33/58 Summary of responses to the questionnaire seeking the views of States and indigenous peoples on best practices regarding possible appropriate measures and implementation strategies in order to attain the goals of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

GE.16-13672(E)



Human Rights Council Thirty-third session

Agenda item 5

Human rights bodies and mechanisms

Summary of responses to the questionnaire seeking the views of States and indigenous peoples on best practices regarding possible appropriate measures and implementation strategies in order to attain the goals of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

Report of the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

Summary

The present document contains a summary of responses from States and indigenous

peoples to the questionnaires seeking their views on best practices regarding possible

appropriate measures and implementation strategies to attain the goals of the United

Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, as requested by the Human

Rights Council in its resolution 30/4.

I. Introduction

1. In its resolution 18/8 of 2011, the Human Rights Council first requested the Expert

Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples to undertake, with the assistance of the

Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, a questionnaire survey

on best practices concerning appropriate measures and implementation strategies to attain

the goals of the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. In its resolutions 21/24,

24/10 and 30/4, the Council requested that the Expert Mechanism continue to send out the

questionnaire, in order to provide summaries of responses for presentation to the Council.

The present report builds upon previous reports presented to the Council at its twenty-first,

twenty-fourth, twenty-seventh and thirtieth sessions (A/HRC/21/54, A/HRC/24/51,

A/AHRC/27/67 and A/HRC/30/54, respectively).

2. The questionnaire focuses on best practices in the areas of self-determination;

participation in decision-making, including free prior and informed consent; languages and

culture; non-discrimination and equality; lands, territories and resources; treaties,

agreements and other constructive arrangements; and measures taken to promote and

protect the rights of women, youth, children, elders, persons with disabilities and other

vulnerable groups.

3. The questionnaires for States and indigenous peoples were designed to be as

consistent as possible, as far as is reasonable, in order for the responses to be comparable

and to promote potential partnerships between States and indigenous peoples in working

towards the implementation of the Declaration. All of the questions put to States and

indigenous people are reproduced below. The responses from States and indigenous

peoples have also been placed on the website of the Expert Mechanism.1

4. The Expert Mechanism thanks all States who responded to this year’s

questionnaires. Responses were received from Australia, Bolivia (Plurinational State of),

Canada, Cuba, Denmark and Greenland, Finland, Mexico, Peru and Romania.

5. The Expert Mechanism also thanks the following indigenous peoples, indigenous

peoples’ organizations and representative bodies, and non-governmental organizations for

their responses: Agrupación de Derechos Humanos Xochitépetl A.C.; Associação União

das Aldeias Apinajé-Pempxà; Bubi People of Bioko Island; Chemudep Organization of

Kenya; World Amazigh Congress; FDAPID-Hope for Indigenous Peoples; Gudang Clan of

far northern Cape York, Queensland; International Presentation Association; Organisation

Tamaynut; Quixelos People.

II. Responses from States and from indigenous peoples

6. The present section summarizes the responses from States and from indigenous

peoples to the questionnaire. It must be borne in mind that responses from States and

indigenous peoples may have conflicting views on the benefits of measures adopted to

implement the Declaration or the ideal strategies to achieve its implementation.

1 See www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/IPeoples/EMRIP/Pages/QuestionnaireDeclaration.aspx.

A. National implementation strategies

7. The questionnaire posed the following question: “Does the State have an

overarching national implementation strategy to achieve the ends of the Declaration? If yes,

please provide details about the implementation strategy, including how indigenous peoples

have been involved. If not, are there any plans to develop one?”

8. This question is linked to the commitment that States have made in the outcome

document of the high-level plenary meeting of the General Assembly known as the World

Conference on Indigenous Peoples to develop and implement national action plans,

strategies and other measures to achieve the ends of the Declaration.

9. Australia stated that, while it did not have an overarching national action plan to

achieve the goals of the Declaration, it was working to achieve those goals through

implementing programmes and policies that had a direct connection with the articles and

principles of the Declaration. Those policies and programmes had been outlined in

responses to previous editions of the questionnaire.

10. Finland stated that, as the Declaration was not a legally binding instrument, it was

not necessary to prepare and adopt a national plan of action or strategy to promote its

objectives and effective realization. Nevertheless, as the Declaration was a political

commitment, it was taken into account in national decision-making. For example, the

Declaration was considered in the first national action plan on fundamental and human

rights of 2012. The second national action plan on fundamental and human rights was

currently being developed and would be focused on specific themes, such as the Sami

people’s right to participation. In Finland, all branches of government worked to integrate

human rights into their work.

