Seminar on current political issues related to indigenous peoples and

Country reports by Students of the Masters Program in Indigenous

Studies 2004, March 3- 4, 2006

Introduction

Students, with the exception of Australia represent almost all the continents in the 2004 batch of the
Masters Program in Indigenous Studies in the University of Tromsø. It was felt that since there was a
rich diversity of students coming from different backgrounds with an interest on indigenous issues in
the multi-disciplinary program sharing of information and experiences would help raise number of
areas of thoughts within the preview of the academic program. All the more the discipline of political
science so far is not yet a part of the multidisciplinary approach in the field of social sciences, law and
humanity, this seminar was intended to bring in that dimension with current issues of the indigenous
peoples in the respective countries where students initially represented. The ‘current issues’ of
concerning the indigenous peoples in different countries would never the less need the perspective of
political science, besides the disciplines of anthropological, historical, law and literature that already
are the part of the formal program. Therefore, to narrow this gap the idea of the two days seminar
facilitated by Sami Centre was organised on the 3rd-4th of March 2006 in Skibotn for students to present
the current issues of the indigenous peoples in their country reports.

The first day of the seminar was dealt on the lecture given by Jarle Weigård, Else Grete Broderstad and
Hans-Kristian Hernes on the indigenous peoples and minority rights, the Sámi political movements and
on the issue of ‘hearing, consultation or negotiation: the case of Finmark Act’ respectively. Where as
the second day was presentation by some Masters Students of Indigenous Studies 04 batch about the
current issues concerning the indigenous peoples in the countries they represented or either basis on
their experience during the fieldwork in the summer of 2005. The theoretical approaches earned from
the lectures and the practical examples from the presentations of the students made the seminar to get a
living experience about indigenous peoples in different angles of the world.

1. Lecture on indigenous people and minorities’ rights from Will Kymlika’s theoretical
perspective, a political philosopher, was focus of discussion by Associate Professor Jarle Weigård

2. The Sami peoples political movement and the establishment of the Sami Parliament by Else
Grete Broderstad, Research Fellow in the Department of Political Sciences

3. On the topic ‘Hearing, Consultation or Negotiation? The Case of Finmark Act’ was presented
by Associate Professor Hans-Kristian Hernes also from the Department of Political Sciences

4. Presentation of country reports of the current issues of the indigenous peoples from the
respective countries by the Masters Students in Indigenous Studies of 2004 batch, discussion and
analytical conclusion

The presentation from different countries has demonstrated that indigenous peoples are facing many
challenging and inter-related political problems from nation states. Of course the degree of indigenous
peoples right protection by national laws greatly different from country to country. The following case
studies are best models for what indigenous peoples are experiencing so far.

4.1 ‘Demand of Constitutional Rights of the Adivasis in Bangladesh’ - A case of Bangladesh:

Abdul Hoque

According to the presentation, the Bangladesh government considers the indigenous peoples as
national minorities but not yet as “indigenous groups”. This has its own impact on the claims of the
people because they would be deprived of many rights owing to such interpretations. It has so far
investigated that about 11 to 13 indigenous groups live in the country. As far as the claims of the
people are concerned, it has been addressed that the question of land and constitutional right for
recognition are on top of the claims. Land encroachment by the mainstream society has threatened the

1
indigenous right of these people. Rather than solving the basic claims of the people, the government
has come up with idea of cultural organizations and instituted cultural academy for the minorities. But,
according to the idea of the presenter, the project failed because of lack of interest, management and
competence on the part of the people. In short, it could be deduced from the presentation that if the
government continues in considering these people as minorities rather than indigenous, their claim for
land and other constitutional rights remains difficult to be achieved.

4.2 ‘Who decides, who dies and how should they die? Adivasis caught between the devil and the
deep blue sea.’ - A Case from India: Bineet Mundu

In India, it is stated that nearly 8% of its population is of the indigenous peoples called the ‘scheduled
tribes’. These groups are identified along with the lowest caste groups in the country and treated as
such. The indigenous peoples call themselves Adivasis – aboriginals or early settlers. So far, the state
policies in relation to them have been very exploitative. They are trapped between the big industrial
development projects undertaken by the state excelled by multinational companies. For instance, in the
5th and the 6th schedules areas according to the Constitution where Adivasi land cannot be bought by or
sold to non-adivasis here the state is in the name of the ‘national interest’ have come up with big
industries, dam projects, mining industries, displacing them and bringing outside population to their
areas. Here where these developmental activities have posed a threat to the Adivasi people is where
different the armed struggles like the Maoist rebels, People’s War Group (PWG) have become very
active working in the interest of the ‘people’. Five different cases were presented in the report which
illustrates how the Adivasi people in central India on one hand are in the pressure of joining the armed
groups if not they have to face the consequences, on the other hand the Adivasis are seen as an obstacle
in the ambitious states developmental projects, facing brutality and elimination from both sides. It was
also added that Indian government does not recognize indigenous peoples and nor has ratified ILO
Convention 169. Click here for case illustration

4.3 ‘The Gwembe Tonga of Zambia and the Kariba Dam’ - A Case from Zambia: Victoria Phiri

