Showing posts with label Conservation and Customary Use Programme. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Conservation and Customary Use Programme. Show all posts

Thursday, July 13, 2017

ICCA Global Support Initiative – Legal Support

Natural Justice is proud to announce that it will be coordinating the ICCA Global Support Initiative’s work on legal and policy change. The work is a follow up to the 2012 Legal Reviews also coordinated by Natural Justice. The overall object is to ensure greater recognition of and support for territories and areas conserved by Indigenous peoples and communities (ICCAs) through appropriate legal/policy reforms at national, regional and global levels in order to enhance local livelihoods and conservation effectiveness. Activities will include: the development of up to 20 national legal reviews, an international review and a synthesis report; submission of insights from the national level reviews to regional and international legal and policy processes; production of a number of policy briefs on important and emerging issues, such as ‘other effective area-based conservation measures;’ and the facilitation of policy platforms and in-country processes. Natural Justice looks forward to working with the Secretariat of the ICCA Consortium and its members, the GEF-Small Grant Program, IUCN and other partners in this important endeavor. More information and updates will be posted to this blog and on the consortium’s website: www.iccaconsortium.org

Friday, July 7, 2017

Kukula Traditional Health Practitioners Association BCP Finalization Workshop, South Africa

Kukula Workshop Participants
On the 28th and 29th June, Natural Justice and K2C facilitated a meeting with the Kukula Traditional Health Practitioners Association at the Timbavati Bush School, Bushbuckridge, South Africa. The overall aims of the meeting were to review the developments of the previous year, to finalize the text of the revised Bio-Cultural Protocol (BCP) and discuss strategies related to leveraging the BCP.
The Kukula traditional health practitioners established the BCP with the intention of regulating their interactions with third parties and protecting their knowledge to enable fair and equitable benefits to their members.
The first day of the meeting focused on a review of the previous year and internal community discussions with Kukula representatives. On the second day of the meeting wider stakeholders were invited to participate in the meeting. Representatives from researchers (Benelex and Dr. Britta Rutert), South African National Parks (SANParks), governmental representatives and legal experts provided an overview of issues that had been identified by the Kukula.
Dr. Louisa Parks (The Benelex Project)
Dr. Louisa Parks (The Benelex Project) shared findings from the first 3 years of the Benelex research project of particular relevance to communities, she highlighted that benefits are more than just limiting damage from a proposed project, they are not compensation, and that they should reflect what a community sees as a benefit – not what others tell them is a good thing. Dr. Britta Rutert (Free University, Berlin) shared the preliminary findings of the ‘Indigenous Entrepreneurs’  research project conducted with the Kukula, she highlighted that entrepreneurship in rural, economically deprived areas with limited infrastructure must be looked as at a “procedural enterprise rather than an economic enterprise”, and organisation, cooperation and negotiation skills were learned and utilized by organisations such as the Kukula in making use of their indigenous knowledge.
Dr. Louise Swemmer (SANParks)
The Kukula have been engaging with South African National Parks (SANParks) on issues related to sustainably harvesting medicinal plants. Discussions focused on opportunities regards integrating Kukula representatives into the roll out of distribution of the medicinal Pepper Bark tree (Warburgia salutaris), which is classified as an endangered on the IUCN Red list. SANParks has been growing hundreds of these tress from seed in their nursery, these trees are in high demand by healers, and SANPaks is spearheading planting of saplings in communal areas, and sustainable harvesting using leaves rather than the bark.
During a legal session, Johan Lorenzen (Richard Spoor Attorneys) provided an update on various laws and policies related to the Kukula, including regulations related to the Traditional Health Practitioners Act as well as the Indigenous Knowledge Systems Bill. This was followed by a presentation by Mr Wiseman Rikhotso (Director, Biodiversity Compliance, Department Environmental Affairs) related to the Threatened or Protected Species (TOPS) Regulations and the compliance awareness drive related to “muthi” (traditional medicine) markets.
The Kukula also discussed the finalization of the update of their bio-cultural protocol (BCP) and how to leverage it moving forwards
.Looking forward the revised BCP text will be finalized, the Kukula together with the Department of Environmental Affairs will host a workshop regards legislation around Threatened and Protected Species (TOPS), and the Kukula will engage with SANParks on supporting the Pepper Bark project in their villages.
Kukula participants

Wednesday, May 10, 2017

Indigenous Peoples and Conservation: A Call to Action

The United Nations' Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues has made a series of recommendations to promote the rights of indigenous peoples in the context of conservation activities. The Permanent Forum met in New York, and, as part of the proceedings, heard from Milka Chepkorir, a Sengwer woman from Kenya, who presented a joint statement on behalf of Forest Peoples Programme, Natural Justice and 20 other organisations. The statement highlighted the lack of implementation of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in the context of conservation policies and practices.

