36/57 Annual report of the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
Document Type: Final Report
Date: 2017 Aug
Session: 36th Regular Session (2017 Sep)
Agenda Item: Item5: Human rights bodies and mechanisms
GE.17-13468(E)
Human Rights Council Thirty-sixth session
11-29 September 2017
Agenda item 5
Human rights bodies and mechanisms
Annual report of the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
Chair-Rapporteur: Albert Kwokwo Barume
United Nations A/HRC/36/57
Contents
Page
I. Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 3
II. Intersessional activities ................................................................................................................. 3
III. Studies, reports and proposals ....................................................................................................... 4
A. Adoption of studies and reports ............................................................................................ 4
B. Proposals ............................................................................................................................... 4
IV. Organization of the session ........................................................................................................... 6
A. Attendance ............................................................................................................................ 6
B. Opening and adoption of the agenda .................................................................................... 6
C. Election of officers ............................................................................................................... 7
V. New mandate of the Expert Mechanism: activities and methods of work .................................... 7
VI. Interactive dialogue with national human rights institutions, regional human rights
institutions and similar mechanisms .............................................................................................. 7
VII. Coordination meeting between the Expert Mechanism, the United Nations
Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues and the Special Rapporteur on the rights of
indigenous peoples ........................................................................................................................ 8
VIII. Indigenous peoples’ participation in the United Nations system .................................................. 9
IX. Ten years of implementation of the Declaration: good practices and lessons learned .................. 9
X. Intersessional activities and follow-up of thematic studies and advice on the rights to cultural
heritage and health ....................................................................................................................... 10
XI. Side events during the tenth session .............................................................................................. 11
XII. Future work of the Expert Mechanism, including the focus of the next annual study .................. 12
Annexes
I. Methods of work for submission of reports to the Human Rights Council and
country engagement ...................................................................................................................... 13
II. List of participants ......................................................................................................................... 18
I. Introduction
1. In its resolution 6/36, the Human Rights Council established the Expert Mechanism
on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples as a subsidiary body to assist the Council in the
implementation of its mandate by providing it with thematic expertise on the rights of
indigenous peoples, as requested by the Council. In the resolution, the Council established
that the thematic expertise would focus mainly on studies and research-based advice, and
that the Expert Mechanism might suggest proposals to the Council for its consideration and
approval.
2. In September 2016, the Human Rights Council adopted resolution 33/25 amending
the Expert Mechanism’s mandate: the Expert Mechanism was mandated to provide the
Human Rights Council with expertise and advice on the rights of indigenous peoples as set
out in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and to assist
Member States, upon request, in achieving the ends of the Declaration through the
promotion, protection and fulfilment of the rights of indigenous peoples. The specificities
of the new mandate are set out in the resolution. The present report is the first annual report
of the Expert Mechanism adopted in the light of this expanded mandate.
3. The Expert Mechanism held its tenth session in Geneva from 10 to 14 July 2017.
During the session, it discussed the draft methods of work for its reports to the Human
Rights Council and for country engagement (see annex I). The summary of the debate in
sections V to XII below is not intended to be a verbatim record, but rather an overview of
the main points raised by expert members and other participants. The individual
contributions of all participants can be viewed on the webcast of the session.1
II. Intersessional activities
4. Since its last annual session in July 2016, the Expert Mechanism has undertaken
several official intersessional activities. In September 2016, it held an interactive dialogue
with the Human Rights Council at the latter’s thirty-third session, as part of the process of
submission of the Expert Mechanism’s study on the right to health and indigenous peoples
(A/HRC/33/57). On the same occasion, Albert Kwokwo Barume, Chair of the Expert
Mechanism, served as moderator of the half-day discussion in the Human Rights Council
on violence against indigenous women. In January 2017, the Expert Mechanism
participated in the expert group meeting on the role of the United Nations Permanent
Forum on Indigenous Issues and other indigenous-specific mechanisms in the
implementation of the Declaration.
5. From 2 to 4 March 2017, the members of the Expert Mechanism took part in a
meeting hosted by the Government of Canada to discuss their new mandate under Council
resolution 33/25, including the development of new methods of work. Members also held a
half-day meeting with all members of the Permanent Forum, which was holding an
intersessional meeting in Ottawa at the same time, in order to discuss cooperation and
possible joint initiatives under the new mandate.
6. On 6 and 7 March 2017, the members of the Expert Mechanism attended the United
Nations Expert Seminar on Good Practices and Challenges for Indigenous Peoples’
Entrepreneurship in Boulder, Colorado, United States of America. The seminar was jointly
organized by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
(OHCHR) and the University of Colorado Law School. The objective of the seminar was to
support the study on good practices and challenges in business and access to financial
services by indigenous peoples. The seminar brought together approximately 30
participants from several regions, including five members of the Expert Mechanism,
indigenous human rights advocates, academics and practitioners. The topics addressed
included State and regional practices on indigenous peoples’ businesses, the role of
1 Available from http://webtv.un.org.
indigenous-owned businesses in promoting respect for human rights, indigenous
knowledge-based businesses, and strategies to promote non-discriminatory access to
financial services by indigenous peoples.
7. From 17 to 21 March 2017, the Expert Mechanism held an intersessional meeting in
the Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous Okrug — Yugra, hosted by the Government of the
Russian Federation. The purpose of this meeting was to draft specific methods of work for
the various activities enshrined in the new mandate of the Expert Mechanism. The meeting
enabled the Expert Mechanism to develop guidelines for its engagement in country
situations, including responding to requests by indigenous peoples and States for technical
advice and dialogue facilitation.
8. The Expert Mechanism was also represented at the sixteenth session (April-May
2017) of the Permanent Forum and took part in the high-level commemorations of the
adoption of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, conducted
by the General Assembly on 25 April 2017. In addition, several members of the Expert
Mechanism engaged with United Nations agencies, regional human rights mechanisms,
Member States and civil society organizations at the country level, including through
activities related to capacity-building.
