The Monroe Doctrine (1823) and USMCA 2020:
From the Doctrine of Discovery
to the
UN Development Goals 2030
US President D.Trump signing the USMCA at the White House, Washington, DC January 29. 2020
In our letter to the USMCA Working Group of the US House of
Representatives on September 13th 2019, we informed the Working Group members
and House Speaker Pelosi that upon review of the public record of debate
concerning the Human Rights of Indigenous Peoples in the context of the
proposed US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), the systemic disregard for the
human rights of Indigenous Peoples is blatantly discriminatory, unacceptable
and must be addressed before the agreement be put to vote. Completely disregarding this message, the
House of Representatives passed the USMCA on December 19th, and the Senate
Finance Committee then passed the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement on
January 9, 2020. On January 16th, the full US Senate advanced the legislation for signature into US law by US President D.Trump.
During the entire process, there has been no substantive and responsible participation of Indigenous Peoples, in full and complete recognition of the right to Self Determination, as Indigenous Peoples equal to all other peoples, and not simply rubber stamp "Feathered Folk" working to diminish the Inherent Human Rights of the Original Nations of Indigenous Peoples under the development agenda of the corporate-state cartels for whom the USMCA-CUSMA-TMEC was designed to serve.
During the entire process, there has been no substantive and responsible participation of Indigenous Peoples, in full and complete recognition of the right to Self Determination, as Indigenous Peoples equal to all other peoples, and not simply rubber stamp "Feathered Folk" working to diminish the Inherent Human Rights of the Original Nations of Indigenous Peoples under the development agenda of the corporate-state cartels for whom the USMCA-CUSMA-TMEC was designed to serve.
WE DENY CONSENT.
Continental Commission Abya Yala
***********
The Monroe Doctrine of 1823 is the US government’s continental extrapolation of the 1823 Johnson v. M’Intosh decision of the US Supreme Court which established the Doctrine of Discovery of Christendom as the fundamental law of the entire juridical system of the United States of America. All US property law, which also includes the possession of US citizenship as a property concept tied to the institutions of American “white” supremacy, is based on this legaloid doctrine. Under the tenets of the Monroe Doctrine, Uncle Sam replaced the Vatican as the Chairman of the Board for the corporate state regimes in the ongoing colonization of the Americas.
*******
UN Declaration on the Rights
of Indigenous Peoples (2007)
Article 18
Indigenous
peoples have the right to participate in decision-making in matters which would
affect their rights, through representatives chosen by themselves in accordance
with their own procedures, as well as to maintain and develop their own
indigenous decision-making institutions.
From the text of CUSMA-USMCA-TMEC:
Subject to Legal Review for Accuracy, Clarity, and Consistency
Subject to Language Authentication
32-1
CHAPTER 32 EXCEPTIONS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS
Section A – Exceptions
Article 32.5: Indigenous Peoples Rights
Subject to Legal Review for Accuracy, Clarity, and Consistency
Subject to Language Authentication
32-1
CHAPTER 32 EXCEPTIONS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS
Section A – Exceptions
Article 32.5: Indigenous Peoples Rights
“Provided that such measures are
not used as a means of arbitrary or unjustified discrimination against persons
of the other Parties or as a disguised restriction on trade in goods, services,
and investment, nothing in this Agreement shall preclude a Party from adopting
or maintaining a measure it deems necessary to fulfill its legal obligations to Indigenous Peoples.”
******************
With the adoption of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP
2007) which affirms the international right of Indigenous Peoples to Self
Determination, equal to all other peoples,
the purported claims of dominion of the colonial states over the inherent human
rights of the Original Nations of Indigenous Peoples comes
to its demise as a legitimate principle in the rule of International Law. The
Original Nations of Indigenous Peoples are free to determine their own future in their
own terms on their own territories in our continent of the Great Turtle Island Abya Yala.
Since UNDRIP, no state, no matter how benign, can legitimately delegate, define or diminish these collective Indigenous Rights. It falls to the states to recognize, respect, and institute guarantees for the Protection of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples with effective restorative consequences for the violation of these rights.
