concentrate resources in the hands of a few, taking away the rights of many to live with dignity. CDM are not a mechanism for mitigating climate change. It is not just “carbon” or pollution that is being traded, but people’s lives.

Our indigenous brothers and sisters have traveled here from the four points of the world, in good faith and with a desire to share with world leaders our traditional knowledge towards developing a shared vision as we prepare for Copenhagen in 2009. We have repeatedly requested the Conference of the Parties here in the great city of Poznań to establish an Expert Group on Climate Change and Indigenous Peoples. If accepted by COP 14, this will send a strong signal of the intent of this Conference process to include those peoples most under direct threat from climate change. The fate of more than a dozen small islands States, whose population is 90% indigenous and the reality of our brothers and sisters of the Arctic regions already hangs in balance.

The UNFCCC must set into action a new economic paradigm moving away from an unsustainable fossil fuel economy. We must transform the values of commerce and consumerism to those of conservation, cooperation and sharing. The acceleration of global warming means that, Annex 1 countries must reevaluate their Bali commitment in emissions reduction levels. Credible scientists and climate studies are now urging a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 80% by 2020, below 1990 levels, and a reduction of CO2 atmospheric concentrations to 350 ppm in order to prevent the “tipping point”. Unless we stabilize energy use immediately, we face dire social and economic chaos. A growing number of analyses now suggest that far greater reductions at source accomplished within a much tighter time frame are needed. The climate crisis demands drastic international and national action, including implementation of self-government and treaties negotiated between Indigenous Peoples and the states in which they reside. We urge that all people of the world renew their understanding of their relationship with the sacredness of Mother Earth. Indigenous Peoples are prepared to renew their responsibilities, and we urge others to do the same. We will never have peace as long as we make war against Mother Earth.

Mr. Chair and Governmental Delegates,

Thank you.

>>>:—-àß—-:<<<

THE ANCHORAGE DECLARATION OF THE PEOPLE’S GLOBAL SUMMIT ON CLIMATE CHANGE

THE ANCHORAGE DECLARATION OF THE PEOPLE’S GLOBAL SUMMIT ON CLIMATE CHANGE, April 24, 2009

Posted on the web site of TEBTEBBA (Indigenous People’s International Policy Center for Research and Education) at: http://www.tebtebba.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=51:the-anchorage-declaration&catid=73:international-conference-on-extractive-industries-.

From 20-24 April, 2009, Indigenous representatives from the Arctic, North America, Asia, Pacific, Latin America, Africa, Caribbean and Russia met in Anchorage, Alaska for the Indigenous Peoples’ Global Summit on Climate Change. We thank the Ahtna and the Dena’ina Athabascan Peoples in whose lands we gathered.

We express our solidarity as Indigenous Peoples living in areas that are the most vulnerable to the impacts and root causes of climate change. We reaffirm the unbreakable and sacred connection between land, air, water, oceans, forests, sea ice, plants, animals and our human communities as the material and spiritual basis for our existence.

We are deeply alarmed by the accelerating climate devastation brought about by unsustainable development. We are experiencing profound and disproportionate adverse impacts on our cultures, human and environmental health, human rights, well-being, traditional livelihoods, food systems and food sovereignty, local infrastructure, economic viability, and our very survival as Indigenous Peoples.

Mother Earth is no longer in a period of climate change, but in climate crisis. We therefore insist on an immediate end to the destruction and desecration of the elements of life.

Through our knowledge, spirituality, sciences, practices, experiences and relationships with our traditional lands, territories, waters, air, forests, oceans, sea ice, other natural resources and all life, Indigenous Peoples have a vital role in defending and healing Mother Earth. The future of Indigenous Peoples lies in the wisdom of our elders, the restoration of the sacred position of women, the youth of today and in the generations of tomorrow.

We uphold that the inherent rights of Indigenous Peoples, affirmed by the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), must be fully respected in all decision-making processes and activities related to climate change. This includes our rights to our lands, territories, environment and natural resources as contained in Articles 25–30 of the UNDRIP. When specific programs and projects affect them, the right to Self Determination of Indigenous Peoples must be respected, emphasizing our right to Free Prior and Informed Consent including the right to say “no”. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate (UNFCCC) agreements and principles must reflect the spirit of the UNDRIP.