III. Studies, reports and proposals
A. Adoption of studies and reports
9. During its session, the Expert Mechanism adopted the following:
(a) A study2 and advice on good practices and challenges in business and in
access to financial services by indigenous peoples, mandated by the Human Rights Council
in its resolution 33/13, paragraph 4;
(b) A report on 10 years of the implementation of the Declaration,3 describing
good practices, lessons learned and methods of work relating to its new mandate, in
accordance with Human Rights Council resolution 33/25, paragraph 2 (b).
10. The Expert Mechanism agreed that the Chair-Rapporteur, in consultation with the
other members of the Expert Mechanism, might make revisions to the above-mentioned
documents in the light of discussions carried out at its tenth session, and agreed to submit
them to the Human Rights Council at its thirty-sixth session.
B. Proposals
Proposal 1: Participation of indigenous peoples in the Human Rights Council
11. The Expert Mechanism proposes that the Human Rights Council make further
efforts to facilitate the participation in its work of indigenous peoples’ representatives and
institutions, as opposed to non-governmental organizations, in accordance with the
Declaration. This would include all meetings relevant to the rights of indigenous peoples, in
particular the dialogue between the Expert Mechanism and the Special Rapporteur on the
rights of indigenous peoples and the annual half-day discussion on the rights of indigenous
peoples. The Expert Mechanism makes this proposal without prejudice to the ongoing
consultative process in the General Assembly aimed at enhancing the participation of
indigenous peoples in United Nations meetings, to enable the participation of indigenous
peoples’ representatives and institutions in meetings of relevant United Nations bodies on
issues affecting them.
2 A/HRC/36/53.
3 A/HRC/36/56.
Proposal 2: Theme of the Human Rights Council’s annual half-day discussion on
indigenous peoples
12. In the light of the information set out in section II of document A/HRC/36/56, the
Expert Mechanism proposes to the Council that it hold a half-day discussion on the
protection of indigenous human rights defenders at its thirty-ninth session.
Proposal 3: Increased engagement of Member States with the Expert Mechanism
13. The Expert Mechanism proposes that the Human Rights Council urge States to
engage more actively with the Expert Mechanism’s activities, in particular during its
sessions, with a view to taking part in a dialogue, which is a core element of the Expert
Mechanism’s amended mandate.
Proposal 4: Protection of human rights defenders
14. The Expert Mechanism renews its earlier proposal to the Council that the latter call
upon States to ensure that indigenous human rights defenders, in particular indigenous
women and indigenous communities, are guaranteed a safe working environment and
security, in compliance with the Declaration and other international standards. In the light
of the information set out in section II of report A/HRC/36/56, it proposes that the Council
request States to ensure that all human rights violations against indigenous communities
and human rights defenders, including indigenous women, are investigated and brought to
justice.
Proposal 5: Sustainable Development Goals
15. The Expert Mechanism proposes that the Human Rights Council urge States to
support indigenous community-based monitoring towards the implementation of the
Sustainable Development Goals and the collection of disaggregated data for the purposes of
measuring progress towards these Goals.
Proposal 6: Reporting to the General Assembly
16. In the light of its amended mandate, which expands its scope to include technical
advice to States, the Expert Mechanism reiterates its previous proposal to the Human
Rights Council that the latter request the Expert Mechanism to report to the General
Assembly on a biennial basis, in addition to its annual reporting to the Council.
Proposal 7: National action plans to achieve the ends of the Declaration
17. The Expert Mechanism proposes to the Council that it remind States of the
commitment undertaken in the outcome document of the high-level plenary meeting of the
General Assembly known as the World Conference on Indigenous Peoples to cooperate
with indigenous peoples to develop and implement national action plans, strategies or other
measures to achieve the ends of the Declaration. In this regard, it proposes that these action
plans be used as a tool to implement the recommendations of international human rights
mechanisms, including the universal periodic review, treaty bodies and special procedures,
and that States consider seeking the collaboration and support of their national human rights
institutions and the Expert Mechanism in the elaboration of these action plans.
Proposal 8: Contributions to the United Nations Voluntary Fund for Indigenous
Peoples
18. The Expert Mechanism proposes that the Council urge States to contribute to the
United Nations Voluntary Fund for Indigenous Peoples.
Proposal 9: Collaboration with the universal periodic review process
19. The Expert Mechanism reiterates its proposal that the Council and Member States
continue to draw increasingly on the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of
Indigenous Peoples in the universal periodic review process. It also reiterates its proposal
that, in future universal periodic review cycles, the Declaration be explicitly included in the
list of standards on which the universal periodic review process is based.
Proposal 10: International Year of Indigenous Languages
20. The Expert Mechanism proposes that the Human Rights Council participate in the
action plan led by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
(UNESCO) to ensure a human rights-based approach to the programmes and events which
will be organized for the International Year of Indigenous Languages in 2019.
IV. Organization of the session
A. Attendance
21. The Expert Mechanism held its tenth session in Geneva from 10 to 14 July 2017. Six
members, Mr. Barume (Democratic Republic of the Congo, Chair-Rapporteur), Megan
Davis (Australia), Edtami Mansayagan (Philippines), Alexey Tsykarev (Russian
Federation), Laila Vars (Norway) and Erika M. Yamada (Brazil), attended the session in
person.4
22. States, parliaments, indigenous peoples, United Nations programmes, bodies and
specialized agencies, national and regional human rights institutions, non-governmental
organizations and academic institutions participated in the session as observers (see annex
II for a complete listing).
23. Also participating in the session were: Claire Charters, one of the advisers to the
President of the General Assembly on the question of enhancing indigenous peoples’
participation at the United Nations (via video link); Anne Nuorgam, member of the Board
of Trustees of the United Nations Voluntary Fund for Indigenous Peoples; Yuval Shany,
Vice-Chair of the Human Rights Committee; Victoria Tauli-Corpuz, Special Rapporteur on
the rights of indigenous peoples; and Mariam Wallet Aboubakrine, Chair of the Permanent
Forum.
