New satellite data reveals that Cambodia’s remaining dense forests were further depleted last year, with four major protected areas and national parks registering higher deforestation than in 2021.
Download full analysis of each article: KhmerEnglish
Conclusion
About Indigenous Community and Local Communities
The Law on Protected Areas, 2008, contains the words indigenous peoples and indigenous communities in Article 4, Article 6, Article 11, Article 18, Article 21, Article 21, Article 22, Article 25, Article 26, Article 27 and Article 31. The law also uses the term local community. The words indigenous peoples and indigenous communities are not found in the new draft law on protected lands. Articles that used to include the terms indigenous peoples and indigenous communities have been removed or no longer used in this law, whereas the terms indigenous communities have been retained and drafted. According to a presentation by the Ministry of Environment’s technical team, the word community refers to a group of people, including indigenous peoples. The word “local community” refers to people who live in or near protected areas and are recognized by local authorities, according to the Glossary of the Draft Law on Protected Areas.
The term local community is unobtrusive to indigenous peoples, but it cannot be defined, integrated, or joined with the term indigenous communities because indigenous communities and local communities are clearly different because indigenous communities have different origins, ethnicities, languages, societies, cultures, and traditions. The practice of subsistence with direct interaction with land and natural resources, in particular, differs from that of other local groups that are not indigenous cultures. Indigenous communities are a group of people who have lived on Cambodian territory since their ancestors were born, with all members expressing ethnic, social, cultural, economic, and traditional practices on the property that it occupies in accordance with the communal use rules. As a result, local and indigenous communities are extremely different. All members express ethnic unity, traditional rules, language, knowledge, beliefs, traditions, and faiths that are strongly tied to forests, land, natural resources, and permanency.
About agricultural practices, shifting plantations or rotational plantations:
Article 24 of the 2008 Law on Protected Areas forbids rotational plantations in the core zones and protected areas, the same as point 9 of Article 7 of this draft law.
The draft amendment to the Law on Protected Areas clearly states that the operation of plantations in the core zone of the protected area is not allowed (point 9, article 7). As a result, neither of these two laws contains an article that explicitly recognizes or permits the operation of shifting or rotational plantations in the context of sustainable use.
Article 37 forbids the release of animals and the hunting of dogs, among other rights, and Article 64 makes it a level 1 natural resource infraction. The right to use fire or cause wildfires, as well as other rights, is prohibited under Article 37 and is punishable as a level 2 natural resource offense under Article 66. This demonstrates that this law does not respect, recognize, or guarantee the protection of family and traditional occupations, as set forth in Convention No. 111 on Discrimination in Labor and Occupation and International Human Rights Standards, as well as others that the Kingdom of Cambodia has ratified and voted for.
Article 22 (Effective) The State recognizes and guarantees the right of local communities and indigenous peoples living in protected areas to use their traditions, customs, and religious beliefs. Article 23 (Draft) The State recognizes and guarantees the right to traditional use, customs, and religious beliefs of local communities living in protected areas. The word indigenous appears at least once in the current article, but not once in the draft article. In addition, these two paragraphs and other articles do not provide for the regulation of the right to utilize the traditional practices, religious beliefs of indigenous and local communities, such as the granting of title rights to these sites. This draft law also lacks procedures and measures to address accountability principles in good governance. When the right to enjoy, beliefs and religions of any indigenous people is affected. Example: Article 22 (in force) or Article 23 (draft) states that ” the State recognizes and guarantees the right to use in the form of ” traditions, customs, religious beliefs of local communities and indigenous peoples living in protected areas. ” Unfortunately, this law does not provide for the mandate of any level of state organization to control those rights (non-ownership) in any level of administrative system, notably at the commune, sangkat or district level that is close to the people and indigenous peoples.
This draft law contains no articles that recognize the claims or indications of actual location, size, type of use, enjoyment, religion, and worship for the registration of collective land ownership (ownership rights) and other registrations that do not belong to immovable properties.
The existing law and draft also do not include any sections that recognize indigenous peoples’ traditional judicial management systems or dispute resolution procedures, as required by paragraphs 34 and 40 of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. In accordance with this right, this law makes no provision for the right of indigenous communities to act as judicial police to oversee the management of their natural resources, economy, society, and culture, as well as to prevent sub-national administration officials from being corrupted.
Not only that the law is still in force and the draft does not have any article on the right to self-determination, the right and the consultation mechanism to provide accurate and sufficient information in advance, have enough time and get free collective consensus. According to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, there are three articles on the right to self-determination, ten articles, eleven articles, nineteen articles, and twenty-eight articles on free consent and prior notice.
Article 25 (Draft) does not grant indigenous peoples the right to self-determination as a community protected area, and Article 28 does not grant the community the right to self-determination in the management, use, and enjoyment of natural resources by themselves, but does require community planning in accordance with the provisions of this law and the national plan, in violation of Articles 3 and 4 of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
Because the proposed law on protected areas does not acknowledge and defend indigenous peoples’ customary rights, as evidenced in Article 55 and this conclusion, the consultation opted to elevate the input as outlined above.
Download full analysis of each article: KhmerEnglish
National Consultation Forum on Indigenous Women’s Issues and Challenges on Law Enforcements and Two New Draft Laws on Forestry and Protected Areas
Himawari Hotel, Phnom Penh, 25 January 2023
Indigenous communities, associations, and organizations consisting of a total of 48 individuals, and 36 women of indigenous Kreung, Tumpoun, Kui, Bunong, Jarai, Thmon, Por, Suy, Chong, and Sa’Och, from Ratanakiri, Kratie, Stung Treng, Preah Vihear, Kampong Thom, Kampong Speu, Pursat, Koh Kong, and Battambang provinces, organized a National Consultation Forum on Indigenous Women’s Issues and Challenges on Law Enforcements and Two New Draft Laws on Forestry and Protected Areas, with the participation of the government agencies including Ministries, Parliament, and Senate, along with national and international NGOs and media.
