• darkblurbg
    Canadian Political Science Association
    2020 Annual Conference Programme

    Confronting Political Divides
    Hosted at Western University
    Tuesday, June 2 to Thursday, June 4, 2020
  • darkblurbg
    Presidential Address:
    Barbara Arneil, CPSA President

    Origins:
    Colonies and Statistics

    Location:
    Tuesday, June 2, 2020 | 05:00pm to 06:00pm
  • darkblurbg
    KEYNOTE SPEAKER:
    Ayelet Shachar
    The Shifting Border:
    Legal Cartographies of Migration
    and Mobility

    Location:
    June 04, 2020 | 01:30 to 03:00 pm
  • darkblurbg
    Keynote Speaker: Marc Hetherington
    Why Modern Elections
    Feel Like a Matter of
    Life and Death

    Location:
    Wednesday, June 3, 2020 | 03:45pm to 05:15pm
  • darkblurbg
    Plenary Panel
    Indigenous Politics and
    the Problem of Canadian
    Political Science

    Location: Arts & Humanities Building - AHB 1R40
    Tuesday, June 2, 2020 | 10:30am to 12:00pm

Race, Ethnicity, Indigenous Peoples and Politics



L15 - Indigenous Rights at a Global Scale

Date: Jun 4 | Time: 08:45am to 10:15am | Location:

Chair/Président/Présidente : Gabrielle Slowey (York University)

Indigenous Rights in International Trade and Investment Agreements: An Application to Mining Projects.: Érick Duchesne (Université Laval), Zoé Boirin-Fargues (Université d'Ottawa)
Abstract: Indigenous peoples’ rights and international investment and commercial law (IICL) seem to coexist in parallel. An abundant literature exists that focuses on interactions between human rights and IICL. As international investment and commercial law has been expanded, Indigenous peoples have mobilized and gained some recognition of their rights in domestic and international legal and political institutions. A growing literature focuses on the integration of indigenous peoples’ rights in the field of international investments and international commercial law. However, little attention has been paid to the analysis of how these legal “areas” are articulated in the context of mining projects. Our project aims to address this gap by taking stock of the current situation, and by defining the avenues for change, both current and potential, in order to encourage international trade and investment to better account for the interests of indigenous communities affected by mining projects. For this paper, we created the first comprehensive dataset, which help us analyze the content of existing bilateral or multilateral investment treaties and elements of interaction between IICL and Indigenous peoples’ rights, as well as the presence of such interactions in arbitral proceedings and awards. At the conference, we aim to present our project, our methodology and our first results. Our analysis will lead us to address the thorny question of whether these results show how current interactions between Indigenous peoples’ rights and IICL, as applied to mining projects, contribute to the dispossession of Indigenous peoples affected by these projects.


Non-State Actors and the Rise of ‘Indigenous Voice’ in International Politics: A Study of International Norms and Standards on Indigenous Peoples.: Smriti Sabbarwal (Jawaharlal Nehru University)
Abstract: The re-emergence of indigenous questions in international politics took place since the late nineteenth century. Before that millions of indigenous peoples all over the world were colonised and subjugated by the forces of European colonisation. It took a concerted and synchronised effort by local and international organisations (mainly non-governmental, liberation movements) to help forge a common identity among the diversified and heterogeneous indigenous communities found all over the world. This resulted in the international indigenous peoples’ movement in the1970s which helped develop an ‘indigenous consciousness’ at the international level- through organising international conferences, establishment of mechanisms to address the concerns of indigenous peoples and so on. Against this backdrop, this paper seeks to analyse the role of non-state actors in the creation of an indigenous consciousness at the international level. The paper is divided into two parts. The first part examines how non-state actors (particularly organisations such as United Nations and NGOS like Amnesty International) played an advocacy role in giving an international visibility to indigenous communities by creating spaces for them to participate. The second part dwells on the international norms and standards which developed as a result of the rise of the indigenous voice and visibility, through 1990s onward. Particular emphasis is laid on the formulation of UNDRIP and the recent Nagoya Protocol. The paper concludes with the contention that more indigenous peoples should get international representation through their organisations in order to address their concerns at international platforms.


Indigenous Global Actors and International Perception: Strategic Diplomacies Beyond Blame and Shame: Leah Sarson (Dalhousie University)
Abstract: All but the most orthodox understandings of power in International Relations acknowledge that material factors alone cannot sufficiently account for state behaviour; rather, IR generally recognizes that ideational sources of power like international perception and reputation are central determinants of state behaviour and that states care about how other states perceive them. This dynamic implicates Indigenous peoples, even as International Relations scholarship largely marginalizes the international agency of Indigenous peoples. In the small but robust body of work on Indigenous diplomacies, much is focused on how Indigenous leaders finesse international perceptions about the state as part of strategic campaigns for rights and redress. Employing an analysis of the international connections of First Nations communities across Canada engaged with the resource extraction sector, this paper asks under what conditions international perception can be construed as an intermediary between the state and Indigenous global actors beyond the politics of blame and shame? The dynamics of resource extraction provide a rich testing ground for this research as Indigenous governments are increasingly insistent on equitable and horizontal participation in the sector rooted in expressions of self-determination, while mining companies are increasingly prepared to exploit heretofore inaccessible projects. The paper argues that when the state must balance its rhetorical commitment to Indigenous rights with its inherent desire to maintain authority, Indigenous peoples access the strategic space presented through this contradiction to advance their political objectives. The result is a feedback loop that strengthens Indigenous claims to self-determination and impugns state authority.


Pathways to Indigenous Rights Protection: The Implementation of the UNDRIP in Taiwan: Cassandra Preece (McMaster University)
Abstract: The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) was officially adopted in 2007. Without substantial legal frameworks for rights promotion and protection, minority and Indigenous groups across the world face the risk of human rights violations, protest, or ethnic conflict. Despite not being a member of the UN or a signatory to the UNDRIP, Taiwan has implemented a comprehensive legal framework for Indigenous rights. The Indigenous Peoples Basic Law (2005) includes almost 90% of the UNDRIP contents, and subsequent legislation including the Indigenous Peoples Language Development Act (2017) represent the overall objectives of the UNDRIP. While significant challenges remain in Indigenous rights protection and promotion in Taiwan, this paper seeks to explain the factors which have contributed to the establishment of a legal framework for Indigenous rights in the country. Specifically, it asks why Taiwan implemented a substantial Indigenous rights framework beginning in 2005 (when UNDRIP was under review)? Through a qualitative analysis of parliamentary proceedings, legislation, news releases, and reports from Indigenous non-governmental organizations, this paper argues that the process of democratization in Taiwan was critical to the establishment of an Indigenous rights legal framework in two ways. First, the struggles of democratization provided a space for the Indigenous rights movement in Taiwan to openly and more forcefully pursue its objectives. Second, the normative pressure from transnational and international networks influenced domestic policy elites to develop an Indigenous rights framework consistent with the UNDRIP.




Return to Home