11. The Plurinational State of Bolivia stated that indigenous peoples’ rights were

enshrined in its Constitution, and both International Labour Organization Indigenous and

Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (No. 169) and the Declaration were enshrined in the

national Constitution. In the light of the outcome document of the World Conference on

Indigenous Peoples, the Plurinational State of Bolivia had passed an economic and social

development plan that incorporated the right to development of indigenous peoples.

Indigenous peoples and communities were involved in the development of the plan, as well

as in the preparation of the action plan to implement the rights of indigenous peoples in line

with the outcome document.

12. Peru responded by highlighting the creation of the Ministry of Culture in 2010, the

main State institution in charge of indigenous peoples’ issues. The Vice-Ministry of

Intercultural Affairs was the entity responsible for implementing specialized policies for

indigenous peoples and providing technical assistance in consultation processes. It was also

in charge of administering indigenous territorial reserves for indigenous peoples in

voluntary isolation and initial contact.

13. According to Canada, it had committed to a renewed “nation-to-nation” relationship

with indigenous peoples and would therefore be engaging with indigenous peoples,

provinces and territories, industry and other sectors of Canadian society regarding the

implementation of the Declaration in accordance with the Constitution. The ensuing

consultations would then form the basis of an action plan. Canada had also committed to

significant investment in support of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s “Calls to

Action” and the forthcoming inquiry on missing and murdered indigenous women.

14. Mexico monitored the extent to which legislation was consistent with the

Declaration through the special programme for indigenous peoples 2014–2018, which was

run by the National Commission for the Development of Indigenous Peoples. The

programme was aimed at promoting and monitoring legislation based on the Constitution,

as well as international standards, including the Declaration.

15. Most indigenous peoples’ organizations reported a lack of national strategies or

plans of action to achieve the ends of the Declaration, although some did highlight specific

policies to address certain provisions of the Declaration.

B. Self-determination and autonomy

16. The questionnaire posed the following question: “Have specific legislative, policy or

administrative measures relating to self-determination and autonomy been adopted in your

country? If yes, please provide details. If not, please outline any plans to develop

legislative, policy or administrative measures in this area.”

17. The importance of self-determination has been highlighted through the work of the

Expert Mechanism, including in its studies on access to justice (see A/HRC/24/50 and

Corr.1 and A/HRC/27/65). The Expert Mechanism has repeatedly maintained that self-

determination is an essential element for the fulfilment of other rights.

18. In its response, Denmark and Greenland referred to the 2009 Act on Greenland Self-

Government, details and a copy of which were attached to a letter dated 8 February 2010

submitted to the General Assembly under the agenda item on the implementation of the

Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Peoples and Countries (A/64/676)

during its sixty-fourth session. In the preamble to the Act, it was recognized that the people

of Greenland were a people, pursuant to international law, with the right to self-

determination. The Act was based on an agreement between the Naalakkersuisut

(Government of Greenland) and the Government of Denmark as equal partners. It provided

for Greenland to assume new responsibilities and introduced new arrangements for mineral

resources and economic issues. The Act affirmed that the Greenland self-government

authorities exercised legislative and executive power in the fields of responsibility

attributed to it.

19. According to Australia, the country did not have specific legislative measures on

self-determination. However, Australia was a party to seven core international human rights

treaties that recognized the right to self-determination. Australia recognized that people

have the right to internal self-determination as reflected in article 46 of the Declaration.

20. Article 289 of the Constitution of the Plurinational State of Bolivia enshrined the

rights of indigenous peoples to self-governance and self-determination. The Plurinational

State of Bolivia had a process in place for claiming indigenous autonomy that allowed for

political, judicial, social, economic and cultural autonomy. In 2009, 11 indigenous

municipalities had become autonomous through that process.

21. Peru highlighted policies and technical instruments for the protection of indigenous

peoples in voluntary isolation and initial contact, including protection and monitoring of

territorial reserves.

22. Under the constitutional framework of Canada, indigenous peoples’ inherent right to

self-government was recognized as an existing aboriginal right under section 35 of the

Constitution. As such, self-government arrangements could be negotiated as part of modern

treaties, which allowed indigenous peoples to govern their own internal affairs. Canada

must consult with indigenous peoples where Crown actions could adversely affect protected

treaty rights.

23. In Mexico, 23 states had recognized the right to self-determination and autonomy.

Furthermore, the National Commission for the Development of Indigenous Peoples,

together with the Electoral Tribunal of the Federal Judiciary, had conducted several

intercultural dialogues on indigenous legal systems, which had ensured that Tribunal staff

were aware of the right to self-determination and autonomy of indigenous peoples and

communities and that those principles were implemented on the ground.

24. Indigenous organizations mostly highlighted the lack of any legislation or plan to

develop legislation in relation to the protection or promotion of self-determination and

autonomy. Furthermore, an indigenous peoples’ organization from Brazil reported that

there were several proposals currently before the parliament that would undermine the

rights of indigenous peoples.