In this sense, the critical question of historical context that emerged in contrast and contradiction in the Zócalo of Mexico City on December 1, 2019 was punctuated by the signing in approval of the final draft text of the USMexicoCanada Agreement 2018 (USMCA) on the evening of November 30, the night before, by exiting Mexican president Enrique Peña Nieto. The USMCA is being promoted as a revised and “modernized” version of the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) between Canada, the USA, and Mexico.
Since UNDRIP, no state, no matter how benign, can legitimately delegate, define or diminish these collective Indigenous Rights. It falls to the states to recognize, respect, and institute guarantees for the Protection of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples with effective restorative consequences for the violation of these rights.
In this sense, the critical question of historical context that emerged in contrast and contradiction in the Zócalo of Mexico City on December 1, 2019 was punctuated by the signing in approval of the final draft text of the USMexicoCanada Agreement 2018 (USMCA) on the evening of November 30, the night before, by exiting Mexican president Enrique Peña Nieto. The USMCA is being promoted as a revised and “modernized” version of the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) between Canada, the USA, and Mexico.
Just as on January 1, 1994 with the original NAFTA, December 1, 2018 marked the
latest updated version of the colonial project of corporate capitalism riding
south from the Rancho Grande of North America. Now disguised as a development
strategy in alignment with the UN
Sustainable Development Goals 2030, the US-Mexico-Trade Agreement is being
unleashed.
The events unfolding in the present Standoff at Wet’suwet’en are a defining moment that will set the precedent and process for how conflicts involving the rights of Indigenous Peoples to Free, Prior, and Informed Consent will be addressed and resolved. A telling narrative in the ongoing struggle is also unfolding concurrently in Pahuatlan, Puebla, Mexico where the Indigenous Peoples have also faced off against the same TC Energy petrochemical corporation (previously TransCanada) who operates seven pipelines in Mexico.
In fact, when Mexican president Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (AMLO) announced in January 2020 that in consequence to the demands of the Indigenous Peoples of Pahuatlan, Mexico invoking their rights to FPIC that one of the TC Energy pipelines would have to be rerouted, the violation of the Right of Indigenous Peoples to Free Prior and Informed Consent regarding economic development projects that impact their Human Rights and territories became an issue of FINANCIAL LIABILTY for the constituencies of the states, and shareholders of the corporations operating in complicity and collusion behind the view of public oversight.
BNN Bloomberg cites analysts as saying the action by AMLO in Mexico could create a risky precedent for indigenous communities that are already protesting a number of pipeline projects. This has already led to a decline in investments.
Final Clarifications:
1.) The designation of Indigenous Peoples in the CUSMA-USMCA-TMEC is definitive, in terms of the recognition of Indigenous Peoples as “peoples”. In the context of the 2007 UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which was not yet in place in 1994 during the original NAFTA agreement, the recognition of Indigenous Peoples in an international commercial agreement necessarily is accompanied and contextualized by the recognition of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples as articulated and affirmed in the principles and articles of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
2) The principle of non-discrimination is a preemptive norm in international law. Therefore, the recognition of Indigenous Peoples as “peoples” in USMCA Article 32.5 Indigenous Peoples Rights must be taken as an affirmation and commitment to uphold, recognize, respect, and institute guarantees of protection for the collective rights of Indigenous Peoples, equal to all other peoples, without illegal or arbitrary discrimination, including effective consequences in the form of legal remedies to address the violation of these rights. Colonization must not be disguised as development.
3) Consultation is not the same as consent. The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples affirms the right of Free, Prior and Informed Consent in culturally appropriate manner for all economic development projects that impact the territories and human rights of Indigenous Peoples.
4) The official text in Spanish (or any indigenous language) of the CUSMA-USMCA-TMEC agreement was never published in Mexico or anywhere else until the date of December 5, 2018 when our sister organization TONATIERRA requested an official copy at the offices of the Mexican consulate in Phoenix, Arizona. Without having the text of the USMCA agreement in advance, there is no legitimate or rational narrative that can explain how the Indigenous Peoples of Mexico have been consulted at least with respect to the protection of their particular and collective rights in the CUSMA-USMCA-TMEC, much less taken into account with the opportunity to approve or DENY CONSENT.