We, the indigenous women’s group, community representatives, associations, and organizations, would like to express our sincere thanks to His Excellency, Lok Chumteav, and the representatives of Ministries, Parliament, Senate, provincial authorities, national and international distinguished guests who are present at today’s forum. Taking advantage of this opportunity, we would like to express our concerns, issues, and challenges as individuals and as a community, as well as our request:
The loss of land and natural resources results in land conflicts with private companies and outsiders who acquire or purchase community land. This loss has a negative impact on indigenous livelihoods, harming traditional occupations, customs, languages, and peaceful ways of life, as well as causing internal conflicts and legal harassment. Following the discussion at today’s forum, we discovered a lack of recognition of traditional rights, indigenous peoples’ social and cultural rights, and a failure to issue communal land titles on time.
Some provincial sub-national authorities discriminate against indigenous peoples and refuse to recognize their identity. This refusal allows outsiders to encroach on or purchase communal land, and thus impedes the process of indigenous identification and collective land registration in compliance with existing laws.
As of today’s forum, many indigenous women are still facing litigation that could result in jail and fines of thousands of dollars, which deeply concerns us. According to what was said at today’s meeting, our efforts to safeguard the forest, spiritual forest, and mountain have resulted in legal harassment of which we are unaware. At least 42 criminal charges have been filed in relation to the social, cultural, and traditional occupation-related economic rights that many indigenous women participating in this forum face. The following are the cases:
3 cases in Preah Vihear
6 cases in Kampong Thom
1 case in Stung Treng
29 cases in Mondulkiri
2 cases in Ratanakiri
1 case in Kraties
We congratulate and are delighted that the proceedings against four defendants were dropped by Mondulkiri’s first instant court, and that the Supreme Court delivered justice to three Bunong indigenous women.
We, who are defending our communities’ rights, land, and natural resources, have been summoned way too many times by the commune authority, police, gendarmerie, district, and provincial authorities, which causes us great concern.
Indigenous women are concerned about law enforcement and legal frameworks that are overly complicated, lack implementing officers, and, in particular, lack proper consultation and meaningful participation of community representatives and elders, who serve as the community’s living library and have extensive knowledge of customary laws and traditions. The loss of customary laws is our biggest concern.
As a result, we, a woman’s group and community representatives attending today’s discussion would like to call on and request the following:
Consider indigenous society to be a permanent society and self-development that preserves our indigenous identity in accordance with laws and policies that recognize an inherent distinctiveness and secure collective rights as provided for in national and international instruments.
The government shall expedite the process of collective land registration based on the actual size and boundary set by the community, as well as some portion of the state’s forested land that is jointly managed and protected by the community and competent authorities. The collective land registration is only done on 5 categories of land, and the state land that we protect and use is excluded, as is the limitation of just 7 hectares of spiritual forest, which has an impact on our religious beliefs. The majority of the community has beliefs about the entire mountain and forest, regardless of size.
Urge sub-national authorities to expedite the issuing of administrative papers and their forwarding to the national or ministry level in order to avoid obstacles and delays.
Request that legal charges against indigenous women and community members be dismissed and nullified as soon as possible.
While waiting for registration, request that the provincial authorities give interim protection measures, recognition documents, or certifications for forests of belief, culture, tradition, and other areas that are a source of economy, market, and daily subsistence for indigenous peoples.
Before the process of land registration, there should be a formality to acknowledge an existing team at the sub-national level to continue managing community, land, and natural resources.
Should impose legal penalties on individuals who violate the rights to use and enjoy land before it is registered.
Ensure customary occupation governance despite the lack of land titles.
We insist on the words “indigenous peoples” and “indigenous community” remaining in these two laws. The replacement of “indigenous peoples” with “local community” causes us tremendous concern since it means we will lose opportunities and our natural rights as outlined in UNDRIP.
Urge state institutions, national and international organizations, and the United Nations to give attention to law enforcement, principles, and national and international fundamental standards that assist indigenous peoples in achieving inclusive development.
Finally, we, the indigenous women and community representatives, would like to offer our heartfelt gratitude to His Excellencies, ladies, and gentlemen present at the National Consultation Forum, and wish you the best of luck, happiness, and success in all your endeavors.
The Lower Sesan 2 (LS2) hydropower dam is the first large-scale dam built on the Sesan River in Cambodia. It will change the natural flow of the Sesan and Srepok rivers, the two main tributaries of the Mekong, and lead to changes in water quantity, the fishery, and sediment. Although the LS2 dam was officially opened by Prime Minister Hun Sen on 25th September 2017, the gates were gradually closed day by day. This has led to the flooding of two villages, Srekor and Kbal Romeas, where villagers have refused to resettle. Even though the two villages have been flooded, the villagers have demanded to continue living in their original villages of Srekor and Kbal Romeas.
The official water level in the LS2 dam’s reservoir was 74.93 meters on October 20th, 2017. Based on recent updates by local people in early November 2017, there are still 146 families, with a total of 700 people, still living in the two villages (38 houses, 58 families, and 252 people in Kbal Romeas, and 72 houses, 85 families, and 448 people in Srekor village). Srekor village was totally flooded by 18th October 2017 and it was later reported that the water level was 7 meters deep at the village temple by early November 2017. Some villagers have moved to their farmhouse and some others to camping tents in a safe area that is located about 4 kilometers from the original village. Kbal Romeas village was also flooded, but not as badly compared to Srekor village. As of early November 2017, the water level was 1.3 meters deep at the temple of Kbal Romeas. Villagers have moved their livestock, including cows, buffalos, pigs, and chickens, and heavy equipment to a safe area which is located about 7 kilometers from the original village. This means that the villagers in Kbal Romeas can still stay in their original houses, but they have to use boats for transportation to land.
