Mechanism – The Voices of Indigenous Peoples in Cambodia

Keynote address by Jose´ Francisco Cali Tzay

José Francisco Calí Tzay 21 March 2024

As you all know today 21 March marks a very special day. Today is the United Nations Day on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination because on 21 March 1960, police in South Africa opened fire and killed 69 people at a peaceful demonstration in Sharpeville, against the apartheid “pass laws”. The UN General Assembly proclaimed this Day in 1966 to commemorate this massacre and to call upon the international community to redouble its efforts to eliminate all forms of racial discrimination.

The various impacts of what I would term “structural discrimination” and “institutional racism” on Indigenous Peoples are reflected in high levels of poverty, maternal and infant mortality, low life expectancy, marginalization, social exclusion and limited access to adequate housing, healthcare, education, employment and decent working conditions; participation and representation, or to justice and redress. In addition, Indigenous Peoples continue to face discrimination in the exercise of their rights to own and control their lands and territories, their rights to consultation and free and prior informed consent and self-determination. Discrimination and racism were used to justify colonial invasion and expansion, occupation of indigenous lands and territories, exploitation and domination of Indigenous Peoples and the whole scale destruction of entire indigenous societies. Racism was implicit in many legal doctrines such as the Doctrine of Discovery’s concepts of “terra nullius”, “effective occupation” which were used to justify the invasion of indigenous territories and the dispossession of their ancestral territories. Racism justified the civilizing mission of colonial powers and their duty to bring the so-called benefits of Western civilization to “uncivilized” , “primitive” peoples or “inferior” races around the world. Racism is behind the contamination of indigenous lands, waters and territories by nuclear testing, dumping of toxic wastes, pesticides, fumigation, oil spills, dams or what peoples have termed environmental racism.

Racism is also behind the rejection of the legitimacy of indigenous values, institutions, justice systems, traditional knowledge and land management and conservation practises. Indigenous Peoples supposed “backwardness” and “irrationality” to manage their lands or internal affairs have crystallised as conventional wisdom in the minds of politicians and members of the judiciary system.

RACISM AND CONSERVATION

Racism is behind the evictions of indigenous peoples, the development of national parks and protected areas excluding the original inhabitants of these lands.

Today is also the International Day of Forests. Proclaiming the Day in 2012, the UN General Assembly called on the international community to celebrate and raise awareness of the importance of protecting forests and trees. Interestingly, the word ‘forest’ originates as a juridical term in early middle age in Europe to designate royal game preserves reserved for the king’s recreational activities. In Asia and Africa, the first protected areas were established as recreational opportunities, hunting grounds for Western colonial elites.

The first “protected areas” established in the USA such as Yellowstone National Park or the Yosemite National Park involved the violent evictions of Indigenous Peoples who had been living on these lands for thousands of years. Some of the earliest American advocates of conservation and protected areas promoting pristine environment and the fortress conservation approach, founders of high-profile conservation NGOs, were also famous proponents of scientific racism, colonial expansion and eugenics. Indigenous Peoples were seen as weak races and were doomed to disappear in the course of progress and modernity.

Conservation’s colonial underpinnings continue to portray Indigenous Peoples as responsible for conservation problems, and permit practices that forcibly evict Indigenous Peoples from their ancestral lands and prevent them from practising hunting, fishing or grazing their animals, accessing sacred sites, collecting wood, often by extreme violence and militarized means.

It is now time to acknowledge and come to terms with the Western conservation’s deep-seated systemic racism, which has historically excluded Indigenous Peoples and continues to do so. It is also time to operate a paradigm shift as conservation is about to become one of the main industries destroying Indigenous Peoples’ lives and violating their human rights. This paradigm shift was already announced by the world’s leading conservationists at the International Union for Conservation of Nature World Conservation Congress held in Durban in 2003 where the 2003 Durban Action Plan was adopted. In this regard, Targets, 8 9 and 10 require that all existing and future protected areas are managed and established in full compliance with the rights of Indigenous Peoples and ” have representatives chosen by Indigenous Peoples in their management proportionate to their rights and interests” and require the adoption of “participatory mechanisms for the restitution of Indigenous Peoples’ traditional lands and territories that were incorporated in protected areas without their free and informed consent [shall be] established and implemented by 2010”.