Milka Chepkorir (see photo below) shared with delegates recent human rights infringements from Kenya, where well over 90 Sengwer homes were burned down, allegedly by the Kenya Forest Service (KFS), a government body. The incident was not isolated but was one of many forced evictions resulting in the destruction of Sengwer homes since the 1970s: evictions that have intensified since first the World Bank and now the EU began funding KFS. The apparent justification for the human rights violations is that the Sengwer should not be on conserved areas, yet, under international law and according to Kenyan Constitution, the Sengwer have a right to their ancestral lands, lands they have occupied – and indeed have conserved effectively – for generations.

Speaking after the Forum, Milka Chepkorir said: “Too often, indigenous peoples like the Sengwer are evicted from their land in the name of conservation. We Sengwer have lived in harmony with our forests for generations. Evicting us from our land doesn’t protect it; it makes our lands vulnerable to exploitation by others, including those who present themselves as conservationists in order to try to justify evicting us and taking our ancestral lands. We need protection to stop this happening, and to secure our communities, our forests and our future.”

Joji Carino, senior policy advisor at Forest Peoples Programme, added: “This year marks 10 years since the adoption of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The conservation community must show greater commitment and action to address the continuing human rights violations inflicted on indigenous peoples, on whose lands and territories, biological diversity is sustainably used and most effectively conserved”.

The Permanent Forum made a number of recommendations for action over the coming year, including undertaking a study to examine Conservation and Indigenous Peoples’ Human Rights by two of its expert members: The Forum addressed the specific situation in Kenya, urging the government there to recognise and formally protect the land and resource rights of the Ogiek and Sengwer peoples. The Forum also urged the International Union for the Conservation of Nature to establish a task force on conservation and human rights to work with indigenous peoples’ communities and organisations both to articulate the rights of indigenous peoples in the context of conservation initiatives, and to continue to promote grievance mechanisms and avenues for redress in the context of conservation action, including the Whakatane Mechanism.

The full recommendations will be published in June.

Johanna von Braun, from Natural Justice, noted in response to the challenge faced: “While we certainly have seen over the last 10-15 years improved rhetoric by conservation actors on the need to respect human rights when establishing protected areas, implementation has been poor. It is time to fully implement the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, not only when we are dealing with more ‘traditional’ land-related conflicts like infrastructure development or the extractive sector, but also in the conservation context.”
FPP and Natural Justice look forward to working together with partners across the world, and with the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, in making sure that concrete steps are taken to reduce the gap that persists between policy commitments and conservation practice in some areas.

Tuesday, May 9, 2017

Too little and too late? Realising the Rights of Indigenous People in Conservation





A side event by Natural Justice and the Forest Peoples Programme during this year’s UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues called “Too little and too late? Realising the Rights of Indigenous People in Conservation” took place on Friday, 28 April, 2017, with the aim of pushing for a renewed focus on the issues surrounding conservation and human rights.  

While over the last few years we have seen an increasing recognition of the crucial role indigenous people play in conservation, highlighting the linkages between community rights to land and resources and biological diversity, the conservation sector continues to be accused of infringing the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities. 

From the first denials of access of Native Americans to Yellowstone National Park in the 1860s to the on-going plight of the Sengwer community in Kenya (see photo above), there are many documented cases of indigenous peoples being evicted and subjugated in the name of conservation. A 2016 report on the matter by UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, Vicky Tauli-Corpuz (see photo left), states that worldwide, 50% of Protected Areas were established on the territories and lands of Indigenous Peoples. This incidence is as high as 90% in Central America. 