Calls for Action

1. In order to achieve the fundamental objective of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), we call upon the fifteenth meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC to support a binding emissions reduction target for developed countries (Annex 1) of at least 45% below 1990 levels by 2020 and at least 95% by 2050. In recognizing the root causes of climate change, participants call upon states to work towards decreasing dependency on fossil fuels. We further call for a just transition to decentralized renewable energy economies, sources and systems owned and controlled by our local communities to achieve energy security and sovereignty.

In addition, the Summit participants agreed to present two options for action which were each supported by one or more of the participating regional caucuses. These were as follows:

A. We call on the phase out of fossil fuel development and a moratorium on new fossil fuel developments on or near Indigenous lands and territories.

B. We call for a process that works towards the eventual phase out of fossil fuels, without infringing on the right to development of Indigenous nations.

2. We call upon the Parties to the UNFCCC to recognize the importance of our Traditional Knowledge and practices shared by Indigenous Peoples in developing strategies to address climate change. To address climate change we also call on the UNFCCC to recognize the historical and ecological debt of the Annex 1 countries in contributing to greenhouse gas emissions. We call on these countries to pay this historical debt.

3. We call on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, and other relevant institutions to support Indigenous Peoples in carrying out Indigenous Peoples’ climate change assessments.

4. We call upon the UNFCCC’s decision-making bodies to establish formal structures and mechanisms for and with the full and effective participation of Indigenous Peoples.

Specifically we recommend that the UNFCCC:

a. Organize regular Technical Briefings by Indigenous Peoples on Traditional Knowledge and climate change;

b. Recognize and engage the International Indigenous Peoples’ Forum on Climate Change and its regional focal points in an advisory role;

c. Immediately establish an Indigenous focal point in the secretariat of the UNFCCC;

d. Appoint Indigenous Peoples’ representatives in UNFCCC funding mechanisms in consultation with Indigenous Peoples;

e. Take the necessary measures to ensure the full and effective participation of Indigenous and local communities in formulating, implementing, and monitoring activities, mitigation, and adaptation relating to impacts of climate change.

5. All initiatives under Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD) must secure the recognition and implementation of the rights of Indigenous Peoples, including security of land tenure, recognition of land title according to traditional ways, uses and customary laws and the multiple benefits of forests for climate, ecosystems, and peoples before taking any action.

6. We challenge States to abandon false solutions to climate change that negatively impact Indigenous Peoples’ rights, lands, air, oceans, forests, territories and waters. These include nuclear energy, large-scale dams, geo-engineering techniques, “clean coal”, agro-fuels, plantations, and market based mechanisms such as carbon trading, the Clean Development Mechanism, and forest offsets. The rights of Indigenous Peoples to protect our forests and forest livelihoods must be ensured.

7. We call for adequate and direct funding in developed and developing States and for a fund to be created to enable Indigenous Peoples’ full and effective participation in all climate processes, including adaptation, mitigation, monitoring and transfer of appropriate technologies in order to foster our empowerment, capacity-building, and education. We strongly urge relevant United Nations bodies to facilitate and fund the participation, education, and capacity building of Indigenous youth and women to ensure engagement in all international and national processes related to climate change.

8. We call on financial institutions to provide risk insurance for Indigenous Peoples to allow them to recover from extreme weather events.

9. We call upon all United Nations agencies to address climate change impacts in their strategies and action plans, in particular their impacts on Indigenous Peoples, including the World Health Organization (WHO), United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (UNPFII). In particular, we call upon all the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and other relevant United Nations bodies to establish an Indigenous Peoples’ working group to address the impacts of climate change on food security and food sovereignty for Indigenous Peoples.

10. We call on United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) to conduct a fast track assessment of short-term drivers of climate change, specifically black carbon, with a view to initiating negotiation of an international agreement to reduce emission of black carbon.

11. We call on States to recognize and implement the fundamental human rights and status of Indigenous Peoples, including the collective rights to traditional ownership, use, access, occupancy and title to traditional lands, air, forests, waters, oceans, sea ice and sacred sites as well as the rights affirmed in Treaties are upheld and recognized in land use planning and climate change mitigation strategies. In particular, States must ensure that Indigenous Peoples have the right to mobility and are not forcibly removed or settled away from their traditional lands and territories, and that the rights of peoples in voluntary isolation are upheld. In the case of climate change migrants, appropriate programs and measures must address their rights and vulnerabilities.

12. We call upon states to return and restore lands, territories, waters, forests, oceans, sea ice and sacred sites that have been taken from Indigenous Peoples, limiting our access to our traditional ways of living, thereby causing us to misuse and expose our lands to activities and conditions that contribute to climate change.