The reservoir of the LS2 dam has submerged the rice fields of local communities. As reported by local villagers, at least 45 hectares of rice belonging to 30 families in Srekor village and at least 24 hectares of rice fields belonging to 12 families in Kbal Romeas village were completely destroyed by the flood. Losing their rice fields means losing their livelihood. This is a big concern for these communities who are worried that they will face a food security problem. A villager in Srekor village said that “We have food but this food would be enough just for two more months, so after that, we may have nothing to eat. We depend on our fields’ harvest but now all fields are flooded, so we don’t know what to do to get food, or we all will die.” Some villagers have already been faced with hunger, as some of their food was submerged by the flood. They are also uncertain if the customary sharing of food to needy villagers can be sustained when the situation reaches a point where there is insufficient food for all of the villagers.
Photo: HRW
Besides food security concerns, local communities in these two villages are also faced with health problems such as diarrhea, stomach aches, fever, cold, inflammation, and skin disease (experiencing itchy skin). Since 18th October 2017, the water level continues to rise day by day and there is no clean water and sanitation provided to these communities by local authorities or local NGOs. Local people are using water harvested from the rain or water collected from the river or nearby stream for drinking, but this practice is not sustainable in the long term due to the ending of the rainy season. The prolonged submergence of the area, and the decay of materials such as trees and plants in the water, will cause a reduction in water quality. Therefore, the drinking water sources that the villagers and animals depend on will no longer be suitable for consumption and may cause further health problems. The Phnom Penh Post released an article on December 5th, 2017 about the shortage of clean water at Sesan, where people are facing shortages of potable water for drinking when dam’s reservoir is stagnant, not clear, and smells bad.
Other main concerns; 81 children have not attended school since 2015 because there were no teachers, and a young woman has died because there are no health services, a poor road, and long distance to the town for receiving public services.
Further, three members of a family of a leader and activist of the community were harassed by the local authorities and provincial court. They have been accused of incitement to commit a felony and obstruction of a public official because of efforts to organize a solidarity mobilization trip and to join their traditional festival on 23 July 2017. Now, three of the community representatives are still in Phnom Penh for their security. On 7 February our lawyer filed a request to the court to postpone the court appearance.
But while they rue their losses, some see a fragile victory
25 September 2017, Dam Inauguration Day. The prime minister Hun Sen allowed both effected communities to continue to live in their old village “They do not want to leave their land because they have their shifting cultivation farm so let them continue to practice traditional shifting cultivation and we just reserve the land and build the house for them in the new settlement in case they want to live here or go and back for their shifting cultivation,” said the prime minister. This was a strong message of the prime minister and helpful for the communities, and so the governor committed to respect this idea. On 9 February 2018, officials visited the effected communities and promised to respond and support the communities demands. The communal land title, public services and compensation were considered by the Deputy governor, but they need a community appointed NGO to work with them. Even though the community has seen the green light from the governor, they still do not trust local authorities and have concerns about the land title. This is because the community demand is for 8200 hectares, but the governor might consider only 900 hectares for communal land title. Based upon these concerns, the community needs help from CIPA to assist in pushing for the tentative promises to come to fruition. This must be done with transparency and must directly benefit the community. If they lose, they will have sacrificed everything for this long struggle.
While CLT is underway, the forest is being cleared.
On 15-16 August 2022, indigenous peoples held a consultative workshop to collect inputs for the draft amendments to the Law on Protected Areas 2008 and the Forestry Law at the Somadevi Angkor Hotel & Resort, Siem Reap City.
This consultation is composed of a total of 181 participants. This includes 151 representatives from indigenous communities (30 female), 23 representatives of indigenous organizations and associations, two Indigenous advisors, 1 non-indigenous advisor, 5 indigenous lawyers, 12 representatives of indigenous communities joined via Zoom Online, 3 from the Indigenous Women’s Association, and the high presence of H.E. Yin Kim Sean, Siem Reap Parliamentary Member, including the Ministry of Interior, the Ministry of Rural Development, national NGOs, international organizations, and 24 development partners who attended directly and remotely. Indigenous peoples attended this discussion, such as 16 ethnic groups including: Bunong, Kui, Sui, Kreung, Tampuan, Jarai, Thmorn, Por, Steang, Kachak, Saouch, Chong, Lun, Khonh, Brao, Kavet, from 12 provinces/cities including Kratie, Ratanakkiri, Mondulkiri, Stung Treng, Preah Vihear, Kampong Thom, Kampong Speu, Pursat, Koh Kong, Banteay Meanchey, Sihanoukville and Battambang.
The purposes of this consultation included:
To indicate the purpose and the process of modification/amendment of the Law on Protected Areas 2008 and the Forestry law 2002 by the indigenous community representatives directly under the leadership of the National Committee for Sub-national Democratic Development (NCDD).
To provide opportunities for indigenous peoples to fully participate in discussions related to the traditional situation of indigenous peoples and previous laws’ application on land tenure and natural resources, to provide inputs effectively and completely on the content of the draft amendments to Law on Protected Areas and Forestry law in line with the recognition of indigenous peoples’ rights to land, forests, and resources based on traditions and customs of indigenous peoples and in accordance with national and international instruments which the Royal Government of the Kingdom of Cambodia ratified.
To ensure that the amendments of the two laws shall serve sustainably collective benefits to indigenous communities with no harm to their traditional right to livelihood, protection and natural resources management and indigenous traditional beliefs.
Based on the objectives, outcomes, and collective spirit of indigenous peoples’ consultations in providing inputs into the draft amendment law on Protected Areas and Forestry Law, we, indigenous people, would like to affirm as follows:
Indigenous peoples have equal rights as others, while all people have rights and differences. Therefore, as indigenous people, we consider ourselves to be different from others and shall respect the right to this difference. Indigenous peoples and indigenous person has rights that are not the subject of any decision making or forced to include or consider their communities be the same as the communities that are different from their communities, affecting the economy, society, or culture representing their identity, traditions, and religious beliefs.