21 years after such announcement where are we? Conservation institutions and policies continue to exclude and discriminate against Indigenous Peoples. In the name of protecting nature, protected areas and national parks continue to be established on the lands of Indigenous Peoples without their consent, in violation of their rights to lands, natural resources and self-determination. Indigenous Peoples continue to be forcibly removed from their lands with devastating consequences. The colonial and discriminatory “fortress conservation” model continues to prevail and to be duplicated in conservation initiatives in Asia, Africa and Latin America.

HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS AND CONSERVATION

As UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, I have witnessed myself during field visits the destructive impacts of conservation projects on Indigenous Peoples and their lands including violent evictions, destruction of their houses and traditional subsistence economies, expropriation of land, denial of self-governance. Indigenous Peoples can no longer hunt, fish, graze their cattle, they lose access to their religious, sacred and cultural sites. They are denied access to justice and reparation, including restitution and compensation. Indigenous Peoples are often forced to relocate without any resettlement programme or access to adequate housing, essential services, water, food, health care or education. The trauma experienced by Indigenous Peoples, in particular children, women and elders, who are forcibly evicted from their lands and homes create severe trans-generational post-traumatic stress disorder. Often, evictions are accompanied by extreme violence and severe human rights abuses perpetrated by rangers, police officers and army officials including torture and ill treatment, arbitrary arrests and detentions, unfair trial, extra-judicial killings, summary executions, enforced disappearances, sexual gender-based violence, death threats etc. % of the total defenders killed exposes the disproportionate targeting.

Beyond this horrific human toll, this model of fortress conservation undermines the very goals of conservation. Decades of experience with fortress conservation contradicts the argument that the removal of Indigenous Peoples is necessary for the conservation and or restoration of biodiversity. Mounting studies have shown that Indigenous Peoples possess the knowledge and ability necessary to successfully conserve and manage bio-diverse ecosystems more effectively than governments or conservation organisations, and at a fraction of the cost, particularly where their rights are recognized, respected and supported. The fortress conservation model diminishes rather than enhances local livelihoods and biodiversity.

Indigenous ancestral territories encompass about 22 per cent of the world’s land surface that hold 80 per cent of the planet’s biodiversity. The ancestral lands of Indigenous Peoples contain the most intact ecosystems. Wildlife is abundant on indigenous lands, but not because such areas are left untouched, but precisely because Indigenous Peoples have been occupying and conserving such lands for centuries.

As we all know, we are facing a global loss of biological diversity on a scale unprecedented in the entire human history. In December 2022, UN member states have endorsed the goal of protecting and conserving 30 per cent of the planet’s lands and waters by 2030 in the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework at the COP15, also known as the 30 by 30.

The Framework acknowledges the important roles and contributions of Indigenous Peoples as custodians of biodiversity and as partners in its conservation, restoration and sustainable use. It also states that implementation must ensure that “the rights, knowledge, including traditional knowledge associated with biodiversity, innovations, worldviews, values and practices of Indigenous Peoples are respected, and documented and preserved with their free, prior and informed consent, including through their full and effective participation in decision-making, in accordance with relevant national legislation, international instruments, including the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and human rights law”.

Despite this language, I remain extremely concerned by the potential negative impact of this 30 by 30 conservation project. Given that some 15.7 per cent of the world’s land is currently covered by protected areas, to reach 30 per cent would require a doubling of the area under some form of conservation protection.

There is an urgent need to establish clear, coherent and consistent human rights guidance for both conservation organizations and major funders of conservation. A number of influential conservation organisations or conservation funders have no policy on the rights of Indigenous Peoples. Others have adopted standards or policy statements which represent an important step forward in reconciling conservation and Indigenous Peoples’ rights, however many of these policies or guidelines present substantial weaknesses and gaps, are outdated or do not reflect the current human rights standards and jurisprudence as it applied to Indigenous Peoples.

To conclude, human rights-based conservation is the most effective, efficient, and equitable path forward to safeguarding biodiversity. The protection of the ecological integrity of critical ecosystems and positive conservation outcomes are strongly correlated with community-based management that engage Indigenous peoples and recognize their human rights, including their rights to self-determination, free and prior informed consent, ownership and ancestral lands, waters, territories and other natural resources

CALL FOR ACTION

On that special day, I call the international community including states, UN Agencies including UNESCO, conservation NGOs in particular the Wildlife Conservation Society, and the World Wide Fund for Nature, Co-operation Agencies in particular the United States Agency for International Development and the German Development Cooperation and other public and private donors and stakeholders to join their efforts to eradicate racism and racial discrimination in conservation embodied by the fortress conservation model, which continue to devastate the lives of millions of Indigenous Peoples in Asia; Africa) and Latin America.