13. In order to provide the resources necessary for our collective survival in response to the climate crisis, we declare our communities, waters, air, forests, oceans, sea ice, traditional lands and territories to be “Food Sovereignty Areas,” defined and directed by Indigenous Peoples according to customary laws, free from extractive industries, deforestation and chemical-based industrial food production systems (i.e. contaminants, agro-fuels, genetically modified organisms).

14. We encourage our communities to exchange information while ensuring the protection and respect of intellectual property rights at the local, national and international levels pertaining to our Traditional Knowledge, innovations, and practices. These include knowledge and use of land, water and sea ice, traditional agriculture, forest management, ancestral seeds, pastoralism, food plants, animals and medicines and are essential in developing climate change adaptation and mitigation strategies, restoring our food sovereignty and food independence, and strengthening our Indigenous families and nations.

We offer to share with humanity our Traditional Knowledge, innovations, and practices relevant to climate change, provided our fundamental rights as intergenerational guardians of this knowledge are fully recognized and respected. We reiterate the urgent need for collective action.

Agreed by consensus of the participants in the Indigenous Peoples’ Global Summit on Climate Change, Anchorage Alaska, April 24th 2009.

.:….:::….:.

DENIAL OF RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES AT THE 14TH CONFERENCE OF PARTIES OF THE UNFCCC

Victoria Tauli-Corpuz, Executive Director, TEBTEBBA (Indigenous Peoples’ International Centre

for Policy Research and Education), Chair, UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, December 10, 2008

It is with great sadness that today, the 60th Anniversary of the adoption of the UN Declaration on Human Rights, some States have denied indigenous peoples of their rights at the 14th Conference of Parties of the UNFCCC.

This morning indigenous peoples were shocked to see the final version of the Draft Conclusions on Agenda Item 5: Reducing emissions from deforestation in developing countries: approaches to stimulate action, of the 29th Session of Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA). This Document (FCCC/SBSTA/2008/L.23) removed any references to rights of indigenous peoples and the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). This move was spearheaded by the same States (Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the USA) which voted against the adoption of the UNDRIP by the UN General Assembly last 13 Sept. 2008.

Furthermore, these same states used the phrase “indigenous people” instead of “indigenous peoples” with an “s” which is the internationally accepted language. The international human rights instrument on indigenous peoples’ rights, the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which was adopted by 144 member-states of the UN, uses Indigenous Peoples. This was a battle fought by indigenous peoples for more than 30 years within the United Nations. The “s” in peoples means that indigenous peoples have the right to self-determination (Article 3, UNDRIP) and have collective rights. The UNDRIP is an interpretation of how the existing Human Rights Covenants apply to indigenous peoples considering the historical and present injustices they are suffering from.

Witnessing the way indigenous peoples rights are undermined by the very States who took the lead in formulating and adopting the UN Declaration on Human Rights, 60 years ago, is a tragic thing.. These States are very keen to include REDD as part of the agreement on mitigation which will be agreed upon during the 15th Conference of Parties in Copenhagen which will be held in 2009. However, they obstinately refuse to recognize the rights of indigenous peoples and other forest peoples, who are the ones who sacrificed life and limb to keep the world’s remaining tropical and sub-tropical rainforests.

I call upon these States to reconsider their positions and move towards recognizing indigenous peoples’ rights, as contained in the UNDRIP, as a framework for the design and implementation of REDD I earnestly wish to see States and the UN system implement effectively the UNDRIP as stated in Article 42. The Declaration has to be implemented in all arenas, whether at the local and national level and at the global level, including by the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and its protocols.

I congratulate the Parties who insisted that the language of rights and the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples remain in the draft conclusions. I know they fought hard for these and I certainly hope they will continue to do this in the future negotiations. Indigenous peoples will continue to oppose the REDD mechanisms if their rights are not recognized by States and the UN, including the UNFCCC and the World Bank. They are very vulnerable to the adverse impacts of climate change, but they are also providing the solutions to climate change. Their traditional knowledge on forests and biodiversity is crucial for the methodological issues being tackled under REDD. Their participation in designing, implementing, monitoring and evaluating REDD policies and proposals has to be ensured. Their free, prior and informed consent has to be obtained before any REDD mechanism is put into place in their territories. It is their right to decide whether to accept REDD or not.