B. Opening and adoption of the agenda
24. Mr. Barume, the Chair-Rapporteur of the Expert Mechanism, opened the tenth
session of the Expert Mechanism and welcomed the United Nations High Commissioner
for Human Rights and the President of the Human Rights Council.
25. The High Commissioner highlighted the following issues: the gap that continues to
exist between international commitments relating to indigenous peoples and the reality on
the ground; the nature of development projects, which often subsumes indigenous peoples’
rights to their lands and territories, and the worrying increase in murder and harassment of
indigenous peoples, often related to defence of their lands; the many good national, regional
and international practices initiated by States and indigenous peoples since the adoption of
the Declaration in 2007; the opportunities for change and implementation of the
Declaration that should be taken up, including support for the new mandate of the Expert
Mechanism, follow-up to the World Conference on Indigenous Peoples and contributions to
the Voluntary Fund.
26. The President of the Human Rights Council highlighted the following points: the
importance the Council gives to the work of the Expert Mechanism and confirmation that it
will continue to support the latter’s work and its new mandate; the necessity of the
participation and partnership with indigenous peoples in United Nations processes;
challenges to the implementation of indigenous rights at the national level; and the
information that the Council will hold a half-day panel discussion at its thirty-sixth session
on the commemoration of the tenth anniversary of the adoption of the Declaration.
4 Kristen Carpenter (United States of America) participated remotely.
C. Election of officers
27. Mr. Barume invited members to nominate a Chair-Rapporteur and two Vice-Chair-
Rapporteurs for 2017-2018. Mr. Tsykarev nominated Mr. Barume for a second term as
Chair-Rapporteur and Ms. Vars and Ms. Yamada as Vice-Chair-Rapporteurs. All three
were appointed by acclamation.
V. New mandate of the Expert Mechanism: activities and methods of work
28. On opening the agenda item, Mr. Barume stated that, under the new mandate of the
Expert Mechanism, the implementation of the Declaration should be “home-grown”: a call
subsequently echoed by States, indigenous peoples and other participants. The Chair
presented the proposed methods of work, designed to enable the Expert Mechanism to
facilitate dialogue between indigenous peoples and States at the national level (see annex I).
29. Numerous interventions were made on the need to ensure mutual coordination
between the Expert Mechanism, the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples
and the Permanent Forum in order to ensure complementarity between the three
mechanisms. Thoughtful coordination and the sharing of information was required to
ensure their efficient and effective functioning. Participants called on the Expert
Mechanism to strengthen its engagement with the human rights treaty bodies and universal
periodic review process at all stages, from the review itself to the implementation of
recommendations. It was also suggested that the Expert Mechanism should strengthen its
engagement with other United Nations funds, agencies and programmes, in particular with
regard to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the implementation of the
Sustainable Development Goals.
30. The participation of indigenous peoples under the new mandate was a recurring
theme. The members of the Expert Mechanism noted that it was vital that consultations
with indigenous peoples should continue throughout the implementation of the new
mandate and that indigenous peoples should actively engage with the new mandate, in
particular peoples from regions and countries where previous participation had been
limited. It was also noted that, although the Expert Mechanism now had the authority to
choose the themes for its own studies, it would continue to consult States and indigenous
peoples.
31. Regarding the Expert Mechanism’s engagement in country situations, participants
noted that that aspect of the new mandate would be influential in developing a coherent
interpretation of the Declaration. Technical advice supplied to States on the development of
domestic legislation and policies should, pursuant to the new mandate, also consider
recommendations from relevant human rights mechanisms, including the universal periodic
review process, treaty bodies and special procedures. When carrying out country
engagement activities, the Expert Mechanism should encourage States to develop and
implement national action plans to achieve the ends of the Declaration and provide States
with technical advice regarding the content of national action plans and ways of
incorporating those plans into the legislative, policy and administrative structures of the
State concerned. Members pointed out that cooperation and openness on the part of States
was required to maximize the effect of the new mandate.
VI. Interactive dialogue with national human rights institutions, regional human rights institutions and similar mechanisms
32. The session commenced with a panel discussion by Maria Luisa Aguilar (Mexico,
national human rights institution), Mohna Ansari (Nepal, national human rights institution),
Karen Johansen (New Zealand, national human rights institution), Soyata Maiga (African
Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights), Samia Slimane (OHCHR) and Laila Vars
(Expert Mechanism member), that focused on four key themes: contributions that national
human rights institutions and regional mechanisms have made in the promotion of
indigenous persons’ rights and the implementation of the Declaration; the main challenges
faced by national human rights institutions in this regard; how the situation of indigenous
peoples has evolved in the last 10 years thanks to the Declaration; and cooperation between
the Expert Mechanism, national human rights institutions and regional mechanisms under
the new mandate. It was also noted by members of the Expert Mechanism that the agenda
item would become a standing agenda item for future sessions of the Expert Mechanism.
33. The panellists noted that their respective institutions were mandated to make
recommendations, provide advice, raise awareness and engage in capacity-building to
promote and protect the rights of indigenous peoples and implement the Declaration. The
challenges identified in relation to their work on indigenous peoples’ rights were
overwhelmingly concerned with the reluctance of States to commit themselves to
implementing the Declaration, the absence of formal recognition of indigenous peoples’
rights in constitutions and laws and the failure of States to ensure the participation of
indigenous peoples and the principle of free, prior and informed consent. States also
continued to view the Declaration as non-binding, thereby downplaying its normative force.
Those challenges had led to ongoing discrimination against indigenous peoples, a failure to
protect indigenous peoples’ rights, in particular cultural rights and rights to lands, territories
and resources, and an inability to enforce or monitor compliance with decisions that
recognized their rights under the Declaration.