I call upon donors, investors and funders to adopt explicit policies and guidelines for the rights of Indigenous Peoples that are aligned with international human rights standards, including the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, the Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (No. 169) and the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and recent developments and jurisprudence.

I call upon them to condition funding on the adoption and application of a solid Indigenous human rights-based approach by the recipient, prohibit funding to projects resulting in the forced resettlement of Indigenous Peoples or forced restriction of access to traditional and customary resources and prohibit funding to projects developed without the free, prior and informed consent of Indigenous Peoples and which will restrict their access to livelihoods or their lands.

I urge conservation organisations to demonstrate a genuine commitment to a human rights-based approach to conservation and the eradication of racism and racial discrimination in conservation. Indigenous Peoples should be recognised as equal partner rights-holders in conservation efforts undertaken on their lands and territories. Ensuring respect for the rights of Indigenous Peoples, rather than excluding them from their lands in the name of conservation, will ultimately benefit the planet and its peoples as a whole.

I call upon conservation donors including Cooperation Agencies to direct financial flows to support Indigenous Peoples to develop and sustain their own conservation initiatives. Indigenous Peoples should be acknowledged as key and equal partners in protecting and restoring nature and recognized for their conservation contributions. Indigenous knowledges and sustainable nature governance practices must be placed at the forefront of efforts to identify, designate, and manage new and existing areas important for cultural and biological diversity, including Indigenous protected and conserved areas, and other Indigenous efforts to protect biodiversity, such as Indigenous and Community Conserved Areas (ICCAs). These are forest and biodiversity conservation programmes designed, developed and led by those who have known, occupied and protected these forests for thousands of years.

I call for the rapid adoption of the H.R.7025 – Advancing Human Rights-Centered International Conservation Act of 2022.

Why is the UPR process important for Indigenous Peoples in Cambodia?

The UPR process is a peer-review mechanism of the UN Human Rights Council, where each UN member state is examined on its human rights situation every four to five years. The review is based on three documents: a report by the state, a report by the UN, and a report by other stakeholders, such as civil society and indigenous peoples’ organizations. The state receives recommendations from other states and has to report on their implementation. The UPR aims to improve the human rights situation in each country and foster cooperation.

For indigenous peoples in Cambodia, the UPR process is an important opportunity to raise their concerns and challenges regarding their collective rights to land, territories and resources, as well as their cultural identity, education, health, and participation. Indigenous peoples in Cambodia face various threats to their livelihoods and well-being, such as land grabbing, deforestation, mining, hydropower projects, and discrimination. They also lack adequate legal recognition and protection of their status and rights.((https://upr-info.org/sites/default/files/documents/2018-12/js1_upr32_khm_e_main.pdf))((https://www.upr-info.org/en/review/cambodia))

By engaging in the UPR process, indigenous peoples in Cambodia can:

– Provide alternative information and perspectives on the human rights situation of indigenous peoples that may not be reflected in the state or UN reports.
– Advocate for specific recommendations to address the gaps and challenges in the implementation of the existing laws and policies related to indigenous peoples’ rights.
– Monitor and follow up on the progress and challenges of the state in fulfilling its human rights obligations and commitments towards indigenous peoples.
– Build alliances and networks with other stakeholders, such as civil society organizations, human rights institutions, UN agencies, and diplomatic missions, to support their advocacy efforts.
– Raise awareness and visibility of their issues and demands at the national and international levels.

Some examples of the achievements of indigenous peoples’ engagement in the UPR process in Cambodia are:((https://www.upr-info.org/en/review/cambodia))

– In the first cycle of the UPR in 2009, Cambodia accepted 91 recommendations, including one on ensuring the rights of indigenous peoples to land and natural resources.
– In the second cycle of the UPR in 2014, Cambodia accepted 205 recommendations, including 11 on indigenous peoples’ rights, such as strengthening the legal framework for communal land titling, ensuring free prior and informed consent, respecting cultural diversity, and promoting indigenous peoples’ participation.
– In the third cycle of the UPR in 2019, Cambodia received 198 recommendations, including 13 on indigenous peoples’ rights, such as accelerating the process of communal land titling, protecting indigenous peoples from land grabbing and forced evictions, ensuring access to quality education and health services, and preventing violence against indigenous women and children.