I welcome paragraph 6 of the Draft Decision which calls for an Expert meeting on REDD before the 30th SBSTA session. This Expert meeting should be used to go more deeply into the methodological issues relevant for indigenous peoples. However, it should also be linked with the policy issues which will be discussed under the Ad-Hoc Working Group on Long-Term Cooperative Action (AWG-LCA). Enhanced policies and measures for REDD should be linked with methodologies proposed by the SBSTA. Indigenous peoples participation in this Expert Group meeting was acknowledged in the Draft Decision and it is my hope that this is implemented.

I call on the Ministers who will be speaking before the High-Level Ministerial Segment to reiterate the importance of recognizing and implementing the UNDRIP in REDD decisions and mechanisms. I call on the Ministers to pledge more financial and technical support for indigenous peoples to be able to contribute more substantially to mitigation efforts.

I urge indigenous peoples to continue being vigilant and active in influencing and monitoring the climate change negotiations, policies and programmes at the national and global levels. We have to use the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples as an instrument which will ensure our survival and dignity especially in the face of the multiple crisis the world faces. The climate change crisis, the economic downturn and the destruction of biodiversity and cultural diversity are serious threats to our continuing existence. But if we strongly unite amongst ourselves, with other civil society organizations, with States who are willing to do all they can to genuinely address these, then there is hope for the earth and the future generations.

There is no choice left for us but to continue contributing what we can to help bring down greenhouse gas emissions, to strengthen our values and systems which are respectful of nature, to assert our rights contained in the UNDRIP and to be in solidarity with the most vulnerable sections of society. We should continue practicing our low-carbon and sustainable traditional livelihoods. At the same time we should demand that resources be made available for us to adapt to climate change.

I reiterate the imperative for the Annex 1 countries to carry the heavier burden of mitigating climate change. As these are the countries which have mainly caused climate change, it is just fair that they be the ones to lead the way. Meeting their legally binding targets for reducing their greenhouse gas emission is the main path towards mitigation. REDD, if properly designed and implemented can still contribute to mitigation. However, I believe that forests should not be used as carbon offsets for Annex 1 countries. Thus, emissions trading of forest carbon may not be the right approach.

Rewards, both monetary and non-monetary, to indigenous peoples and other forest peoples for protecting the forests maybe a better track to take.

Let it not be said that the richest and most powerful reneged on their duty to save this world and to respect the rights of those who have contributed the most to mitigating climate change.

Thank you.

Contact: Victoria Tauli-Corpuz, email: <mailto:vicky%40tebtebba.org>vicky@tebtebba.org, mobile: +63-9175317811, www.tebtebba.org.

——=* * *=—–

SOCIETY FOR THREATENED PEOPLES INTERNATIONAL (STP) STATEMENT

SOCIETY FOR THREATENED PEOPLES INTERNATIONAL (STP) STATEMENT AT THE 9^th HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL ON CHINA – TIBETANAUTONOMOUS REGION (TAR)

Contact: Rebecca Sommer, Representative of the NGO Society for Threatened Peoples International, in consultative status to the United Nations ECOSOC, and in participatory status with the Council of Europe, Indigenous Peoples Department, USA, (718)302-1949, cell: (917)554-4933, rebeccasommer@earthlink.net, http://www.gfbv.de

China’s delegation tried to censor our statement at the 9th Session of the Human Rights Council (with the argument that in “China are no Indigenous Peoples) -the president of the Council declared that our statement was in the guidelines  - and allowed it to be read to the end, on the floor.

Item 3: Promotion and Protection of all Human Rights, Civil, Political, Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, including the Right to Development

People’s Republic of China

The Tibetan Autonomous Region (TAR) is home to 40 known species of endangered plants and 141 known species of endangered animals makes this sufficient cause for alarm. A recent study conducted by U.S. and Chinese scientists reported that global warming could cause a dramatic decline in plant species diversity on the rangelands of the Tibetan Plateau, in particular. Furthermore, climate change and large-scale developments are continuously leading to desertification, glacial melt, and flood.

The Tibetan Plateau is the source of many Asia’s major rivers. Currently 90% of the runoff of these rivers flows downstream to eleven countries, providing water resources for 47% of the world’s total population. China, however, has plans to divert many of these rivers to meet the increasing water demands of its farming and tourism industries, despite the fact that several are already drying up due to climate change.