34. Panel members identified certain improvements in their regions since the adoption
of the Declaration, namely the increasing number of references to indigenous peoples’
rights in high-level governmental discussions, the influence of the Declaration in
policymaking, the creation of government bodies exclusively dedicated to indigenous issues
and the development of jurisprudence pertaining to the rights of indigenous persons. In
discussing the enhanced cooperation between the Expert Mechanism, national human rights
institutions and regional mechanisms under the new mandate, the panellists noted the utility
of training for indigenous peoples, public officials and other stakeholders on the work done
by the Expert Mechanism, as well as capacity-building related to the new mandate and the
Expert Mechanism’s working methods. Importantly, national human rights institutions
should also continue to report on issues affecting indigenous peoples, in particular to ensure
that the violations of their rights were included in the reviews of international human rights
bodies, such as the treaty bodies. OHCHR drew the attention of national human rights
institutions to the publication The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous
Peoples: a Manual for National Human Rights Institutions, which might prove a useful tool
to facilitate enhanced cooperation under the new mandate.
35. In response to a question about ways in which national human rights institutions and
regional mechanisms informed indigenous communities about their rights and about
successful decisions upholding their rights, panellists noted that either the relevant
authorities or the rights holders themselves were directly notified of the decision. Some
national human rights institutions and regional mechanisms had also published reports and
implemented specialized programmes in a variety of formats and languages, which were
designed to raise awareness amongst indigenous peoples about their rights. Many national
human rights institutions and regional mechanisms also collected evidence of violations of
indigenous peoples’ rights in the communities or regions concerned. Participants also raised
the need for greater collaboration between the Expert Mechanism, the Permanent Forum,
national human rights institutions and regional mechanisms. It was suggested that greater
collaboration could be achieved by institutionalizing collaboration and ensuring that the
exchange of information was systematic and reciprocal.
VII. Coordination meeting between the Expert Mechanism, the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues and the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples
36. The members of the Expert Mechanism held a private meeting with the Chair of the
Permanent Forum, the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples and a
representative of the Board of Trustees of the Voluntary Fund. Participants considered the
following issues: updates on planned activities for the tenth anniversary of the adoption of
the Declaration; the selection and coordination of thematic studies; the coordination of
country engagement; and the consultation process to enable the participation of indigenous
peoples’ representatives and institutions in meetings of relevant United Nations bodies on
issues affecting them. The three mechanisms decided, inter alia, to draft a joint statement to
mark the tenth anniversary of the Declaration.
VIII. Indigenous peoples’ participation in the United Nations system
37. Ms. Charters, in her capacity as an independent adviser to the President of the
General Assembly, provided a detailed update on progress in relation to General Assembly
resolution 70/232, in which the Assembly had requested its President to conduct
consultations on the possible measures necessary to enable the participation of indigenous
peoples’ representatives and institutions in meetings of relevant United Nations bodies on
issues affecting them. Consultations on the various elements of the Assembly resolution
had taken place from late 2016 until May 2017. The consultations had reached an impasse
and States had shared a draft resolution deferring any action on the matter. The principal
issues of contention were: the venues for participation by indigenous peoples’
representatives and institutions; the application process; the criteria to determine whether
the organizations were genuinely representative of indigenous peoples; and State
recognition as a mandatory criterion for participation. The principal concern of the
indigenous community was that those issues had the potential to undermine existing
standards on the rights of indigenous peoples in international human rights law, including
the Declaration.
38. Several States, representatives of indigenous peoples and other participants echoed
those concerns, noting that it was critical that the negotiations should not undermine
existing standards on the rights of indigenous peoples. Notwithstanding the current lack of
consensus, participants expressed the view that negotiations should continue and that States
should continue to work on the process, provided that the negotiations were consistent with
the standards set out in the Declaration. That could be achieved, for example, through the
adoption of a procedural resolution that committed States to the process and provided
guidance for the way forward. Participants also suggested that the Expert Mechanism voice
its support for the process and provide advice to the Human Rights Council on steps the
latter could take to support it. In the light of the difficulties encountered during the process,
participants emphasized the added importance of the Voluntary Fund and the OHCHR
Indigenous Fellowship Programme.
IX. Ten years of implementation of the Declaration: good practices and lessons learned
39. Statements from the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples,
members of the Human Rights Committee and the Committee on the Elimination of
Discrimination against Women, indigenous peoples, Member States and other participants
demonstrated that, since its adoption by the General Assembly on 13 September 2007, there
have been a number of positive developments in the implementation of the Declaration.
Firstly, it has proven to be an invaluable tool in galvanizing indigenous peoples to
campaign for their rights at the national level. States have demonstrated their commitment
to implementing the Declaration through a number of measures, including constitutional
amendments, national action plans and specific policies such as the revitalization of
indigenous languages. Secondly, and of particular significance, is the Declaration’s
application as a source of law in regional human rights mechanisms, for example by the
Inter-American Court of Human Rights in Kaliña and Lokono Peoples v. Suriname and by
the African Court of Human and Peoples’ Rights in African Commission of Human and
Peoples’ Rights v. The Republic of Kenya (the Ogiek case). At the international level, the
Declaration has also increased the attention paid by treaty bodies to the rights of indigenous
peoples as an instrument based on existing human rights obligations contained within the
core international human rights treaties. For example, the Human Rights Committee and the
Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women address the rights of
indigenous peoples and the Declaration in their concluding observations, communications
and general recommendations and comments. During the discussion, the Committee on the
Elimination of Discrimination against Women also indicated that it was considering
developing a general recommendation on the rights of indigenous women. It should be
noted that the Expert Mechanism had the opportunity to meet informally with the latter
Committee during the tenth session to discuss subjects of mutual interest. The Expert
Mechanism is grateful to the Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law and
Human Rights for having sponsored this event under the Geneva treaty body platform.
40. Notwithstanding the aforementioned positive developments, participants agreed that
an implementation gap existed between the support shown by States for the Declaration at
the international level and concrete action to promote and protect indigenous peoples’
rights at the national level. One of the key barriers to implementation was the failure of
some States to recognize indigenous peoples, denying them the rights contained in the
Declaration. Other States demonstrated a tendency to adopt legislation that recognized the
rights of indigenous peoples while failing to amend other laws that violated their rights,
including laws on extractive industries, forestry and agriculture. Experts and observers also
voiced concern at the escalating number of attacks against indigenous human rights
defenders, often in the context of development projects carried out without the free, prior
and informed consent of the indigenous peoples concerned.