C. Participation in decision-making and free, prior and informed consent

25. The questionnaire posed the following question: “Have specific legislative, policy or

administrative measures been adopted to implement rights relating to participation in

decision-making, including the obligation to seek free, prior and informed consent? If yes,

please provide the details. If not, please outline any plans to develop legislative, policy or

administrative measures in this area.”

26. Finland responded that it was intending to revise the Act on the Sami Parliament

(974/1995) and that the Ministry, in that context, would reiterate that the current obligation

to negotiate under section 9 should be changed to better comply with the principle of free,

prior and informed consent. Finland also referred to a State-owned enterprise,

Metsähallitus, which conducted business activities on State-owned land and waters. Under

the administering law, municipal advisory committees were appointed in the Sami

homeland regions and they were composed of representatives from various bodies,

including the Sami Parliament, the municipality, reindeer-herding cooperatives, the

fisheries region and commercial fisheries. Those committees issued opinions to

Metsähallitus.

27. Consistent with the Declaration, Australia recognized the importance of engaging in

good-faith negotiations with indigenous peoples in relation to decisions that affected them.

One example was the Empowered Communities initiative being implemented in eight

regions across Australia. Australia also interpreted the principle of free, prior and informed

consent as consistent with the territorial and political sovereignty of Australia.

28. The response of the Plurinational State of Bolivia highlighted the fact that the right

to free, prior and informed consultation was established in the country’s Constitution. The

State also had a number of other pieces of legislation relating to consultation in the context

of specific activities, such as extractive operations.

29. Canada responded that aboriginal treaty rights were protected under section 35 of

the Constitution. The Supreme Court of Canada required the Crown to consult with

indigenous peoples and accommodate where possible their interests in cases where

indigenous constitutionally protected rights could be infringed. Canada would be

undertaking a review, in partnership with First Nations, Inuit and Metis Nation, of laws,

policies and operational practices to ensure the Crown was respecting those constitutionally

protected aboriginal and treaty rights.

30. Mexico ensured that indigenous peoples were adequately consulted when the

National Commission for the Development of Indigenous Peoples undertook its afore-

mentioned monitoring of the extent to which legislation was consistent with the

Declaration. For example, that consultation process was recently followed in Baja

California, Baja California Sur, Durango, Sinaloa and Campeche.

31. Several indigenous peoples’ organizations emphasized that free, prior and informed

consent was either not referred to or was not well articulated in laws and policies and

provided examples of large-scale public works, such as hydroelectric dams, or extractive

industries pursuing their activities on indigenous peoples’ lands without their consent.

D. Participation of indigenous peoples in the development and

implementation of legislative, policy or administrative measures

that affect them

32. Finland responded that the Act on Metsähallitus, which included provision for

municipal advisory committees in the Sami homeland, was drafted by a working group

appointed by the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry on 16 June 2013. That working

group included representatives from the Sami Parliament and the Skolt Sami Village

Council.

33. Australia engaged with a range of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander leaders,

organizations and communities when designing policies and programmes and implementing

services. One example was the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Plan

2013-2023, which recognized the importance of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander

peoples’ involvement in the planning, design and implementation of health services.

34. Denmark and Greenland stated that the 2009 Act on Greenland Self-Government

demonstrated the commitment to and implementation of the Declaration. The Act required

the Naalakkersuisut (Government of Greenland) to be heard on all other matters affecting

Greenland and the Government of Denmark. It required all bills of the Government of

Denmark that might be brought into force in Greenland to be submitted to the autonomous

government for comments. The Government of Denmark was required to await those

comments before presenting bills to the Danish parliament.

35. Peru reported on the establishment of a working group on public policies focusing

on indigenous peoples, which was a space for participation and dialogue between

indigenous peoples and the executive power to coordinate, propose and monitor such public

policies. Peru also highlighted its quota system in place in certain departments and

provinces to address the gaps in the political representation of indigenous peoples. Peru

reported on consultation processes, pointing out that of 11 processes carried out in 2015–

2016, nine had concluded with agreements between indigenous peoples and the State.

36. Indigenous peoples in Canada had treaty or self-government agreements, which

Canada was bound to respect. Canada must consult with or secure agreement from

indigenous government (as set out in such agreements) when developing and implementing

legislative, policy or administrative measures that affected the rights of indigenous peoples.

Canada submitted that it was also in the process of undertaking an extensive review to

ensure compliance on the part of the Crown with aboriginal and treaty rights.

37. Mexico had ensured that indigenous peoples were consulted during the development

of the National Development Plan by holding consultation meetings with representatives of

indigenous peoples and communities. Furthermore, 22 state constitutions and 24 state laws

recognized the right to consultation and participation of indigenous peoples and indigenous

communities. In 2004, the Government of Mexico had also established the Advisory

Council of the National Commission for the Development of Indigenous Peoples. That

body had become the main organ of participation and consultation for indigenous peoples.