Indigenous peoples have their own economic, social, and cultural rights which are recognized, protected, and governed in accordance with their traditions, culture, law, and law enforcement without discrimination in the area of natural resources and land regardless of any form.
Concerning that indigenous peoples suffer from historical injustice caused by discrimination through using common words or meanings with other local communities or deprivation of indigenous peoples’ rights to land management and land tenure, and natural resources as stated in the content of the draft amendments to the Forestry Law and the Law on Protected Areas.
Concerning that the draft amendments to the two laws, in particular, the right to fair consultation, the right to full information, the right to collective decision-making without intimidation, and the right to develop based on their collective needs and interests to ensure their sustainability, culture, traditions, religious beliefs, and economy.
Recognizing that the rights of indigenous peoples are enshrined in the Land Law 2001, the Forestry Law 2002 and the Law on Protected Areas 2008, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples 2007 and Convention No. 111 on recognized labor rights and occupations are really essential to the lives of indigenous peoples in living with dignity, and in particular, past recognition is most prominent in Asia and the ASEAN level in recognizing the rights of indigenous peoples within the framework of indigenous customary rules, and national and international laws.
Statement on issues and concerns of indigenous communities:
The wording of local communities in the two draft amendments cannot represent indigenous communities or indigenous peoples because indigenous communities differ from other local communities in their origins, ethnicity, language, socio-culture, and tradition. Indigenous communities are the groups of people who have lived in the territory of the Kingdom of Cambodia since the birth of their ancestral lineage, where all members show their ethnicity, sociality, culture, executive economy, traditional livelihood, and customary land tenure of collective use. The local community, therefore, and indigenous communities are not the same.
The Forestry Law promulgated by the Royal Kram for 20 years and the Law on Natural Protected Areas for 14 years has made some members of indigenous communities (individuals and a group) face many issues in implementing their economic, social and cultural rights, including:
Complicated procedures and processes for the establishment of communities, time consuming and resource consuming which are not appropriate or flexible to the actual situation of the indigenous people.
Zoning of core areas, conservation areas, sustainable use areas, and community areas without the knowledge, participation, and collective consent of the indigenous people in the location they have been living. Despite this, there is the exchange of compensation from the state, but it is perverse from the traditional conditions, culture, religious beliefs, and indigenous identities of indigenous peoples. As a result, some indigenous people were arrested and sent to court because the traditional farming practices included rotation or shifting plantations for making a living and losing land, religious belief land, residential land, agricultural land, dependent land or location, etc. Individuals, families, and communities that are not organized as community protected areas, and community forestry do not receive benefits and rights to protect and conserve natural
Community protected areas and community forestry do not cover all of the customary land use and religious beliefs that indigenous peoples have experienced in the past.
In addition to the agreement on community forestry and community protected areas, the authorities have ever issued documents or tiles of customary use rights, right to beliefs in locations in forest areas, natural protected areas or natural resources conservation areas to indigenous peoples. When the community, group, or family does not have this land tenure, it causes a number of consequences, such as the lack of legal evidence to prove what the court and the parties in disputes, and the Forestry Administration or the Nature Protection and Conservation Administration, considered illegal activities, which result in severe arbitrary fines, and in some cases, prosecution..
Most indigenous people misunderstand the purpose of strategic plans, management, conservation, and natural resource use of community forestry and community protected areas that were established in their villages or communities.
Indigenous peoples are severely affected by forest development projects that have traditionally been used and adhered to. The law defines these forest lands as public property of the state and subdivides them into state private lands so that they can be leased or concessioned to private companies for development without fair consultation. There is not enough time, not enough information, no solution or avoidance of social, cultural, and environmental impacts properly and fairly, especially without the consent of indigenous peoples in advance.
Sub-national law enforcement officers interpreted and enforced the law vaguely, and generally accused existing or customary indigenous communities of not being legal communities, and asked for certification of communities recognized by administrative authorities while no authority has clear responsibilities to facilitate the preparation and issuance of certificates to indigenous communities as required.
Indigenous peoples do not know which areas are the core areas or natural protected areas because it does not discuss how to define the four areas, both mapping, border demarcation, and setting up border posts in each natural protected area. It made indigenous community members infected and easily fell into the accused when using land in accordance with rights to operational farming for making a customary living.
In order to respond to or address common issues and challenges arising from the lack of attention to the content and governance of tenure as well as the implementation of the Law on Protected Areas and the Forestry Law, indigenous people agreed to hold 4 consultations, including this consultation, to collect and include in the draft amendments to these two laws in order to get adequate governance of tenure for indigenous peoples, incorporating individuals’ and collective rights of indigenous peoples to access information, adequate time in advance, fair and collective consultation without intimidation, threats or restriction of the rights to make shifting or rotation cultivation or other rights over the management of land, forests, and natural resources – the dependent resources for the livelihood of indigenous peoples. These collected inputs were based on indigenous peoples’ traditions and international norms, including VOLUNTARY guidelines on the responsible governance of tenure of land, fisheries and forests in the context of national food security (VGGT), Universal Declaration on Human Rights, United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, No. 111 on Discrimination of Employment and Occupation, and National Laws, including the Land Law 2001, Indigenous Peoples Development Policy, Sub-Decree No. 83 on Procedures and Procedures for Land Registration of Indigenous Communities, National Policies and outcomes of Consultations in Ratanakkiri and Mondulkiri Provinces by Indigenous Lawyers Association decided to include inputs and make a Joint Communiqué about the following 8 inputs:
Input 1: Request Provisions for ” Indigenous Peoples and Indigenous Communities” in the amendments to the Law on Protected Areas and Forestry. Provisions in the Law on Protected Areas and the Forestry Law are non-regulatory as ” Local community” to present or integrate with ” indigenous communities” because indigenous communities are very different from local communities. Differences include origin, language, ancestry, customs, traditions, cultures, systems, and social structures. All members express the unity of ethnicity, traditional rules, language, knowledge, beliefs, religious practices, and multi-religions linked closely to forests, land, natural resources, and permanence.