We demand an accounting and moratorium on the approval of the CUSMA-USMCA-TMEC until the right of Indigenous Peoples to Free, Prior and Informed Consent is recognized, respected and effective mechanisms of protection are instituted to correct the violation of this right, as is now happening in the Standoff at Wet’suwet’en.
We call for all Original Nations of Indigenous Peoples to stand in defense of the Territorial Integrity of Mother Earth.
This preliminary study establishes that the Doctrine of Discovery has been institutionalized in law and policy, on national and international levels, and lies at the root of the violations of indigenous peoples’ human rights, both individual and collective. This has resulted in State claims to and the mass appropriation of the lands, territories and resources of indigenous peoples. Both the Doctrine of Discovery and a holistic structure that we term the Framework of Dominance have resulted in centuries of virtually unlimited resource extraction from the traditional territories of indigenous peoples. This, in turn, has resulted in the dispossession and impoverishment of indigenous peoples, and the host of problems that they face today on a daily basis.
Of the three countries engaged in
the CUSMA-USMCA-TMEC, Canada was the only government that provided
reference of context for this operative Article regarding the rights of
Indigenous Peoples. This implies that
the Canadian interpretation of standards regarding Indigenous Peoples Rights
across the entire CUSMA-USMCA-TMEC market zone will prevail.
The events unfolding in the present Standoff at Wet’suwet’en are a defining moment that will set the precedent and process for how conflicts involving the rights of Indigenous Peoples to Free, Prior, and Informed Consent will be addressed and resolved. A telling narrative in the ongoing struggle is also unfolding concurrently in Pahuatlan, Puebla, Mexico where the Indigenous Peoples have also faced off against the same TC Energy petrochemical corporation (previously TransCanada) who operates seven pipelines in Mexico.
In fact, when Mexican president Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (AMLO) announced in January 2020 that in consequence to the demands of the Indigenous Peoples of Pahuatlan, Mexico invoking their rights to FPIC that one of the TC Energy pipelines would have to be rerouted, the violation of the Right of Indigenous Peoples to Free Prior and Informed Consent regarding economic development projects that impact their Human Rights and territories became an issue of FINANCIAL LIABILTY for the constituencies of the states, and shareholders of the corporations operating in complicity and collusion behind the view of public oversight.
BNN Bloomberg cites analysts as saying the action by AMLO in Mexico could create a risky precedent for indigenous communities that are already protesting a number of pipeline projects. This has already led to a decline in investments.
Final Clarifications:
1.) The designation of Indigenous Peoples in the CUSMA-USMCA-TMEC is definitive, in terms of the recognition of Indigenous Peoples as “peoples”. In the context of the 2007 UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which was not yet in place in 1994 during the original NAFTA agreement, the recognition of Indigenous Peoples in an international commercial agreement necessarily is accompanied and contextualized by the recognition of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples as articulated and affirmed in the principles and articles of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
2) The principle of non-discrimination is a preemptive norm in international law. Therefore, the recognition of Indigenous Peoples as “peoples” in USMCA Article 32.5 Indigenous Peoples Rights must be taken as an affirmation and commitment to uphold, recognize, respect, and institute guarantees of protection for the collective rights of Indigenous Peoples, equal to all other peoples, without illegal or arbitrary discrimination, including effective consequences in the form of legal remedies to address the violation of these rights. Colonization must not be disguised as development.
3) Consultation is not the same as consent. The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples affirms the right of Free, Prior and Informed Consent in culturally appropriate manner for all economic development projects that impact the territories and human rights of Indigenous Peoples.
4) The official text in Spanish (or any indigenous language) of the CUSMA-USMCA-TMEC agreement was never published in Mexico or anywhere else until the date of December 5, 2018 when our sister organization TONATIERRA requested an official copy at the offices of the Mexican consulate in Phoenix, Arizona. Without having the text of the USMCA agreement in advance, there is no legitimate or rational narrative that can explain how the Indigenous Peoples of Mexico have been consulted at least with respect to the protection of their particular and collective rights in the CUSMA-USMCA-TMEC, much less taken into account with the opportunity to approve or DENY CONSENT.