38. Answers from indigenous peoples’ organizations described situations ranging from

complete exclusion from decision-making to pro forma processes for participation, carried

out by the State simply to comply with protocols, but not in good faith. Other organizations

stated that the non-recognition of their indigenous status by Government authorities

hampered any attempts to participate in decision-making.

E. Cultures and languages

39. The questionnaire posed the following question: “Have specific legislative, policy or

administrative measures been adopted to implement rights relating to cultures and

languages? If yes, please provide details. If not, please outline any plans to develop

legislative, policy or administrative measures in this area.”

40. The Government of Finland safeguarded Sami-language social welfare and health-

care services by way of a separate discretionary transfer that was paid out through the Sami

Parliament. In 2016, the discretionary transfer amount was €480,000. The Sami Parliament

prepared an annual plan for the spending of that money. The discretionary government

transfer was a key channel for the Sami people to influence the provision, organization and

contents of services arranged for them and thus to steer the way in which Sami language

and culture were maintained and developed in their homelands. On 3 July 2014, the

Government had made a decision in principle on a programme to revive the Sami language,

concerning all Sami languages spoken in Finland, which it considered to be under threat.

The measures for the revival of language were under way and included securing funding for

“language nest” activities and increased allocations for the production of teaching materials

in the Sami language.

41. The response of Denmark and Greenland referred to the 2009 Act on Greenland

Self-Government, which recognized the Greenlandic language as the official language in

Greenland.

42. Australia provided funding support to maintain, preserve and transmit the estimated

250 languages spoken in the country. That funding supported community-based activities,

languages research and the development of language resources. Aboriginal languages were

also now being taught in some schools and, in 2016, had been included in the New South

Wales Higher School Certificate for the first time. Aboriginal languages were also

supported though the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority’s draft

Framework for Aboriginal Languages and Torres Strait Islander Languages.

43. The Plurinational State of Bolivia responded by outlining the Avelino Siñani Law,

which had created the Plurinational Institute of Languages and Cultures. The Institute had

the objective of promoting the development of indigenous languages and culture, which it

achieved through the creation of the various language and cultural institutions for each

indigenous group, of which there were currently 16. Furthermore, the Ministry of Education

had ensured the production of school textbooks in 23 indigenous languages. Education

curricula were also permitted to be adapted regionally to ensure that the Bolivian education

system remained plurinational. There were currently 11 regional-specific curricula.

44. Peru reported the strengthening of its national register of interpreters and translators

of indigenous languages, as well as the development of the National Plan for Intercultural

Bilingual Education.

45. According to Canada, the federal Department of Canadian Heritage was responsible

for administering funding related to the Aboriginal Peoples Program, which supported

retention and revitalization of culture, heritage and language. Canada negotiated treaties

and other self-government agreements with indigenous peoples and those agreements also

provided individual groups with the ability to protect their language and culture.

46. In Mexico, the National Commission for the Development of Indigenous Peoples

was the government agency responsible for implementing rights relating to culture and

languages. The Commission had carried out several initiatives since 2014 to improve the

implementation of those rights. Those initiatives had covered a wide range of topics,

including art, food, music, dance, film, traditional ceremonies, crafts, contemporary

indigenous literature and traditional medicine. For example, to ensure access to justice for

indigenous peoples, the Commission had established a system that allowed an indigenous

person to access legal services in his or her indigenous language through the provision of

translators. It was estimated that, in the period from 1 December 2012 to 31 May 2016, the

Commission had provided language support services to 3,888 indigenous persons.

47. Indigenous peoples’ organizations described advances in that area, in one case with

support from the private sector. In other cases, while constitutional recognition of

indigenous languages existed, there were no measures taken to ensure their promotion and

protection.

F. Non-discrimination and equality

48. The questionnaire posed the following question: “Have specific legislative, policy or

administrative measures relating to non-discrimination and equality been adopted? If yes,

please provide details. If not, please outline any plans to develop legislative, policy or

administrative measures in this area.”

49. Finland had the new Non-Discrimination Act (1324/2014), which provided for the

appointment of the Non-Discrimination Ombudsman and expanded the scope of protection

against discrimination. The Act applied to all public and private activities and included

obligations for public authorities to develop “equality plans” concerning education and

employment. The Act was overseen by a new tribunal, which covered all grounds of

discrimination and could undertake conciliation between parties and impose fines in order

to reinforce its decisions.

50. Discrimination and vilification on the basis of race was prohibited in Australia under

the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 and individuals who experienced such discrimination

could make a complaint to the Australian Human Rights Commission.