Since 1985, the Yellow River has run dry for progressively longer periods each year. Likewise, in 2006, the Yangtze River, which serves approximately 500 million people along its course, had the lowest water level in its upper reaches since 1920. Nonetheless, many of China’s new development projects under construction or scheduled to begin in the future will magnify the damage already done to the natural ecosystems along these rivers. Chinese plans for a new nationwide power grid, involving the construction of 14 new hydro-dams on the Mekong and the Yangtze rivers, and adding to the 22,000 large dams already existing, seem to exemplify Chinese unwillingness to halt ‘progress’ in consideration of the environment.

According to the official newspaper “People’s Daily”, “Water shortage has become a problem, restricting the development of China’s western region. It is estimated that areas in the upper and middle reaches of [the] Yellow River will face a water shortage of four billion cubic meters by the year 2010. And the figure will skyrocket to 11 billion cubic meters in 2030.” The Chinese government’s efforts to divert rivers from their natural courses and the areas naturally sustained by them, demonstrates a disregard for not only the wildlife along the rivers, but also the people.

Development is the major factor influencing the quality of Tibet’s ecosystem. According to Dawa Tsering, Head of World Wildlife Fund for Nature (WWF) China’s Program Office in Lhasa, “ [Once Tibet’s ecosystem is] damaged, [the effects will be] extremely difficult to reverse,” therefore, “integrating the needs of local development with conserving Tibet’s biodiversity is in need of urgent attention.”

In recent years, the Chinese government has made significant efforts to protect the plateau’s fragile environment by implementing wildlife conservation policies, but a troubling gap between official policies and their actual implementation remains. In early 2007, several skinned chiru carcasses, whose shahtoosh wool is a precious commodity on the black market, were found after poachers had been spotted along the Khunu Mountain range. Additionally, Chinese authorities are enticing Tibetans to wear traditional clothes, trimmed with animal skins, at public gatherings and official functions.

Since the early 1960s, China’s misguided approach to agriculture and economic development has accelerated the deterioration of the Tibetan rangeland. Policies supporting infrastructure development, the reclamation of communal land for commercial development, fencing, and widespread harvesting of wild medicinal herbs, uncontrolled gold mining, and the permanent settlement of nomads have all contributed to grassland degradation, even though each of these policies conflict with China’s stated interest in protecting Tibet’s natural environment.

Under China’s ‘Western Development Strategy,’ the new 1,142 km Golmud-Lhasa railway was built on 550 km of continuous permafrost. Hundreds of millions of dollars were spent to provide environmental safeguards along the railway. According to the U.S. Embassy’s research, the constant maintenance work on the highway parallel to the railroad has had a much more devastating effect on the plateau’s environment than the railway.

The concerns occasioning this new railway are not, however, limited to environmental issues. The new railway will facilitate immigration of Han Chinese in TAR and therefore contribute to more ethnic tensions and to a profound change of the ethnic composition of TAR:

In 2006, following large-scale government initiatives to exploit Tibet’s natural resources, a total of 194 mining permits and 249 prospecting permits were granted to foreign investor-involved projects. The British company, Central China Goldfield, and Canada’s, Continental Minerals Corporation, among others, have received such permits and are currently conducting mining operations in Tibet. In February 2007, the official Chinese press announced that there are reserves of several billion tons of iron ore, 30-40 million tons of copper, 40 million tons of lead and zinc, and 600 new potential sites for mines on the Tibetan Plateau.

The mining operations will endanger Tibet’s fragile environment. Improved infrastructure will bring more Chinese to Tibet and displace ethnic Tibetan populations to extract the mineral resources. Herders are already being forcibly evicted to make room for new dams and roads.

Many had been relocated away from their native homes and forced to slaughter their livestock. In January 2008, there were plans to move more than 52,000 Tibetan herders and farmers to new homes. In most cases, their lack of marketable skills prevents them from finding alternate means of making a living.

In 2006 alone, there was a 36 percent increase in the number of tourists in Tibet. Of these, 93 percent were from China. In the first ten months of 2007, Tibet received 3.72 million tourists, a 64 percent increase from the previous year. Of these, only 350,000 were overseas visitors. Chinese tourism bureaus have attributed this trend of systemic growth in tourism to the construction of the new railway.

Although we lack official data recording the number of Chinese people who arrive in Tibet by rail for purposes other than tourism, it is safe to assume that the new railroad will have impacts similar to those of other railroads connecting China to Inner Mongolia and Xinjiang, where the original inhabitants became minority by outnumbering Han Chinese. In Inner Mongolia, experts estimate that the population in the region increased some five times from 1912-1949. By 1949, the Han Chinese outnumbered the Mongolians by 11 to 1. Such migration has not only marginalized the native Mongolian population, diluting its political significance and overshadowing its particular concerns with those of the Han Chinese, but it has also forced Mongolians to abandon their “age-old nomadic traditions,” and led to grassland degradation.