EMRIP16: Item 7 – International Decade of Indigenous Languages By Rachana Sam At

16^th session of the UN Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (EMRIP)
17^th to 21^st July 2023, Geneva, Switzerland
Joint Statement on
Agenda Item 7: International Decade of Indigenous Languages

By Rachana Sam At, Cambodia Indigenous Peoples Alliance (CIPA)
On behalf of Asia Indigenous Peoples Caucus

Dear Madam/ Mr. Chair,

The Indigenous Peoples’ in Asia appreciates the joint efforts of the EMRIP, UNESCO, OHCHR, IFAD and other relevant UN agencies in drawing global attention to the critical situation of many indigenous languages, following the proclamation of the International Decade of Indigenous Languages from 2022 to 2032.

Language oppression leads to loss of language, which in turn impacts on the physical, mental, social and spiritual wellbeing. It impacts on culture, erosion of identity, breakdown of social relations and other Indigenous ways of life.

The Indigenous Peoples and their organisations in Asia are working on initiatives towards mobilizing stakeholders and resources to resist the loss of Indigenous languages which aim towards for the preservation, revitalization and promotion of indigenous languages.

Some of the Indigenous languages in Asia are on the verge of extinction or critically endangered due to various threats ( can provide some examples here) i.e. in Nepal, 10 languages were already extinct, 23 languages is nearly extinct. There is only one last speaker of Kusunda language after the death of Gyani Maya Kusunda. In Bangladesh, only 6 elders are left who can speak in Renmitcha language, 14 other languages are listed as endangered in Bangladesh by the International Mother language institute. In Japan, there are almost no native speaker of Ainu language. The situation is almost the same in other countries’ in Asia.

To address the challenges faced by Indigenous Peoples, some of the Member States in Asia have undertaken remarkable efforts such as officially recognizing Indigenous languages and scripts, introducing Indigenous languages in the education system and using them in various creative media. This is in response to the initiatives and movement by Indigenous Peoples. We call on the UNESCO country offices to facilitate the Member States at national and local levels to intervene in more actions to meet the objectives of the International Decade of Indigenous Languages.

The cultural diversity and richness have given the Indigenous Peoples a distinctive and enduring identity. The Indigenous Peoples’ language who are a minority by number is more at risk of language loss. However, in most Asian countries Indigenous Peoples are still the victim of eviction by State-led development projects, which affect dislocation from ancestral land, out-migration, damage of the socio-economic system, and loss of rich Indigenous cultural diversity as a whole.

In most of the states the education is imparted in the language of majority, and the language of minorities are neglected and suppressed which affect the early education of indigenous children. The digitalization of education system, has also impacted the education of indigenous youth, leading to school drop out of indigenous youth.

Our recommendations to member states, EMRIP, UNESCO, other relevant stakeholders,

To urge the government of the states in Asia to launch action plans for the localization, and operationalization of the Global Action Plan of the International Decade of Indigenous Languages with a full spectrum of human rights, legal recognition of indigenous language, and greater daily use of indigenous languages across all socio-cultural, economic, environmental, legal and political domains.
Initiate and implement National Action Plans with budget allocations to protect, preserve and promote the indigenous languages at the country level
To support and implement additional urgent action, particularly for the indigenous languages at most risk.
To strengthen and build upon the affirmative actions for multilingual education and cultural preservation
To create favourable conditions for knowledge-sharing and dissemination of good practices concerning indigenous languages.
Finally, to adopt a holistic human rights-based approach towards the protection of Indigenous languages.
Recognize Indigenous languages as an official language or working language, preservation of oral tradition and development of language text to ensure access to justice, resources, information, all structures and affairs of state and non-state actors working in indigenous territory and mother-tongue speakers’ area.

Download full statement

Our languages have been stifled, our perspectives and voices have been dismissed by the states and the United Nations

Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
Sixteenth session 17-21 July 2023
Monday 17 July

Item 7: International Decade of Indigenous Languages

Madam Chair, distinguished members of the UN Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, esteemed delegates, and fellow Indigenous Peoples,

Our histories and cultures, our wisdom and aspirations, have all played an integral role in shaping the world we inhabit and our identity itself. And language is the enabler, and it is at the heart of all these processes. However, for far too long, our languages have been stifled, our perspectives and voices have been dismissed by the states and the United Nations.