51. Article 9 of the Constitution of the Plurinational State of Bolivia stated that one of

the essential functions of the State was to create a just society, free from discrimination and

exploitation. Article 14 of the Constitution stipulated that the State prohibited and

sanctioned all forms of discrimination. The country also had a law against racism and all

forms of discrimination. That law had the objective of establishing mechanisms and

processes to prevent and sanction acts of racism and all forms of discrimination.

52. Peru reported on measures taken in the health sector to ensure indigenous peoples’

access to health services on a non-discriminatory basis, as well as to ensure that those

services were intercultural in nature. Peru also had a national policy on the mainstreaming

of a multicultural approach, which was mandatory for all State institutions.

53. Canada responded that it had a constitutional and legislative framework protecting

the rights of indigenous peoples, including in relation to discrimination and equality. It was

also launching an inquiry to address known forms of gender-based discrimination related to

the transmission of Indian status.

54. Mexico guaranteed the right to non-discrimination and equality through its national

constitution, as well as through various legislative instruments, such as article 3 of the

General Law for Equality between Men and Women. The National Commission for the

Development of Indigenous Peoples also contributed to the protection of those rights

through various national programmes, such as the National Programme for Equality and

Non-Discrimination 2014-2018.

55. Responses from indigenous peoples’ organizations emphasized that, despite

constitutional and/or legislative guarantees, structural discrimination against indigenous

peoples persisted.

G. Lands, territories and resources

56. The questionnaire posed the following question: “Have specific legislative, policy or

administrative measures been adopted to implement rights relating to lands, territories and

resources? If yes, please provide details. If not, please outline any plans to develop

legislative, policy or administrative measures in this area.”

57. The response of Finland referred to the new Fishing Act (379/2015), according to

which a person who resided permanently in certain municipalities had a right to obtain a

permit from Metsähallitus concerning fishing in State-owned water free of charge. There

were some exceptions to that provision, however.

58. The Government of Denmark and the Government of Greenland were currently in

the process of resolving a claim to the continental shelf north of Greenland. The claim area

was for approximately 895,541km 2 beyond 200 nautical miles of the coast of Greenland.

The claim material had been submitted to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental

Shelf through the Secretary-General, in accordance with the United Nations Convention on

the Law of the Sea, ratified by the Kingdom of Denmark in 2004.

59. The response of Australia stated that there were state and federal legislative schemes

that recognized Aboriginal peoples’ rights to lands and territories. Under the Aboriginal

Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976, the Aboriginal Lands Trust could apply for

inalienable freehold title to be granted. About 50 per cent of the land mass of the Northern

Territory was covered under the Act, as was about 80 per cent of the coastline. Therefore, it

was one of the most significant pieces of land rights legislation in Australia. At the federal

level, the Native Title Act 1993 provided an avenue for indigenous claimants to seek native

title recognition of their land under Australian law.

60. The Plurinational State of Bolivia responded that its Constitution guaranteed the

possession, access and title of indigenous territories in the framework of their self-

determination and their right to autonomy, self-governance and culture. Since 2006, the

State had transformed the agrarian property structure and now 23.9 million hectares of land

belonged to indigenous communities. In 2015 alone, the State had awarded 295,000 titles of

land to indigenous peoples and communities.

61. Peru reported on measures to prevent illegal logging on indigenous territories, as

well as on measures to recognize the collective ownership of lands through formal titles.

62. Canada outlined the recognition and protection of aboriginal and treaty rights under

section 35 of the Constitution. That framework provided indigenous peoples with the right

to participate in decision-making on matters affecting them, including on lands, territories

and resources. Comprehensive land agreements also received constitutional protection and

provided for ownership, use and management of land and resources.

63. Indigenous peoples’ organizations’ responses highlighted a range of issues: from a

complete lack of legislative measures to address their claims over their lands, to situations

in which, despite constitutional recognition of their lands and territories, demarcation

processes had not moved forward sufficiently and land invasion and resource extraction

persisted.

H. Treaties, agreements and other constructive arrangements with States

64. The questionnaire posed the following question: “Have specific legislative, policy or

administrative measures been adopted to implement rights relating to treaties, agreements

and other constructive arrangements with States? If yes, please provide details. If not,

please outline any plans to develop legislative, policy or administrative measures in this

area.”

65. Finland was in the process of negotiations for a Nordic Sami convention intended to

develop the status of the Sami as an indigenous people. It had also ratified the Nagoya

Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits

Arising from Their Utilization to the Convention on Biological Diversity. The Government

was furthermore in the process of ratifying International Labour Organization Indigenous

and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (No. 169) and the ratification bill would be based on a

study that drew on international norms, experiences and practices concerning the rights of

indigenous peoples.