The definition or defining of indigenous peoples and indigenous communities shall be separated completely from the local community in the provisions of these two amendment laws. The request is made on the basis of:
Land law already provides a clear definition.
Indigenous communities are different from local communities. Indigenous communities or groups are socially and culturally distinct, which means that indigenous societies are not the same as local communities or other
Defining local communities referred to as indigenous peoples or indigenous communities can affect cultural identities and cultural and social nature and potentially lead to misunderstandings or misinterpretations when rights of indigenous peoples are impacted or abused, especially when matters go to court or administrative proceedings while practicing on the
Indigenous peoples’ traditional, cultural, and social rights are permanent, while the rights arising from the establishment of community protected areas and community forestry are the rights that arise from the periodic agreement between the state and the communities. Furthermore, the majority of indigenous peoples have no knowledge, no information, and no ability to create communities in line with the purposes of the said two laws on their own.
The specific provisions on indigenous peoples in the draft amendments to both laws are consistent with other laws in force in the Kingdom of Cambodia, such as the Civil Code and the Land Law.
Input 2: Request for provisions in the Law on Protected Areas and the Forestry Law to recognize rights and provisions of governance guaranteeing tenure of traditional occupations of ” rotational or shifting cultivation ”.
Definition or traditional farming practices in rotational or shifting cultivation are the traditional method of land use for growing a variety of crops, such as rice, vegetables, corn, sesame, chili, eggplants, luffa gourds, pumpkins, cucumbers, wax gourd, varieties of cassava, beans and taro and so on. There are many land locations. One location could be made for 1-2 years and after that moved to another place. It takes eight or ten years later until it is time to cultivate again in the first location, operating on the land that had been occupied and used in the past, including deforestation of old plantations or replanting plots, leading to naturally fertile soil.
Rotational or shifting plantations can be remade after abandonment over the years. They have moved to different places, leaving behind a variety of old plant varieties that can be mixed with the forest or other plants that grow back and can provide food and shelter for many species of wildlife as well.
The practice of traditional agriculture is invaluable in relation to the traditional economy, culture, and society of indigenous peoples. For economic relations, we can supply natural foods for health and livelihood; exchange products and crops; interconnected with cultural traditions, such as knowledge of how to conserve the seeds; how to plant; how to harvest mixed crops based on seasons, weather conditions, soil conditions; use of knowledge; how to take care of crops in the field; and connect with social relations, which leads to good solidarity of members of indigenous communities, such as helping each other; mutual assistance while planting; taking care of each other’s plantations with neighboring planters, etc.
More value: rotational or shifting cultivation are valuable in the process of sustaining the natural environment in serving the public interests, humans, animals, land, air, the world, and the whole planet. A sustainable process in this sense is to allow trees, plants, and natural forests to grow again so that the water does not erode the soil, leading to the removal of streams such as canals and streams, causing shallow loss of fish habitats, and re-establishing soil quality, good quality of land. According to meteorologists, it is found that nurseries and small trees have the ability or capacity to absorb and store more carbon, while older trees have the ability to store less carbon or saturated carbon. At this point, indigenous peoples’ knowledge or practices of rotation or shifting cultivation , which provide opportunities for reforestation and small trees, have the ability and capacity to absorb and store large amounts of carbon, contributing to environmental and planetary degradation for the whole earth.
This is the value of the method and knowledge in the operation of rotational or shifting cultivation , which is not the clearing of forest land or new land for destruction and ownership but the practice of planting the crops which are essential for families, traditions, culture, society and the environment.
The denial or imposition of a ban on the practice of rotational or shifting cultivation is a serious violation of the indigenous rights and economic rights of indigenous peoples, as well as an indication of discrimination in traditional occupations for hundreds of thousands of years ago. For example, in Preah Vihear province, vulture conservation areas have been engaged in rotational or shifting plantations long before before the law on Natural Protected Areas, Forestry Law, land law, and before conservation groups designated the area as a protected area. Today, there are many vultures in the area, as well as many other animals, which is very different from the area where there are plantations, which are not shifting cultivation. Therefore, rotational or shifting cultivation activities do not affect the environment and natural resources until the depletion of forest resources leads to extinction. Generally, affecting forest, or natural resources is a lack of education, understanding of actual practices to tradition, or a discriminatory mindset toward the traditional occupations of indigenous peoples.
Input 3: Proposed amendments to these two laws shall have specific provisions on ” Governance of legal nature rights” such as rights to areas and locations use, based on traditional practice, rights of religious beliefs, and worship beliefs of indigenous peoples:
3.1. Laws shall enact “decentralization to Commune/Sangkat Local Administration to obtain legal rights to issue the certificate”, rights to use, to harvest the products, beliefs, or religion either individual or entity of the indigenous peoples, areas, and locations that have been used. Based on the reflection of these two laws, there is no provision requiring the sub-national administrative authority to issue ” a document or certificate of tenure”, areas and locations, enjoyment and religious beliefs of indigenous persons or legal entities that have experienced, and when taking legal action before a court or state authority, judges or state officials always ask for and require the letters or customary tenure documents on those relevant areas issued by the state authorities, thus causing indigenous peoples to suffer injustice due to the lack of evidence before the courts and authorities State.
3.2 Shall have specific provisions on “a collectiveagreeable mechanism for full and fairconsultation” by participating in the zoning of customary tenure rights based on the actual situation of indigenous peoples.
3.3. These two draft amendments shall have specific articles on “recognizing the confirmation of location, size, type of use, enjoyment, religious beliefs, an actual worship place for registering the land ownership as a collectivenessand for other registrations that are not real estateownership” instead of having state institution deny or ban these rights.
