Canada, the UN, and the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

In a previous posting for June 20, 2006, we related news of the Canadian government’s opposition to the United Nations’ Draft Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous People, opposition that has become more marked since Stephen Harper became Prime Minister after the Conservatives came to power in the 2006 elections. While his government’s opposition to the Declaration has therefore been known for some time, in this past week a fair amount of controversy has been brewing in both the Canadian parliament and in international media coverage. The Draft Declaration, if it had been supported by Canada, would not have acted as binding legislation. The current, renewed debate seems to stem from the recently concluded assembly of the Permanent Forum for Indigenous Issues at the UN, as well as discussions in Canada about bringing aboriginal peoples under national human rights legislation.

In some of the leading news about Canada’s position this past week, some newspapers have reported that Australian Prime Minister John Howard may have inspired Canada’s Stephen Harper to oppose the UN declaration. In

The Globe and Mail for Saturday, June 9, 2007, a story by Gloria Galloway titled, “Did Australia Demand Reversal on Natives?” states: “Canada’s decision to withdraw support for the United Nations Declaration on the Right of Indigenous Peoples coincided with a visit to Ottawa by Prime Minister John Howard of Australia — a country that strongly opposes the declaration. Shortly after Mr. Howard’s meeting with Prime Minister Stephen Harper in May, 2006, Mr. Harper called Indian Affairs Minister Jim Prentice to tell him to review Canada’s position of support, government sources said Friday.” While a spokeswoman for PM Harper denied this, the reporter insists “the sources were clear that there was a direct link between the visit of the Australian Prime Minister and the change in policy.” It is important to note that previous Canadian governments had in fact played a role in drafting the UN declaration.

The link between Howard and Harper was first claimed in an Australian press report in late May. In Melbourne’s

The Age newspaper, Russell Skelton’s “Australia ‘blocked UN native rights declaration’” said that Tom Calma, the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner, “claimed Australia had played a role in persuading Canada, which had initially supported the declaration, to oppose the landmark statement.”

Amnesty International has also called attention to the turnaround in Canadian policy under Harper’s administration (see:

CTV.ca, “Canada blocking UN Aboriginal rights: Amnesty”). Amnesty further revealed that staff in three Departments of the Canadian state urged the Harper government to approve the declaration. The staff work in the Departments of Defence, Indian and Northern Affairs, and Foreign Affairs. This was also reported by Gloria Galloway on June 8, 2007, in The Globe and Mail: “Back UN on native rights, Ottawa urged–Bureaucracy at odds with PM’s position, documents show.”

The future of the Draft Declaration at the UN seems in doubt, as one might expect where the rights of indigenous peoples are contingent upon the good faith of one of the leading institutions responsible for indigenous marginalization: the nation-state. States and not peoples are the members of the UN. While public opinion at home might encourage states to adopt declarations that could limit state sovereignty, it seems that public opinion is very confused. In Canada, feedback to press reports show that while many support approval of the declaration, an almost equal number of respondents feel that Aboriginals are already protected under Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms (which is not the case), or that allocating rights on the basis of “race” is racist, or that the United Nations should not “dictate” policy to Canadians, or that the Draft Declaration entails such stark provisions as allowing foreign troops to be based in Canada if invited by First Nations reserves to do so.

Aboriginals in Australia: Still the Worst Off

Aborigines still Australia’s worst-off: reportBy Rob Taylor
Reuters
Friday, June 1, 2007

CANBERRA (Reuters) – Aborigines are 13 times more likely than other Australians to go to prison, with poverty, unemployment and poor education behind a sharp jump in the number of indigenous jailings, a report said on Friday.

The rate of Aboriginal jailings rose 32 percent in the six years to 2006, while black youths were 23 times more likely to be detained after a brush with police and the courts, a government study of Aboriginal disadvantage said.

“Indigenous people are highly over-represented in the criminal justice system, as both young people and adults,” said the report, the third in a series.

Australia’s 460,000 Aborigines make up about 2 percent of the country’s 20 million population. They are consistently the nation’s most disadvantaged group, with far higher rates of unemployment, alcohol and drug abuse, and domestic violence.

The report said wages for Aborigines had risen over the last decade and unemployment had halved. But median household incomes for Aborigines were still around half the level of other Australians and their life expectancy lagged by 17 years.

“If we are going to close the gap in life expectancy we will have to address the overcrowded housing and of course give young people the opportunity to get a job,” opposition lawmaker Jenny Macklin told local radio.

Indigenous Affairs Minister Mal Brough said the report showed some encouraging signs and blamed an indigenous-run state agency — axed by the government two years ago — for many of the failings, as well Aborigines themselves.

“Let’s be honest with ourselves and say a lot of this comes down to personal responsibility and people being responsible for their drug and alcohol behavior, the abuse they inflict on others,” Brough told Australian Broadcasting Corp. radio.

Prime Minister John Howard’s conservative government has often clashed with Aboriginal leaders, favoring practical measures such as better access to health and education.

Howard has repeatedly refused to apologize for past racial injustices suffered by the Aborigines.

Indigenous doctor Marlene Kong this week said Aboriginal Australians lived in “fourth-world” conditions and called for international aid agencies to step in, warning decades of government help had failed to overcome problems.

“It’s been a critical situation for 30 years, and something needs to be done,” the former Doctors Without Borders medic told New Scientist magazine.

“Infant and maternal mortality, two of the most important indicators of a population’s health, are at least three times higher than for non-indigenous people, and getting worse.”