66. In Australia, international treaties and international human rights were given

recognition through various laws designed to implement such rights domestically, such as

the Race Discrimination Act 1975. All bills of Parliament must also be scrutinized in

accordance with the Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011, which required that

bills be accompanied by a statement of compatibility assessing the compatibility of the

proposed legislation with the human rights recognized under the core human rights treaties

Australia had ratified.

67. Canada had a constitutional and legislative framework that protected indigenous

peoples’ rights to participate in decision-making that affected them, including in relation to

treaties, agreements and other constructive arrangements with the State. Canada also

negotiated modern-day treaties and self-government agreements with indigenous groups

and those agreements provided that Canada would consult with indigenous groups before

agreeing to international obligations that could have an adverse impact on the group.

68. In response to the question, the Plurinational State of Bolivia highlighted the

implementation of the first stage of a programme intended to protect indigenous peoples

who lived in voluntary isolation or were in initial contact.

I. Indigenous women, youth, children, elders, persons with disabilities

and any other vulnerable group

69. The questionnaire posed the following question: “Please describe any particular

measures taken to promote and protect the rights of indigenous persons belonging to the

following groups: women, youth, children, elders, persons with disabilities and any other

vulnerable groups (such as lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons). If no such

measures have been taken, please outline any plans to do so.”

70. Finland noted that the Sami Parliament had identified the priority areas for the

discretionary funding transfer for 2016 as being services for older people and health care.

The Ministry of Justice had also established an intergovernmental network of contact

persons for fundamental human rights, which would be tasked with developing a national

action plan on fundamental human rights. Gender equity policies were pursued under the

Ministry of Social Affairs and Health, which ensured gender was included in all areas of

decision-making and the Sami people were included in that work.

71. In Finland, Sami children were entitled to child health services similar to all other

children in a municipality. The Government supported Sami youth through the Youth

Council of the Sami Parliament, which promoted the linguistic and cultural rights of young

Sami people.

72. Denmark and Greenland referred to legislation passed in 2014 to recognize “legally

fatherless” Greenlanders, i.e. children born out of wedlock who had no rights to inheritance

from their fathers. The Danish parliament had introduced legislation to improve the rights

of such persons by allowing them to initiate proceedings to determine who their father was

and establishing inheritance rights. Furthermore, Greenlanders living in Denmark affected

by social vulnerability were supported as part of the strategy for vulnerable Greenlanders

living in Denmark, for which 13.4 million krone had been earmarked for the period 2013-

2016.

73. The response of Australia referred to federal, state and territory anti-discrimination

laws, which protected individuals from discrimination, including women, children, persons

with disabilities and lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons.

74. Peru stated that its emphasis had been on three groups: indigenous persons without

identity documents; indigenous peoples living in border areas with difficult access; and

indigenous women.

75. Canada reported that it had specific measures for the promotion and protection of the

rights of women, youth, children, persons with disabilities and other vulnerable groups. The

Constitution also contained the Charter of Rights, which protected human rights.

76. Mexico stated that it promoted and protected the rights of indigenous persons

belonging to vulnerable groups through the National Commission for the Development of

Indigenous Peoples, which had facilitated the release of indigenous persons from

incarceration, provided translation and interpreting services in indigenous languages and

promoted the rights of indigenous women. The Commission had also spearheaded a variety

of programmes that focused on such topics as the following: violence against women; the

full exercise of citizenship rights by indigenous youth; improving the productivity of

projects run by indigenous people, with a focus on women; school attendance rates for

indigenous children and youth; infrastructure for indigenous communities, including

housing, with a focus on single mothers and persons with disabilities; and the electoral

rights of indigenous peoples, with a focus on indigenous women.

J. Raising awareness about the Declaration

77. The questionnaire posed the following question: “Has the State taken measures to

raise awareness about the Declaration among various sectors of society, including

parliamentarians, the judiciary, the civil service and indigenous peoples?”

78. The Ministry for Foreign Affairs in Finland was in the process of publishing the

Declaration, as well as the outcome document of the World Conference on Indigenous

Peoples.

79. Denmark advised that, as a member State of the European Union, it contributed

actively to bringing European Union policies into line with the Declaration. It had provided

the European Union with a senior national adviser on indigenous issues to support an

update of the European Union policy and guidelines on indigenous peoples.

80. Australia had provided information previously (in 2014 and 2015) about its efforts

in that regard.

81. Peru discussed training programmes carried out by the Ministry of Culture to

improve awareness of collective rights enshrined in national and international legal

frameworks. Those programmes had reached 4,454 indigenous leaders, 2,384 civil servants,

and 508 members of the general public.