3.4. In the draft amendments to both laws, there shall be specific provisions on “settlement mechanisms and measures under the principles of accountability in good governance” when there is a withdrawal or impact on rights to use, enjoyment, beliefs, and religions of indigenous peoples. Example: Article 22 of the Law on Protected Areas into force stated that “the state recognizes and guarantees the right to use in the customary, traditional, religious beliefs natures of local communities and indigenous peoples living in protected areas” but the law does not mandate, not assign the roles to any level of the state organization to conduct the governance of tenure (non-ownership) rights in any particular level of administrative system at commune/Sangkat level or the district level closest to the indigenous peoples and citizens.
Input 4: The draft amendments to these two laws should have “a separate chapter” (the same as the Land Law) on the determination, recognition, protection of rights and governance of tenure to exercise rights, enjoyment, beliefs, religions, and cultures, as well as how to settle conflicts or disputes in the event of an incident, taking into account the traditional rules of indigenous peoples prior to the imposition of imprisonment of indigenous members.
Input5: Propose a time limit for community forestry and community protected area agreements “should be the same periods as economic concession land agreements (50 or 99 years)and community agreements should not be terminated or suspended” when the community has complied with the agreement.
Input6: Proposed amendments to these two laws should be enacted to the state “to ensure national budget resources” annually for the management, conservation, and development of community forestry and community protected areas to be more effective and sustainable.
Input 7: Proposed draft amendments to these two laws should impose obligations on the state “to apply the principle of Free, Prior and Informed Consent ” from the indigenous community collective before deciding to terminate the agreement or confiscate the community forest land or natural resource protection area from the indigenous community.
Input 8: Proposed draft amendments to these two laws should have specific provisions on “the sizing of forests, mountains, lakes, reliefs, temples, and natural cultural sites be based on actual indications by indigenous peoples and neighboring communities, and the authorities are involved.” The size of the land, forest, mountain, and beliefs, and these areas should not be limited to 7 hectares as in Sub-Decree No. 83 on the procedure and process for registration of indigenous community land as collective property. The reason is that the cultural traditions of the indigenous people never measure or know the location of the land size, the forest, the mountains, where the forest spirits are, how many hectares in reality, depending on the situation, the size of the actual operation, in particular, leading to the loss of space that must be protected for the common interests. Therefore, if the two draft amendments to the new laws also stipulate the size of spiritual forest land, and burial ground as in Article 6 of Sub-Decree No. 83 on procedures and process for registration of indigenous community land as collective property, being into force actually violates and constitutes a form of discrimination against indigenous peoples’ religious, cultural and social rights at the level of national law, contrary to Article 31 and Article 43 of the 1993 Constitution of the Kingdom of Cambodia, including the Law on Culture and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which the Royal Government of the Kingdom of Cambodia voted for support in 2007.
Overall, the indigenous communities agreed that the two draft amendments to the new laws shall include separate chapters and articles on the rights of indigenous communities as informed in the 8 inputs listed above.
At the same time, the consultation also reviewed specific articles of the Forestry Law 2002 and the Law on Protected Areas 2008, reflecting the status of traditional practices, legal content, and community law enforcement. The indigenous peoples have decided to organize and consolidate their inputs into specific chapters and articles related to the rights of indigenous peoples in order to facilitate the review and adoption of both draft amendments.
Therefore, we, the representatives of the 16 indigenous peoples from all 12 provinces and cities, are optimistic and sincerely hopeful that the leadership of the Ministry of Interior, Ministry of Environment, Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, Ministry of Justice, NCDD, the Council of Ministers, the National Assembly, the Senate and the King of the Kingdom of Cambodia will accept all the inputs as mentioned in this Joint Communiqué to serve the peaceful benefit of the indigenous peoples and the whole nation of Cambodia.
Input consultation for the process of amending the Law on Forestry and the Law on Protected Areas is a very important part of the process, particularly for indigenous communities, as the actors will benefit greatly from these two laws if they are made in accordance with their decisions, adequate consultation, and with as many stakeholders as possible included. But if the consultation process does not allow for enough participation from all stakeholders, it will have a significant impact on how these laws are implemented.
The Cambodia Indigenous Peoples Alliance has been engaged in mobilizing partners to consult, particularly with indigenous people throughout the country, to ensure that their perspectives are included in the whole input consultation process for revising these two laws. We work from the local to the national level because we believe a law serves the common good in an inclusive, transparent, accountable, and democratic manner when all stakeholders are involved.
The Cambodia Indigenous Peoples Alliance has so far worked with indigenous communities at many different levels and stages, from ethnic-based to multi-ethnic consultations. In particular, it has organized workshops at the national level with indigenous representatives from provinces like Kampong Thom, Preah Vihear, Kratie, Stung Treng, Ratanakkiri, Mondulkiri, Kampong Speu, Pursat, Battambang, Koh Kong, Kampong Som, and Banteay in which indigenous groups such as Kui, Kavet, Kreung, Jarai, Chong, Tampuon, Bunong, Brao, Suy, Stieng, and Sa’Och, actively participated in providing input. They also expressed concern that the term “indigenous peoples” was removed from these proposed laws.
This is a historic event for indigenous peoples in Cambodia to debate this draft law face-to-face, ensuring that the laws serve a common interest and are in line with international standards such as the Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests in the Context of National Food Security (VGGT), the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), ILO Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention No. 111, the Laws of Cambodia and National Policies.
The process has raised concerns for indigenous communities, indigenous organizations, and CSOs because it gives them very little time to offer their input. This is especially the case for indigenous communities, who are worried that it will undermine their traditional livelihoods, culture, identity, and rightful enjoyment. These laws have had negative effects on their lives thus far, as stated in their joint statement following the consultation workshop held in Siem Reap. In particular, the definition of local communities as indigenous communities or indigenous peoples has affected the protection and respect for traditional socio-cultural characteristics.