41. Securing implementation of the Declaration was the challenge of the next decade.
Participants noted that the participation of indigenous peoples was critical if full
implementation was to be achieved. In that regard, indigenous peoples needed to be
supported by means of capacity-building programmes that improved their awareness of the
rights contained in the Declaration, in particular rights to indigenous lands and territories,
and the principle of free, prior and informed consent. The Expert Mechanism, the
Permanent Forum and the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples also
needed to ensure that their areas of thematic focus continued to extend beyond human
rights and development alone to include climate change and conservation, for example the
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and climate change mitigation
and adaptation.
42. Regarding the treaty bodies, the representatives of the Human Rights Committee and
the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women indicated that those
bodies would welcome a briefing by the Expert Mechanism, the Permanent Forum or the
Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples and would welcome more
information on country-specific situations regarding indigenous peoples’ rights. The
representative of the Human Rights Committee also indicated that the latter would be
interested in exploring possible future coordination with the Expert Mechanism on ways to
support the implementation of its recommendations. As noted in the outcome document of
the World Conference on Indigenous Peoples, national action plans to achieve the ends of
the Declaration were an invaluable tool for States to give effect to their international human
rights obligations regarding the rights of indigenous peoples, and therefore to achieve the
ends of the Declaration.
X. Intersessional activities and follow-up to thematic studies and advice on the rights to cultural heritage and health
43. As Chair for the item, Mr. Tsykarev provided an overview of the three intersessional
activities that had taken place in March 2017 (see section II above). Regarding the follow-
up to thematic studies and advice, Mr. Tsykarev noted that UNESCO had used the study on
cultural heritage during the development of its new policy on engaging with indigenous
peoples. He encouraged UNESCO to include a section in the policy on the repatriation of
indigenous peoples’ cultural heritage and to keep further debate on the policy open and
participatory for all stakeholders.
44. Participants highlighted a number of positive initiatives currently being undertaken
in relation to the right to health. They included the creation of health units for indigenous
peoples based on intercultural models of health, university support for the use of traditional
practices and medicines in indigenous communities and awareness-raising about indigenous
health care among medical students. The use by indigenous youth of the Expert
Mechanism’s study on the right to health to develop a national plan on health for
indigenous peoples with a focus on youth in Latin America and the Caribbean, in
collaboration with the Pan American Health Organization and the Fund for the
Development of Indigenous Peoples in Latin America and the Caribbean, was also
emphasized. Participants highlighted a number of challenges that continued to affect
indigenous peoples, including: high rates of alcoholism in indigenous communities; high
rates of suicide, particularly among indigenous youth; violence against indigenous human
rights defenders; the need to travel long distances to access health-care services; the use of
harmful chemicals in indigenous territories by agribusinesses; and the difficulty of
providing health-care services for indigenous peoples whose territories were divided by
State borders. Participants also reminded States of the need to be aware of the significant
negative health effects of intergenerational trauma caused by the removal of indigenous
children from their families and communities and the sexual, physical and psychological
abuse that often took place in residential schools and other facilities.
45. Regarding the study on the right to cultural heritage, participants noted that items of
indigenous peoples’ cultural heritage continued to be removed from indigenous territories
or destroyed by infrastructure projects, such as the construction of roads. As with the right
to health, State borders often created difficulties in the search for common solutions for the
preservation of the cultural heritage of indigenous peoples. Participants echoed the
comments of the Chair in calling for UNESCO to include a section on repatriation of
indigenous cultural heritage in its new policy on indigenous peoples. Participants gave a
number of positive updates, highlighting a number of programmes that facilitated the
protection of cultural heritage, including consultation frameworks and indigenous ranger
programmes that carried out land and sea management activities. In closing, Mr. Tsykarev
welcomed the initiatives of the two Finnish academic institutions, namely the University of
Helsinki and the University of Lapland, in organizing expert seminars as a follow-up to the
Expert Mechanism’s study on cultural heritage in 2017 and 2018, respectively. The Expert
Mechanism also had the opportunity to meet informally with UNESCO representatives
during the session to discuss the follow-up to the recommendation of the Permanent Forum
on Indigenous Issues on the repatriation of cultural objects of indigenous peoples.
46. In a side event on the issue of the International Year of Indigenous Languages (see
section XI below), co-organized by UNESCO and the Expert Mechanism, participants
considered the proposed elements of an action plan for the Year, to be prepared by
UNESCO and presented at the seventeenth session of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous
Issues in 2018.
XI. Side events during the tenth session
47. Twenty-four side events were held during the session,5 on the following diverse
themes: effective and meaningful participation in the Expert Mechanism; monitoring,
reporting and advocacy for human rights and the prevention of genocide; defending the
rights and identity of the peoples of Crimea; Mapuche ancestral medicine; participation of
indigenous peoples in the processes of the World Intellectual Property Organization; the
impact of extractive industries in the Americas and Africa; the European Commission and a
rights-based approach for indigenous peoples; 2019 — Year of Indigenous Languages; a
new United Nations mechanism for international repatriation of indigenous peoples’
cultural heritage, ceremonial objects and human remains; securing indigenous peoples’ land
rights through strategic litigation; indigenous participation process in Chile; employment
and entrepreneurship among indigenous communities; progress in the implementation of
5 See http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/IPeoples/EMRIP/Session10/SideEventsTimetable.pdf.
the Declaration for the Amazigh people; the expanded mandate of the Expert Mechanism:
20 years of the OHCHR Indigenous Fellowship Programme; a health plan for indigenous
youth in Latin America and the Caribbean; the Training Programme to Enhance the
Conflict Prevention and Peacemaking Capacities of Indigenous Peoples’ Representatives of
the United Nations Institute for Training and Research; the role of businesses and access to
financial services for indigenous peoples in Asia; implementation of the Declaration on the
Rights of Indigenous Peoples; indigenous medicines; rights of indigenous peoples in the
context of biodiversity conservation; advancing economic empowerment for indigenous
peoples; and the situation of the Mapuche people in Argentina. For more information on the
content of these events, please follow the links of the individual organizations.