Conservation interventions can impact on indigenous and other local communities in a number of ways, including: denial to the right to self determination, denial of free, prior and informed consent; lack of engagement by outsiders with indigenous institutions; eviction; unjust resettlement; destruction of property and livelihoods; denial of access and use of natural resources; intimidation and physical harm; and exploitative employment.

Recently, increasing attention has been paid to these kinds of infringements, including by the reports by two Special Rapporteurs, namely the aforementioned Ms Victoria Tauli-Corpuz, and Professor John Knox, Special Rapporteur on Human Rights and the Environment.

It should be noted that these injustices have not been ignored by the conservation sector. Indeed, the adoption of the Durban Accord at the World Parks Congress in 2003 marked a shift as the conservation movement adopted a new paradigm of ‘People and Parks’ which recognised the central role of indigenous peoples in the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity.

On top of that the conservation community has adopted some principles and policies recognising its legacy and the on-going human rights violations in many protected areas. These include:


  • IUCN initiated the Whakatane Mechanism in 2011 to enable visits to assess, address and redress injustices carried out in the name of conservation against indigenous peoples and local communities, on the ground.
  • A number of the larger conservation NGOs have established the Conservation Initiative on Human Rights.
  •  Several conservation NGOs have set up indigenous advisory groups or working groups on Human Rights

However, in spite of this improved rhetoric, implementation on the ground continues to be problematic, with on-going cases of human rights violations in the name of conservation.

The aim of the side-event was to build momentum towards a new focus on conservation and human rights by linking recent UN reports and recommendations with local experiences and proposals for ways forwards.

Speakers included Ms Victoria Tauli-Corpuz, who spoke about the recommendations coming out of her report on the matter; Ms Milka Chepkorir, who spoke about the plight of the Sengwer community in Kenya, which is suffering abuses  at the hands of the Kenya Forest Service; Mr Onel Maserdule, who spoke about conflicts between indigenous peoples and conservation initiatives in Panana; and Ms Tuhi Martukaw, from the Kasavakan Community, who added additional examples of such conflict from Taiwan (ROC).

Before opening up the floor for discussion, Milka Chepkorir also read the recommendations that were included in a formal submission called “Joint Submission on the Lack of implementation of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in the context of conservation policies and practices” to the Forum during its first week of deliberations. The submission was endorsed by a range of indigenous peoples organisations and their supporting organisations.

The recommendations are as follows:

We call on the Permanent Forum to:

a)   Take the lead in convening an Expert Group Meeting on Conservation and Human Rights in 2018, in collaboration with the UN Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, to further explore options for UN action to promote and protect the rights of indigenous peoples in the context of conservation activities, recognising that conservation science makes very clear that securing indigenous peoples’ collective tenure rights is the surest basis for effective, as well as just, conservation;

b)   Develop an Expert Report on Conservation and the Rights of Indigenous Peoples to follow-up the recommendations and reports of the UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the UN Special Rapporteur on Environment and Human Rights and to inform the work of relevant UN agencies and conventions;

c)  Pursue its recommendations to key global conservation organisations, with a focus on the members of the Conservation Initiative on Human Rights, and to request CIHR members to report in 2018 to the Forum on the implementation of the Initiative;

d)  Urge the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) to establish a joint Task Force on Conservation and Human Rights to work with indigenous peoples' organisations to clearly articulate the rights of indigenous peoples in the context of conservation initiatives, and to continue to promote grievance mechanisms and avenues to redress in the context of conservation action, including the Whakatane Mechanism (in turn, contributing to implementation of IUCN Resolution 6.072)[1];

e)  Urge International Financial Institutions, the European Commission, the Global Environment Facility and other donors to apply the strongest possible safeguards in the financing of conservation programmes and projects, including climate change mitigation and adaptation actions, and to recognise collective tenure as the most effective basis for effective conservation and sustainable use of natural resources;

We also call the attention of the Permanent Forum to the following specific case and associated recommendation:

f)   Recommend to the European Union and the Government of Kenya that financing and planned actions in the Cherangany Hills in western Kenya be contingent on the recognition and formal protection of the rights of the forest indigenous peoples, including the Ogiek and the Sengwer, to their lands, as provided for under the Community Land Act, 2016, and the 2010 Constitution, especially Article 63 (2) d ii.