82. Canada has promoted the Declaration in society at large and with indigenous

peoples, parliamentarians and civil society. The Government of Canada had announced the

country’s full support for the Declaration without qualification and had outlined plans on

how it could be implemented domestically in accordance with the Constitution.

83. Mexico had carried out training programmes on the Declaration through local events

and projects aimed at indigenous peoples and run by civil society organizations and the

National Commission for the Development of Indigenous Peoples. During the period from

1 July 2015 to 30 May 2016, training was also provided to 762 civil servants on a range of

human rights issues, although none of the topics focused specifically on the Declaration.

84. Indigenous peoples’ organizations reported measures taken to increase awareness of

indigenous peoples’ rights, including dissemination of printed copies of the Declaration,

radio progammes and training.

K. Challenges

85. The questionnaire posed the following question: “What are the main challenges

encountered in adopting measures and implementing strategies to achieve the ends of the

Declaration?”

86. Finland observed that a major challenge in that regard concerned the rights of Sami

people who did not live in their homelands, as was the case for 60 per cent of Sami people.

Sami people who lived outside of their homeland had the constitutional right to language

and culture and were assisted with educational needs. There were some Sami cultures

(including Skolt Sami and Inari Sami) that were described as being on the “verge of

extinction”, as not many people now spoke the language. Another challenge concerned

Sami victims of violence and discrimination. As the community was relatively small, there

was concern about confidentiality of sensitive issues. Some issues related to health and

social services were also seen as “taboo” and, to counter those challenges, the Government

had incorporated special measures into its standard service.

87. Australia noted that barriers existed due to differences in Aboriginal and Torres

Strait Islander life experiences, geography, discrimination and other factors. Australia had

previously responded to the question and would appreciate hearing from other Member

States as to best practices. Australia had previously provided information about the matter,

including: the need for evidence to inform the development of programmes and policies;

the importance of engagement of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples; and the

recognition of the need for assessment and flexibility in programme design and delivery to

assist in achieving the aims of the Declaration. Australia referred to the National Aboriginal

and Torres Strait Islander Health Plan 2013-2023 and its implementation plan, which

recognized the need to support Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander well-being through

ensuring connection to land, culture and community, as well as the need to ensure that

indigenous peoples were involved in the planning, design, delivery and implementation of

health services.

88. Denmark and Greenland reported on a round table held by the International Work

Group for Indigenous Affairs in October 2015 on indigenous peoples and the post-2015

development agenda. One of the issues discussed was how to link the implementation of the

Declaration to the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals.

89. According to Canada, the main challenge was to ensure that indigenous peoples

were full partners in the implementation of the Declaration and the development of an

action plan. Modern treaty and agreement-making processes had also proven to be very

challenging for complex reasons and efforts were under way to increase the efficiency of

such processes.

90. Mexico stated that one of the main challenges for States was how to work

collaboratively with indigenous peoples to implement measures consistent with the aims of

the Declaration. For example, a priority for the Government of Mexico was the

development of a national action plan for the implementation of the outcome document of

the World Conference on Indigenous Peoples; however, that must be done in such a way

that it respected and was in compliance with the rights of indigenous peoples.

91. Some indigenous peoples’ organizations reported that their recognition as distinct

peoples constituted an overarching challenge. Other challenges included a lack of political

will from State authorities, language barriers, gaps in the legal framework and a lack of

financial resources among indigenous peoples’ organizations to carry out their mission.

L. Best practices

92. States and indigenous peoples were asked to provide examples of best practices

regarding possible appropriate measures and implementation strategies to attain the goals of

the Declaration. The following practices were described by States in their responses.

93. Finland was engaging its Government and the Sami Parliament in talks concerning

the World Conference on Indigenous Peoples and was mapping out relevant national action.

It had organized meetings of government representatives with indigenous peoples from

Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden, including in relation to the review of the Expert

Mechanism, as well as the participation of indigenous peoples at the United Nations.

94. In Finland, Metsähallitus was also enhancing measures to strengthen the

participation of the Sami Parliament and the Skolt Sami Village Council in planning the

management and use of State-owned lands and waters in the Sami homeland. It had

developed methods for participatory planning. For example, the management plan for the

Hammastunturi Wilderness Area was based on article 8 (j) of the Convention on Biological

Diversity. Another example of best practice, according to the State, was reflected in section

49 of the Environmental Protection Act (572/2014), which concerned the granting of

environmental permits and imposed the precondition for the granting of such permits that

the planned activities would not weaken the Sami people’s opportunities to carry on

traditional livelihoods or otherwise maintain and develop their cultures.

95. Denmark and Greenland responded that they worked closely to promote indigenous

peoples rights at the international level. A recent example was the fifteenth session of the

Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, where Denmark and Greenland had prepared two

national statements and participated in four joint Nordic statements in support of the rights

of indigenous peoples.