XII. Future work of the Expert Mechanism, including the focus of the next annual study
48. The Expert Mechanism decided that its next annual study on the status of the rights
of indigenous peoples worldwide in the achievement of the ends of the Declaration,
mandated by the Council in its resolution 33/25, paragraph 2 (a), will focus on the theme of
free, prior and informed consent.
49. The Expert Mechanism also decided to prepare a report for the Human Rights
Council on good practices and lessons learned regarding the efforts to achieve the ends of
the Declaration, as authorized under Council resolution 33/25, paragraph 2 (b).
Annex I
Methods of work for submission of reports to the Human Rights Council and country engagement
I. Introduction
1. The Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples was established by the
Human Rights Council, the main United Nations human rights body, in its resolution 6/36
of 2007, as a subsidiary body of the Council.
2. In the outcome document of the high-level plenary meeting of the General Assembly
known as the World Conference on Indigenous Peoples (Assembly resolution 69/2), the
Assembly invited the Human Rights Council, taking into account the views of indigenous
peoples, to review the mandates of its existing mechanisms, in particular the Expert
Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, with a view to modifying and improving
the Expert Mechanism so that it can more effectively promote respect for the United
Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, including by better assisting
Member States to monitor, evaluate and improve the achievement of the ends of the
Declaration.
3. In September 2016, the Human Rights Council adopted resolution 33/25, by which it
amended the mandate of the Expert Mechanism. The latter’s new mandate is to provide the
Human Rights Council with expertise and advice on the rights of indigenous peoples as set
out in the Declaration, and assist Member States, upon request, in achieving the ends of the
Declaration through the promotion, protection and fulfilment of the rights of indigenous
peoples. Specific new elements of the mandate include:
(a) Upon request, assisting Member States and/or indigenous peoples in
identifying the need for and providing technical advice regarding the development of
domestic legislation and policies relating to the rights of indigenous peoples;
(b) Providing Member States, upon their request, with assistance and advice for
the implementation of recommendations made at the universal periodic review and by
treaty bodies, special procedures or other relevant mechanisms;
(c) Upon the request of Member States, indigenous peoples and/or the private
sector, engaging and assisting them by facilitating dialogue, when agreeable to all parties,
in order to achieve the ends of the Declaration;
(d) Identifying, disseminating and promoting good practices and lessons learned
regarding the efforts to achieve the ends of the Declaration, including through reports to the
Human Rights Council;
(e) Seeking and receiving information from all relevant sources as necessary to
fulfil its mandate;
(f) Expanding the membership from five to seven experts, in order to reflect the
seven indigenous sociocultural regions.
4. According to paragraph 8 of resolution 33/25, the Expert Mechanism will determine
its own methods of work. The methods of work provide guidance for the implementation of
different elements of the new mandate. They will be revisited and revised periodically, as
appropriate, in the light of the experience gained in the implementation of the new mandate.
II. Reports and studies for submission to the Human Rights Council
A. Rationale
5. In resolution 33/25, the Human Rights Council decided that the Expert Mechanism
should:
(a) Prepare an annual study on the status of the rights of indigenous peoples
worldwide in the achievement of the ends of the Declaration, focusing on one or more
interrelated articles of the Declaration, as decided by the Expert Mechanism, taking into
consideration the suggestions received from Member States and indigenous peoples,
including challenges, good practices and recommendations (paragraph 2 (a));
(b) Identify, disseminate and promote good practices and lessons learned
regarding the efforts to achieve the ends of the Declaration, including through reports to the
Human Rights Council on this matter (paragraph 2 (b));
(c) Report at least once a year to the Human Rights Council on its work, and
keep the Council fully informed of developments on the rights of indigenous peoples
(paragraph 3).
B. Annual study on the status of the rights of indigenous peoples (thematic
study)
6. The study on the status of the rights of indigenous peoples worldwide will fulfil the
same purpose as the thematic studies conducted by the Expert Mechanism under its
previous mandate. However, the Expert Mechanism will now be able to select the theme of
its study itself, instead of receiving a mandate from the Human Rights Council to pursue a
particular theme.
C. Selection of the theme
7. The members of the Expert Mechanism will select the theme of their annual study,
which should focus “on one or more interrelated articles of the Declaration”. This process
should take into consideration suggestions received from Member States and indigenous
peoples. The Expert Mechanism will receive suggestions formally from Member States and
indigenous peoples during its annual session (under an agenda item on future work) and
during its annual interactive dialogues with the Human Rights Council and the United
Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, but may also consult informally with all
stakeholders, including through the Indigenous Peoples’ Caucus. The Expert Mechanism
will also consult with the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples and the
Permanent Forum to ensure there is no overlap in studies being carried out by the three
mechanisms. The Expert Mechanism will decide on the theme of its study at the latest by
mid-June of each year, and will announce the theme during its annual session in July.
D. Report on good practices and lessons learned regarding the efforts to
achieve the ends of the Declaration
8. The Expert Mechanism is mandated to identify, disseminate and promote good
practices and lessons learned regarding the efforts to achieve the ends of the Declaration,
including through reports to the Human Rights Council. While the annual study under
paragraph 2 (a) of Council resolution 33/25 will take a thematic approach, the annual report
under paragraph 2 (b) will address trends in the implementation of the Declaration. As set
out in paragraph 9 of resolution 33/25, the Expert Mechanism may seek and receive
information from all relevant sources.