Indigenous families and communities have faced multiple issues pertaining to social, cultural, and economic rights for over 20 years of the forest law’s enforcement and for about 12 years of the protected area law’s enforcement, including:
Complicated and time consuming, and expending high resources in building community,
Some Indigenous Peoples have been arrested and taken to court for practicing traditional agriculture, rotational or nomadic farming for livelihoods
Failure to fully participate in the legal demarcation of areas in areas where indigenous peoples have been living.
Lack of documents or certificates of traditional use rights, beliefs about locations in protected areas or forest conservation areas, etc. The fact that their community, group or family is undocumented has many legal consequences, including being prosecuted and considered illegal.
Confused and unclear about the purpose of multiple communities in their village or community
Affected by forest development projects that are classified as state land and leased to private development companies without consultation and consent from the villagers who have been living there.
Interpretations by sub-national law enforcement officials are vague and generally accuse indigenous peoples of being unlawful communities and ask for certification from administrative authorities.
Infringement of rights to collective property within a community forest or protected area community due to a decision by the Ministries to reject indigenous peoples’ claims as protected or conserved areas.
Indigenous peoples do not know which areas are the core or conservation areas, as the four areas have not yet been demarcated and border posts have been set up in each of the protected areas, most of which are members of indigenous communities who easily fall into charge when using land according to their right to live.
Along with this joint statement, the two-day workshop also looked at particular provisions in each of the two laws and took indigenous peoples’ views into consideration.
Indigenous women hold ancestral knowledge useful for preserving land and natural resources. In Asia, out of 260 million Indigenous Peoples, it can be safely estimated that indigenous women make up 50% of such population.
The CCHR calls on the government of Cambodia to resolve its commitment to speed up the registration of collective land titles for indigenous communities and solve issues. To protect their cultural identity and traditional land, they are registering their communal land. The request comes during today’s World Indigenous Day celebrations in indigenous communities.
Indigenous groups with only 18 collective land titles received 37 collective land titles from 2011 to July 2022. Given that the Cambodian government is devoted to expediting indigenous peoples’ land registration, it has been offered since 2017. This is based on data from the Cambodian Center for Human Rights for the 28th international indigenous peoples’ day and the 18th for Cambodia, both of which were celebrated on August 9.
In order to safeguard indigenous communities’ cultural identity and customary lands, a local rights group calls on the government of Cambodia to resolve its commitment to expedite the registration of collective land titles for them.
Delays in issuing collective land titles to indigenous peoples are a concern for their communities, as deforestation has been caused by development projects such as dams and economic land concessions. Affects Cambodian indigenous populations because they rely on non-timber forest products. Additionally, deforestation has a significant impact on the culture and customs of indigenous peoples. Ms. Thip Yao, the Representative of Indigenous Peoples in Cambodia, announced this in celebration of World Indigenous Day.
Cambodia is home to approximately 400 000 indigenous peoples, or 2% to 3% of the overall population. There are 458 communities representing 24 different ethnic groupings among them, spread throughout 15 provinces.
According to human rights organizations, the delayed pace of collective land registration is a result of its complexity and expense.
We are indigenous peoples of the land of the Kingdom of Cambodia, whose ethnic, sociocultural, and economic unity is expressed via customs, traditions, identities, and collective practices.
Joint Statement of the Cambodia Indigenous Peoples Alliance
On occasion
28th International Day of Indigenous Peoples and 18th in Cambodia
Under the theme ” The Role of Indigenous Women in the Preservation and Transmission of Traditional Knowledge“
We are indigenous peoples of the land of the Kingdom of Cambodia, whose ethnic, sociocultural, and economic unity is expressed via customs, traditions, identities, and collective practices. The Government of Cambodia has made significant efforts and shown considerable concern for indigenous peoples in order to develop a national framework and sign and ratify international instruments for the applicability of indigenous peoples in Cambodia, particularly the 1993 Constitution of Cambodia, which is the supreme law of the nation, Articles 31, 45, and 47. Some laws outline the status and the rights of indigenous peoples. These laws include the Forestry Law of 2002, the Law on Protected Areas of 2008, and the Land Law of 2001. In accordance with the 2009 national policy on the development of indigenous peoples, the government has 11 ministries engaged in and working on the development and conservation of indigenous peoples through:
United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, 2007.
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, September 3, 1981.
ILO Convention No. 111 on “Discrimination in Employment and Occupation” in 1999 indicates the traditional tenure of land and natural resources of indigenous peoples.
International Labor Convention (ILO) 169 On Indigenous Peoples And tribes discussed in Cambodia for many years since 1996.
Women’s potential and challenges
In the context of indigenous societies, women are crucial to the development efforts in the family, community, and society in the setting of indigenous societies. Indigenous communities’ collective cultural identity, land, and natural resources, as well as society at large, are best led, managed, and preserved by women. Indigenous women’s knowledge is not only being preserved but also being transmitted every second through practical activities associated with everyday roles in the family, community, and wider society. Indigenous women are pioneers in traditional farming, gathering firewood, finding and managing water sources, and gathering food for the family from the forest, including fruits, vegetables, and medicinal plants. Indigenous women also provide for the family’s health, security, and economy as well as knowledge about how to care for all types of crops, use farming techniques, and sustainably harvest non-timber forest products.
Indigenous women have a variety of important roles in their families, communities, and society, including income-generating, caregivers, leaders, human rights advocates, and many more. Despite this, they frequently face discrimination on the basis of their gender, class, color, and socioeconomic status. Long-standing violations of the rights to self-determination, self-governance, and management of natural resources and ancestral lands exist. Indigenous women are leaders in defending their lands, cultures, and communities, serving as leaders at the local, regional, and national levels. Indigenous women are frequently reflected in a variety of decisions, expressions, and frequent acts that are adversely affecting them more and more, including victimization, discrimination, and violence. Over time, indigenous women’s knowledge of and commitment to protecting their cultural identities, traditions, beliefs, communities, collective lands, and natural resources have presented many difficulties. Women who take the lead to protect the identity of the land and natural resources, for instance, are vulnerable to social threats that discriminate against them in decision-making and the application of unfair laws, which can result in lawsuits, imprisonment, family separation, living in poverty, insecurity, and fear, the decline and loss of NTFP jobs, and not only that, but it has also put the identity of women at risk because their basic resources are destroyed, and women’s rights are violated. Due to the inflow of outsiders into indigenous communities, women are also experiencing a loss of identity, language, cultural heritage, and security. As a result, indigenous women and girls have been sexually raped and killed, and drug usage is on the rise. There are still very few safe villages and communes covered by the national policy.