96. In Australia, the Aboriginal community-controlled health sector was described as a

model of self-determination. The Aboriginal community-controlled health organizations

had the following key attributes in common: they were incorporated Aboriginal

organizations, initiated by local communities, based in local communities, governed by an

Aboriginal body elected by the community and delivering holistic and culturally

appropriate health services to the community. The importance of the Aboriginal

community-controlled health organizations was recognized in the National Aboriginal and

Torres Strait Islander Health Plan 2013-2023 and subsequent implementation plan, which

built on the Declaration and recognized the importance of indigenous partnerships.

97. The Constitution of Canada recognized aboriginal rights and ensured that the Crown

was responsible for any breach of such rights, which had led to a substantial body of

jurisprudential law in support of aboriginal rights. The Government would also be engaging

with indigenous peoples to develop an action plan to implement the Declaration at the

national level.

98. Mexico provided a range of examples of best practice that contributed to achieving

the goals of the Declaration. Those examples focused specifically on programmes carried

out by the National Commission for the Development of Indigenous Peoples. For example,

under the National Register of Bilingual Indigenous Lawyers, between 1 January 2013 and

30 June 2016, 198 indigenous lawyers had been trained on a range of indigenous legal

issues, such as land rights of indigenous peoples and communities. The purpose of that

programme was to improve the availability of legal services that were relevant to the

specific legal issues of indigenous peoples, as well as being sensitive to the cultural and

linguistic needs of indigenous peoples.

99. Good practices highlighted by indigenous peoples included the joint ownership and

management of lands in national parks and programmes to teach indigenous languages to

civil servants.

M. Use of the studies and advice of the Expert Mechanism

100. The questionnaire posed the following question: “Have the thematic studies and

advice of the Expert Mechanism been used in the formulation of laws, policies and

programmes pertaining to indigenous peoples’ rights?”

101. According to Australia, the thematic studies of the Expert Mechanism provided a

background to support policy and programme development. They also provided an

opportunity to learn from other States and to provide different perspectives. The studies had

not yet been used directly in the formulation of laws, policies and programmes but rather

the information was being used indirectly.

102. Mexico stated that the National Commission for the Development of Indigenous

Peoples was guided by the studies and advice of the Expert Mechanism when carrying out

its work and specific programmes.

103. Several indigenous peoples’ organizations reported that, to their knowledge, the

studies and advice of the Expert Mechanism were not being used by States when

formulating laws and policies concerning indigenous peoples.

III. Concluding comments

104. The Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples very much

appreciates the responses of States and of indigenous peoples and indigenous peoples’

organizations to its questionnaire, in particular first-time respondents. The responses

received allow the Expert Mechanism to evaluate some of the advances and challenges

in the implementation of the Declaration from the perspective of both States and

indigenous peoples. However, the Expert Mechanism regrets the relatively low

number of responses received and the fact that many States with indigenous peoples

did not submit any information on their laws, policies and practices related to the

implementation of the Declaration.

105. The majority of responses received from States provide very general

information. While information was provided on laws, policies and programmes

relating to indigenous peoples, there was almost no information indicating the

effectiveness of the measures taken. Most States provided only positive answers to

questions. Answers outlining challenges would also provide a greater understanding

of the barriers faced by States when implementing the Declaration.

106. The responses received suggest that very few States have developed

comprehensive national strategies to implement the Declaration. Given the

interdependence and interrelated nature of the rights contained in the Declaration, its

implementation requires comprehensive approaches and actions, as highlighted in the

outcome document of the World Conference on Indigenous Peoples.

107. Several responses from States showed encouraging progress in terms of efforts

to adopt national legislation relating to indigenous peoples’ right to participate in

decision-making. However, it was not always clear whether States were following the

obligation to seek indigenous peoples’ free, prior and informed consent.

108. Responses from indigenous peoples provide examples of approaches and

activities, including advocacy and awareness-raising, development of resources on the

Declaration, training for indigenous communities and organizations, and translating

the Declaration into indigenous languages.

109. However, few of the representatives of indigenous peoples who responded

proposed overarching strategies for implementation of the Declaration. That may

partly be due to the fact that most of the indigenous respondents work at the local

level and are generally limited by a lack of financial resources and, in some cases, by a

lack of will from State institutions to cooperate and engage with indigenous peoples.

110. Several responses from both indigenous peoples’ organizations and States point

towards the fact that indigenous women, children, youth and persons with disabilities

are in a particularly vulnerable situation. Targeted measures must be taken to

address the situation of those groups.

111. Most indigenous peoples’ organizations reported a lack of attention devoted by

States in considering the Declaration and, more generally, the rights of indigenous

peoples. Those concerns hamper the effective implementation of the Declaration.