E. Annual report to the Human Rights Council on the work of the Expert
Mechanism
9. The report will be discussed and finalized at the annual session of the Expert
Mechanism in July and presented to the Council annually during its September session. The
Expert Mechanism will submit an annual report to the Human Rights Council, including a
summary of its annual session and its intersessional activities, as well as proposals to the
Council.
III. Country engagement
A. Rationale
10. Pursuant to paragraph 2 of Human Rights Council resolution 33/25, the Expert
Mechanism should:
(a) Upon request, assist Member States and/or indigenous peoples in identifying
the need for and providing technical advice regarding the development of domestic
legislation and policies relating to the rights of indigenous peoples, as relevant, which may
include establishing contacts with other United Nations agencies, funds and programmes;
(b) Provide Member States, upon their request, with assistance and advice for the
implementation of recommendations made at the universal periodic review and by treaty
bodies, special procedures or other relevant mechanisms;
(c) Upon the request of Member States, indigenous peoples and/or the private
sector, engage and assist them by facilitating dialogue, when agreeable to all parties, in
order to achieve the ends of the Declaration.
B. Core principles of country engagement
11. In its country engagement, the Expert Mechanism will uphold the highest standards
of efficiency, competence and integrity, meaning in particular, though not exclusively, the
observance of probity, impartiality, equity, honesty and good faith. The Expert Mechanism
will neither seek nor accept instructions from any government, individual, governmental or
non-governmental organization or pressure group whatsoever.
C. Purposes and modalities of country engagement by the Expert
Mechanism
12. The purposes of country engagement by the Expert Mechanism may include:
analysis of domestic legislation of policies and provision of independent advice and
recommendations to the requester(s); facilitation of dialogue between requester(s) and other
stakeholders; independent observation of and advice on the implementation of laws and
policies to implement the Declaration; capacity-building for requester(s) and other
stakeholders; awareness-raising.
13. The Expert Mechanism can work to bring stakeholders together to describe their
activities and understanding and to share good practices and standards from around the
world, particularly in relation to relevant rights enshrined in the Declaration. The dialogue
may concern broad country-level engagement or local issues, depending on the specific
situation. In some cases, working in a closed session may be particularly valuable. Dialogue
with national human rights institutions is also a positive area on which the Expert
Mechanism can focus.
14. The Expert Mechanism may also support States in the implementation of
recommendations made by other human rights mechanisms in relation to the human rights
of indigenous peoples and may provide a deeper analysis of these recommendations. This
work may be research-based and/or policy-oriented.
15. Depending on the nature of the request, the modalities for country engagement may
include, inter alia: country missions; training activities for State institutions, indigenous
peoples’ organizations, national human rights institutions and other stakeholders; video or
audio calls; in-person meetings in Geneva or in other locations; email exchanges; formal
communication through diplomatic channels.
D. Invitations and requests for country engagement
16. States or indigenous peoples may request the Expert Mechanism to engage at
country level. Requests from States will be received through the Office of the United
Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) or the secretariat of the Expert
Mechanism via diplomatic channels. Requests from indigenous peoples will be submitted
to OHCHR or the secretariat of the Expert Mechanism, using a template made available on
the Expert Mechanism website. Requests should provide at least the following information:
(a) Requesting institution/organization;
(b) Name of contact person(s);
(c) Description of the situation;
(d) Steps that have been taken to address the issue, including any domestic
remedies;
(e) Expected action by and technical advice to be supplied by the Expert
Mechanism;
(f) Whether State authorities or other stakeholders have been consulted about or
informed of the request submitted to the Expert Mechanism;
(g) Proposed time frame;
(h) Any other relevant information.
17. The Expert Mechanism will acknowledge receipt of all requests, and may accept or
decline requests as necessary or desired, taking into account existing capacity and resources
as well as geographical balance. The Expert Mechanism will also give due attention to
issues of current interest, bearing in mind the overall implementation of its mandate
(including other elements, such as reports and studies), in order to prioritize requests.
Requests that cannot be accepted immediately may be kept in a waiting list and addressed
at a later stage.
18. The members of the Expert Mechanism will decide internally which specific
members will be assigned to engage with each request, including potential country visits.
The decision will be made in accordance with the expertise and portfolio of each expert.
Regional expertise and knowledge of local languages should also be taken into account.
19. Terms of reference should be agreed for every country engagement activity in the
light of the mandate of the Expert Mechanism. Modalities of engagement, timelines and the
types of activity envisioned, as well as the expected final product, should be prepared by
the Expert Mechanism in consultation with the requester(s) and other relevant stakeholders.
The terms of reference should also include modalities for the disclosure of information, in
agreement with the requester and other stakeholders.
20. Country engagement may include country missions by Expert Mechanism members
at the request of States and/or indigenous peoples. The approval and cooperation of all
parties should be sought. If the proposed country mission is triggered by a request from
indigenous peoples, the Expert Mechanism should duly inform the Member State
concerned to make sure that the Government agrees to the proposed visit.
21. Country missions may be undertaken for the purposes outlined in paragraph 1
above. Specific activities may include:
(a) Collection of good practices, lessons learned, challenges and testimonies;
(b) Increasing awareness of the Expert Mechanism mandate, studies, reports,
advice and goals of the Declaration;
(c) Promoting understanding of the Declaration at the country level;
(d) Providing States and specific government officials with methods of
implementing thematic advice issued by the Expert Mechanism;
(e) Dissemination of the Expert Mechanism’s studies and advice and the best
practices of stakeholders;
(f) Support with follow-up of universal periodic review and treaty body
recommendations;
(g) Policy dialogue with stakeholders;
(h) Meetings and interviews with stakeholders;
(i) Facilitation and promotion of dialogue through information, interpretation,
technical legal advice, providing knowledge, and similar means;
(j) Site visits;
(k) Training;
(l) Public lectures.
22. The actual agenda for the country mission is a matter to be determined by the Expert
Mechanism, in consultation with the requester(s).
E. Communication
23. A media advisory will be issued before a country engagement mission and a press
release afterwards, as well as press releases after intersessional meetings when deemed
appropriate.