Demand
We are a Cambodia Indigenous Peoples Alliance consisting of representatives of Indigenous Community Networks: Sa’Och, Chong, Suy, Por, Kui, Brao, Kachak, Lun, Kreung, Tampaun, Kavet, Jarai, Stieng, Thmoun, Bunong, and Krol, and Cambodia Indigenous Women Association, Cambodia Indigenous Youth Association, and Indigenous Peoples Organizations.
We encourage indigenous women all across the nation to keep up the good work of strengthening the capacity of self-help networks and their voices in all trends and mechanisms to guarantee that they are included in all decisions pertaining to the leadership of the conservation, transmission of traditional knowledge, and sustainable development of indigenous peoples in compliance with the right to self-determination enshrined in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
At the same time, we urge national and international development agencies to pay attention to work and offer women real support in the development and conservation of local communities.
In particular, we urge the Royal Government to pay attention to the conservation and development of indigenous peoples in a sustainable manner in line with the Sustainable Development Goals. And urge the Royal Government to promote the political will to put in place laws to recognize and guarantee the knowledge of the rights of indigenous women and the collective rights of indigenous communities, and moreover, the Royal Government shall put into effect the recognized law with respect to the rights and traditional culture of indigenous peoples, as enshrined in national and international instruments to ensure that indigenous women and indigenous communities have the right to make informed decisions, collective land ownership according to the demands or needs of indigenous peoples. We, the Indigenous Peoples, expect that there will be no discriminatory content and law enforcement practices that will deprive indigenous people of their land, natural resources, culture, society, and economy.
Additionally, the Royal Government and the courts are urged to stop any acts of arbitrary detention, framing, intimidation, restrictions, and violence against indigenous peoples by state authorities at all levels. We demand a drug-free, safe society that is especially free from rape and murder of indigenous women and girls. In cases of rape and murder of indigenous girls and women, the Royal Government shall support and intensify the investigation and arrest of the perpetrators to be punished in accordance with the law that is in effect in the most efficient and just manner.
At the same time, we implore the Royal Government to enhance and develop indigenous communities’ markets in order to help lower bank debt and improve the economic stability of indigenous communities.
We also compel the Ministry of Justice and Judges to strengthen law enforcement and recognize the legal rights that respect the rights of indigenous peoples in order to guarantee that we, as the victims, receive a fair trial.
International Land Coalition Asia (ILC Asia) stands in solidarity with Heng Phen, an indigenous woman and land rights defender from the Kuy community in Cambodia. Local authorities arrested Phen on 14 June 2022 and sent her to pretrial detention at the Kampong Thom Provincial Court in central Cambodia.
Phen was charged with “committing violence against a real estate occupant” – a charge she denied – after a complaint came from Chheng Phan, a representative of Sambath Platinum company. The company used a section under Cambodia’s Land Law to wrongfully charge Phen. This is particularly concerning as Kuy women play a crucial role in their communities as defenders of their environment and cultures.
The indigenous Kuy community has had a long-standing dispute with Sambath Platinum since 2012. In 2011 the state granted the company nearly 2,500 hectares of land concessions for a rubber plantation in Boeng Per Wildlife Sanctuary, in Kampong Thom province. A community representative, Hean Hiek, said that in 2014 the provincial administration asked the company to cut off 130 hectares of its concession land and distribute it back to the community. The company was also ordered to stay at least 100 meters away from a canal that the community used.
However, Hiek said the company never obeyed. He also claimed that just last month, eight police officers armed with weapons came to the village and intimidated the villagers, injuring them and seizing their farm tractors. The community alleged that the company had cleared about 700 of 1,000 hectares of their land.
Lorang Yun of Cambodia Indigenous Peoples Alliance (CIPA), a member of ILC, expressed his concern over this unjust treatment against Phen for peacefully protecting the community’s land. “It is unjust and discriminates the indigenous peoples. The court favours the company and criminalises her instead of upholding the rights of indigenous peoples as recognised by Cambodian law. Mrs Phen should not be charged with a crime for peacefully using, managing, and claiming the land. We urge the court to release Mrs Phen and dismiss the case against her,” said Lorang.
As a coalition of 59 civil society organisations in 14 countries in Asia, including Cambodia, ILC Asia supports our members who have worked tirelessly to protect the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities, especially in the face of criminalisation and violent threats. Despite being the custodians of the land that they have lived on for generations and of the traditional knowledge that they hold to preserve our planet, indigenous peoples are often denied the right to own and access land. This is particularly concerning given that Cambodia adopted the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in 2007, which recognises Indigenous peoples’ rights to their land, territories and resources, and obliges states to protect indigenous representatives to be free from any kind of discrimination in the exercise of their rights.
The Land and Housing Rights Network (LAHRIN), an ILC-supported national platform on land rights in Cambodia, has been working with local governments and civil society to assist indigenous communities in obtaining Collective Land Titles (CLT). The progress has been slow and is often hampered by red-tape bureaucracy, according to Sophea Pheap, facilitator of LAHRIN.
Together with ILC member organisations in Cambodia, we call on the Cambodian Government:
To immediately drop all fabricated charges against Heng Phen and release the indigenous rights defender immediately;
To immediately stop the criminalisation, any act of violence and harassment against indigenous rights defenders, community leaders, and political activists.
To facilitate the effective recognition of collective land ownership of indigenous lands, in collaboration with Cambodia’s Indigenous Peoples.