The Tonga people are believed to be among the indigenous people in Zambia. Their livelihood depends
on livestock. Here in the home lands of the Tonga people the construction of the Kariba dam
constructed during 1960-1961 by the colonial government, which eventually has taken away about
67% of their arable land. During this time, the colonial government forcefully displaced the people and
settled them on unproductive land. After the migration, their livelihood has been greatly affected in
many ways. It was deprived them from their right of ancestral lands. From the presentation it became
possible to understand that the Zambian government has not mitigated the problem of the Tonga
people. The people are still landless and land claim remains basic question of the people, for which
some thing needs to be done. Click here for case illustration

4.4 ‘Indigenous Nationalities of Nepal’ - A case from Nepal: Sundar Bhattarai

In Nepal, it is stated that the issue of poverty is very rampant occurrence. Though the government of
Nepal identified some 59 indigenous nationalities and claims to have recognized some special rights
for the disadvantaged groups, such as these it remained on paper. It is also claimed that there is some
participation of these people in the political, educational and civil service activities of the country.
Nevertheless, there different groups of people in Nepal still are struggling for human rights, equality
and the restoration of democratic administration. Click here for case illustration

4.5. Indigenous Peoples in South Africa - A case from South Africa: Pricilla

The movement of Khoekhoe, San and Khoesan peoples in South Africa can be taken as a good start in
indigenous people’s movement in Africa. Though the concept “indigenous peoples” is controversial in
Africa, the human Rights commission under AU (African Union) has assigned a group to investigate
and report on the issue in the continent. There are about 38 organizations working on indigenous
peoples in South Africa. The South African case is a good and promising start in Africa. Click here for
case illustration

2
4.6 political conditions in Sámi land and Nigeria - The case from Sapmi and Nigeria: Steve

In this presentation attempt has been made to look at some similarities and differences between
Norway and Nigeria on issues of indigenous peoples. Unlike the Norwegian state, which recognizes
and respects the rights of indigenous people in its national territory, Nigeria considers the indigenous
peoples as ethnic minorities. Though the government of Nigeria has ratified ILO 169, no specific
mention was made concerning the indigenous peoples of the country. Like what has been stated above
in other countries like India, indigenous peoples in Nigeria also suffer from land encroachments from
the state and multinational companies, particularly related to oil. There fore, the people are confronting
with the state and oil companies. Click here for case illustration

4.7 “The Great Majorities” - The case from Latin America: Waltar Anacata Avendano

Click here for case illustration

4.8 Oil Company and indigenous peoples - The case from Russia: Anastasia (2005 batch)

The experience from Russia demonstrates, like many other parts of the world, the challenges
indigenous peoples face from land encroachment by the state and oil companies, which in turn lead to
dismantlement of these peoples from their traditional lands and resources. Lack of enough and fair
compensation, lack of consent, and cultural disintegration etc were and are still prominent problems
that these peoples are facing in Russia.

Short summary of the presentation

Based on the degree of indigenous peoples movement, the state’s inclination to hear the voices of these
peoples an the one hand and based on the nature of challenges the indigenous peoples face on the other
hand, it sounds fair to group the countries under this presentation into four groups.

Under the first group, India, Zambia, Nigeria and Russia can be put together. In these four countries,
indigenous peoples are simply recognized in the category of ‘national minorities’ or in a category of
‘less developed’ and are under serious threat from multinational companies and /or some modern –
technology related “development” programs.

It is possible to see the situations in these countries in a triangular approach of analysis in which the
three edges of the triangle is occupied by indigenous peoples/minorities, resources on these peoples’
land and Multinational Companies. While these three variables operate on the edges of the triangle, the
state plays a central role in manipulating and regulating all variable.

Draw a triangle and label:

resources

indigenous peoples/minorities multinational companies

The second group, according to Asebe’s (one of the participants) grouping system, are Bangladesh and
Nepal; where governments consider the peoples under study as minorities. The basic difference

3
between the first and the second grouping is on the challenges the peoples are facing. While the first
are threatened for their livelihood by multinational companies, the latter’s threat is from the state and
mainstream society.

Norway as the first country to recognize the Sami people as indigenous peoples becomes a best model
in the history of indigenous peoples’ movement. Though the level of granting rights for indigenous
peoples is by far less than the one in Norway, the South African experience is a promising particularly
for indigenous peoples in Africa. Thus these two may be grouped under one category.

The last group is Latin America in which non-indigenous peoples have also been struggling for the
rights of indigenous peoples. And now a day, indigenous peoples are on the way for empowerment.
The best example is the recent presidential election in Bolivia where the president is from the
indigenous peoples; - Analysis as presented by Debelo, Asebe Regassa.

Note of appreciation to all the participants, the student contributors and especially the resource persons,
Jarle Weigård, Else Grete Broderstad and Hans-Kristian Hernes for their valuable contributions. Per
Klemetsen Hætta and Rachel Issa Djesa for facilitation the seminar on behalf of the Sami Centre, Steve
for chairing the two days seminar and Debelo, Asebe Regassa for summarising the presentations and
his analysis and also drafting the seminar report.