Annex II
List of participants
States Members of the United Nations represented by observers
Algeria, Australia, Azerbaijan, Bolivia (Plurinational State of), Brazil, Canada, Chile,
China, Colombia, Denmark, Djibouti, Ecuador, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece,
Guatemala, Honduras, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Iraq, Japan, Malaysia, Malta,
Mauritius, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, Nepal, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Norway, Panama,
Paraguay, Peru, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden,
Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine, United States of America, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic
of), Viet Nam.
Non-Member States represented by observers
Holy See.
United Nations mandates, mechanisms, bodies, specialized agencies,
funds and programmes represented by observers
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; International Labour
Organization; United Nations Development Programme; United Nations Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Organization; United Nations Institute for Training and Research;
World Health Organization.
Intergovernmental organizations, regional organizations and
mechanisms in the field of human rights represented by observers
African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights; European Commission; European
Union; Inter-American Commission on Human Rights; World Bank.
National human rights institutions represented by observers
National Human Rights Commission of Mexico; National Human Rights Commission of
Nepal; New Zealand Human Rights Commission.
Academics and experts on indigenous issues, represented by observers
of the following institutions
Centre for International Governance Innovation; Ethnographic Museum of Geneva; Geneva
Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights; Geneva School of
Economics and Management; Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz Universität Hannover; Graduate
Institute of International and Development Studies; Haute-École de Travail Social;
Indigenous Law Centre, University of New South Wales; Kolonialism Osteko Ikasketa
Zentroa; Leuphana Universität Lüneburg; Max Planck Institute for Social Anthropology;
McGill University; Scales of Governance, the UN, States and Indigenous Peoples;
Universidad de la Rioja; Universidad del Rosario; Universidad Federal de Bahia;
Universidad Loyola Andalucía; Université Paris Diderot; University of British Columbia;
University of Colorado Law School; University of Deusto; University of Essex; University
of Geneva; University of Hamburg; University of Lucerne; University of Melbourne;
University of Tübingen; University of Zurich.
Non-governmental organizations, indigenous nations, peoples,
organizations and parliamentarians
Aboriginal Rights Coalition; Agencia Internacional de Prensa Indígena; American
Association of Jurists; Asia Indigenous Peoples Pact; Asociación Americana de Juristas;
Assemblée des Arméniens d’Arménie Occidentale; Assembly of Nova Scotia Mi’kmaq
Chiefs; Association Aquaverde; Association Culturelle Ath Koudhia de Kabylie; Awa
Associates; Bangsachampa; Centre de Documentation, de Recherche et d’Information des
Peuples Autochtones; Centre Europe-Tiers Monde; Centre for International Governance
Innovation; Centro de Estudios Multidisciplinarios Aymara; Comisión Juridica para el
Autodesarrollo de los Pueblos Originarios Andinos; Comité de solidarité avec les Indiens
des Amériques; Community-Based Rehabilitation Global Network; Comunidad de Historia
Mapuche; Confederación de Nacionalidades Amazonicas del Peru; Confederacy of Treaty
Six First Nations; Congrès Mondial Amazigh; Congrès Populaire Coutumier Kanak;
Consejo Regional Indigena del Tolima; Consultative Committee of Finno-Ugric Peoples;
Continental Network of Indigenous Women of the Americas; Coopérative des artisans
d’Alarçès; Council of Indigenous Peoples in Today’s Vietnam; Crimean Tatar Resource
Centre; CSIA-Nitassinan; Drumbeat Media; ECMIA North; EDFU Foundation; European
Network of People of African Descent; Ewiiaapaayp Band of Kumeyaay Indians;
Fédération des ONG de Kanaky Nouvelle Calédonie; FENAMAD; Forest Peoples
Programme; Friends World Committee for Consultation; Fundación Paso a Paso A.C.;
Geneva for Human Rights; Geneva International Centre for Justice; Greenpeace Russia;
Groupe International de Travail pour les Peuples Autochtones; Hawai’i Institute for Human
Rights; He Puna Marama Trust; Hutukara; ICCA Consortium; Indian Council of South
America; Indian Law Resource Center; Indigenous Community “Reindeer Herder”;
Indigenous Information Network; Indigenous Leadership Development Institute;
Indigenous Peoples Network of Malaysia; Indigenous Peoples of Africa Co-ordinating
Committee; International Indian Treaty Council; International Public Organisation
Foundation for Research and Support of Indigenous Peoples of Crimea; Inuit Circumpolar
Conference; Just Planet; Khmers Kampuchea — Krom Federation; Kirat Youth Society;
Lelewal Foundation; Maari Ma Health Aboriginal Corporation; Maloca International; Maya
Leaders Alliance of Southern Belize; Membertou Governance; Metareilá; Minority Rights
Group; Mohawk Nation at Kahnawake; My Chosen Vessels; MyRight; Narok South
Disability Network; National Congress of Australia’s First Peoples; Native American
Rights Fund; Negev Coexistence Forum for Civil Equality; Nepal Indigenous Disabled
Association; NGO Pole of Cold — Oymyakon; OIDEL; Open Society Foundation; Open
Society Justice Initiative; Organisation Tamaynut; Organización de Mujeres Indígenas por
la Conservación, Investigación y Aprovechamiento de los Recursos Naturales; Pacific
Disability Forum; Pueblo Indígena Bubi de la Isla de Bioko; Quaker United Nations
Organization; Russian Association of Indigenous Peoples of the North, Siberia and the Far
East; Saami Council; Sami Parliament in Sweden; Sami Parliament of Finland; Saniri
Alifuru/Alifuru Council; Shimin Gaikou Centre (Citizen’s Diplomatic Centre for the Rights
of Indigenous Peoples); Society for Threatened Peoples; Solidarité avec les Peuples
Autochtones des Amériques; Structural Analysis of Cultural Systems; Temoust; Ti
Tlanizkel; Tin Hinane; WWF International; Youth Organisation of Mordovian People;
Yuchi Language Project.