Based on a survey of 270,000 passengers over a period of approximately 75 days, or about 3,600 passengers per day, the Director of the TAR Development and Reform Committee, Jin Shixun, asserted that 60% of those using the Qinghai-Tibet railway were businesspersons, students, transient workers, traders, and individuals visiting relatives, and only 40 % were tourists. ICT estimates that if a similar proportion prevailed throughout the remainder of the first year of operation, then approximately 900,000 passengers of the 1.5 million who took the train that year could have been non-Tibetan businesspersons, workers, and traders, who intended to remain in the TAR for a period.

Society for Threatened Peoples urges the HRC to call on the People’s Republic of China to:

• Reinvest revenues generated by the Qinghai-Tibet railway to empower local Tibetans by improving already existing schools, providing new vocational training institutions and establishing healthcare institutions in rural areas.
• Include local Tibetans as active stakeholders in all strategic development programs.
• Allow nomads to manage livestock without imposing restrictions on mobility and enforce an immediate moratorium on nomad resettlement.
• Enforce strictly existing regulations and implement further environmental protection policies, specifically with regard to Tibet’s endangered species.
• Cease mining activities in ecologically fragile areas in TAR and mostly Tibetan populated areas, including the Yarlung Tsangpo and other regions in the proximity of nature reserves.
• Abandon all development projects potentially damaging vitally important Tibetan river systems.
• Exert further conservation efforts in existing nature reserves by providing sufficient funds, professionally-trained staff and resources to train current employees.
• Allocate more funds on conducting researches vital to conservation of little-known Tibetan species.
• Construct new parks and protected areas to preserve threatened and endangered species.

Also, read the UPR Info Statements Analysis (by roland.chauville@upr-info.org), So far 12 countries:

Brazil: http://www.upr-info.org/IMG/pdf/SA_Brazil_S1.pdf

China: http://www.upr-info.org/IMG/pdf/SA_China_S1.pdf

Cuba: http://www.upr-info.org/IMG/pdf/SA_Cuba_S1.pdf

Egypt: http://www.upr-info.org/IMG/pdf/SA_Egypt_S1.pdf

France: http://www.upr-info.org/IMG/pdf/SA_France_S1.pdf

India: http://www.upr-info.org/IMG/pdf/SA_India_S1.pdf

Japan: http://www.upr-info.org/IMG/pdf/SA_Japan_S1.pdf

Mexico: http://www.upr-info.org/IMG/pdf/SA_Mexico_S1.pdf

Pakistan: http://www.upr-info.org/IMG/pdf/SA_Pakistan_S1.pdf

Russian Federation: http://www.upr-info.org/IMG/pdf/SA_Russian_Federation_S1.pdf],

Switzerland: http://www.upr-info.org/IMG/pdf/SA_Switzerland_S1.pdf

The United Kingdom: http://www.upr-info.org/IMG/pdf/SA_United_Kingdom_S1.pdf

////////|\\\\\\\\

APPROPRIATE EDUCATION MAKES A DIFFERENCE

APPROPRIATE EDUCATION MAKES A DIFFERENCE

Stephen M. Sachs

In the early 1950’s, through some caring connections, Senipisi “Langi” Kavaliku went from Tonga to the Putney School, in Vermont. Putney is a high school based on John Dewey’s experiential progressive education, stressing development of students in terms of their own needs and potentials, through a maximum of positive experience, including participating in a very democratic community. Within western education, this approach comes as close as most any to an Indigenous way of doing education. Kavaliku became the first Tongan to enter Harvard University, and to gain a Ph.D (from the University of Wellington in Aorearoa – New Zealand). He returned to Tonga dedicated to developing appropriate education – which he did for some 40 years, serving as Minister of Education, and as a member of the Board of Governors of the Commonwealth of Learning, representing the South Pacific for 6 years. Kavaliku’s approach to learning integrated cultural and family issues toward a global concept of education, that allows access to the international community. One result of his efforts is that Tonga now has the most Ph.D.s per-capita of any country. Those of us who knew him, celebrate his life of loving service (See, “Senipisi ‘Langi’ Kavaliku ‘57,” The Putney Post, Spring, 2009).