It is applaudable that the UN Decade of Indigenous Languages have pointed to the need to promote, strengthen and mainstream indigenous languages across social, cultural, economic, environmental, political, scientific and technological domains acknowledging their importance for sustainable development, biodiversity, climate change mitigation and adaptation, and reconciliation processes in the society.

Most importantly, a person’s freedom to use his or her chosen language is a prerequisite to freedom of thought and freedom of speech, which are fundamental to building a democratic polity that relies on meaningful dialogues and facts. Therefore, looking at how language governs and affects us in all aspects of our life, states need to do much more and double up their efforts guided by Article 13 and 14 of the UNDRIP.

There is urgency in this because scientists have warned that up to half of all human languages will have disappeared by the end of the century.

Nevertheless, some of the good practices and initiatives in Asia include the following:

1. In India:

The Constitution of India has begun to recognize indigenous languages such as Santali, Bodo, and Mundari.
Tribal Research Institutes (TRIs) and Tribal Language Teachers’ Training Institutes are being established to work toward the preservation, development, and promotion of indigenous languages and assist in the publication of literature and dictionaries in indigenous languages.
Scholarships and grants are being provided to students and researchers studying indigenous languages.
Efforts are being made to introduce multilingual education in indigenous areas.

In Malaysia, the government, University and indigenous organizations are promoting:

Ethnic language Ambassador.
Ethnic Language Champion Award and Cultural Village Award.
Online ethnic language classes, and language Boot Camps for children.
Forums and Webinar on indigenous languages.
Novel writing competition in the mother tongue.
Publication of materials in multiple formats in indigenous languages.
Orthography spelling system workshops and Ethnoarts workshops.

In Bangladesh the government is:

Giving awards for indigenous language champions.
Developing curriculum for schools in indigenous languages.

These examples of good practices are small but inspirational and should drive us to overcome the enormous challenges we face in achieving our vision and the Global Action Plan. To overcome these challenges, governments must develop a comprehensive National Action Plan (NAP) that has depth and clearly identifies and defines the systemic barriers, issues and challenges faced by Indigenous Peoples. Governments should adopt various measures and recognize the primary importance of establishing collaborations with indigenous communities, educational institutions, NGOs, and linguistic experts for designing and implementing effective strategies to impart education in indigenous languages.

Further, the NAP must consider investing in research and teacher’s training programs, developing and disseminating educational resources in indigenous languages, indigenous-led curriculum development, promoting bilingual education, improving infrastructure, and implementing targeted initiatives to address socio-economic and cultural barriers to education. Education in indigenous languages must primarily aim at strengthening their human rights, legal recognition of their language, identity and self-governance. And in addition, the development of the NAPs must take into account the following:

Lack of Resources: The existing curriculum is inadequate. There is a need to develop curriculum that is comprehensive and inclusive of indigenous languages, cultures, history and knowledge systems to ensure that education in indigenous languages is relevant.
Teacher’s Training: Governments needs to focus on training teachers to resolve the issue of shortage of trained teachers and equipping them with the necessary linguistic and pedagogical skills to teach in indigenous languages and in ways appropriate to indigenous cultures.
Standardization and Accreditation: Most indigenous languages lack standardized scripts, grammar rules, and linguistic guidelines. The absence of accreditation processes for indigenous language education hinders the establishment of quality educational institutions and the recognition of indigenous language certificates or degrees.
Lack of Infrastructure: Many indigenous areas lack or are without educational infrastructures and located in remote areas, such as shortage of schools, classrooms, and basic amenities. It is important that all responsible institutions and agencies are well resourced and adequately funded.
Socio-economic Factors: Socio-economic factors such as poverty, illiteracy, and lack of awareness among indigenous communities can affect their engagement and participation in education. Therefore, governments needs to address these factors and create an enabling environment that encourages indigenous communities to value and pursue education in their languages.
Monitoring mechanism: Establish monitoring framework and mechanism, and governance structure of the Decade at the local and national levels.

I thank you Chair, for this opportunity to place some of these pressing issues and concerns of Indigenous Peoples regarding indigenous language and education.

Gam A. Shimray
Secretary General, Asia Indigenous Peoples Pact.

Download full statement