We call for the public
constituencies of Mexico-US-Canada to raise their voice of protest and in
denunciation that the public institutions of government are being subverted to
the criminal and dehumanizing service of the international corporate cartels of
PETROPOLIS.
We demand an accounting and moratorium on the approval of the CUSMA-USMCA-TMEC until the right of Indigenous Peoples to Free, Prior and Informed Consent is recognized, respected and effective mechanisms of protection are instituted to correct the violation of this right, as is now happening in the Standoff at Wet’suwet’en.
We call for all Original Nations of Indigenous Peoples to stand in defense of the Territorial Integrity of Mother Earth.
*********
All Peoples have the right to self-determination. It is a fundamental principle in international law, embodied in the Charter of the United Nations and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
The standard, Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC), as well as Indigenous Peoples’ rights to lands, territories and natural resources are embedded within the universal right to self- determination. The normative framework for FPIC consists of a series of international legal instruments including the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), the International Labour Organization Convention 169 (ILO 169), and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), among many others.
FPIC is a specific right that pertains to Indigenous Peoples and is recognized in the UNDRIP. It allows them to give or withhold consent to a project that may affect them or their territories. Once they have given their consent, they can withdraw it at any stage. Furthermore, FPIC enables them to negotiate the conditions under which the project will be designed, implemented, monitored and evaluated.
Consultation is not consent.
January 14, 2020
Message to the US Senate
USMCA and the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
January 10, 2020
Honorable Members of the US Senate,
Good greetings. On December 12th of last year we submitted a communique to the email address of the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission requesting a public hearing before the commission for the purpose of informing the US Congressional representatives regarding the right of Indigenous Peoples to Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) as stipulated in the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2007).
Of critical and timely importance to this request has been the attempt by Indigenous Peoples, thus far unsuccessfully, to have this issue addressed before the final vote of approval in the US Senate on the US-Mexico-Canada-Agreement (USMCA).
In this context, also in December of last year, the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination issued a statement expressing concern “by the refusal to consider free, prior and informed consent” in regards to large-scale development projects in Canada, and “alarmed” by the escalating threat of violence against Indigenous Peoples the Committee urged the government of Canada to guarantee no force will be used against them.
These concerns were highlighted in a recent article in The Guardian that reported the RCMP were prepared to use lethal force against Indigenous protesters blocking workers from clearing the Coastal GasLink’s natural gas pipeline route a year ago in unceded Wet’suwet’en territory. On January 4th 2020, Wet’suwet’en Hereditary Chiefs evicted Coastal GasLink corporation from their territory in exercise of the right of Self Determination as Indigenous Peoples. The eviction notice applies to “Camp 9A” on Dark House territory, as well as the neighbouring Gidimt’en, Tsayu, and Laksamshu clan territories.
Meanwhile in Mexico, on December 19th 2020, the Mexico office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (ONU-DH) said that the consultations on the government’s Maya Train project failed to meet all international human rights standards. Such international standards establish that a consultation process with indigenous communities must be carried out prior to a project being executed in a manner that is culturally appropriate, serves to inform and allows free participation.
Yet during information meetings regarding the Maya Train observed by the ONU-DH in Campeche, Yucatán, Quintana Roo, Chiapas and Tabasco, community members asked questions about the possible negative impacts of the project on several occasions “without obtaining a clear and complete response,” the statement said. The ONU-DH said that the absence of studies about the potential impacts or “the failure to disseminate” the studies made it difficult for people to reach an informed opinion about the Maya Train project.
The Mexico office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (ONU-DH) said in a statement that during the month-long consultation process in southeastern states it observed that the information presented to indigenous communities only outlined the potential benefits of the project and not the negative impacts it may cause. According to public reports from Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (AMLO), US President D.Trump has offered support and financial backing for the Maya Train project, in spite of the concerns over Human Rights violations and the unawareness in the general American public of the role of their government in the scheme.
Going back to the fast tracking of the Dakota Access Pipeline in the Treaty Territories of the Oceti Sakuwin by President D.Trump as soon as he got into office in 2017, the current administration in Washington has blatantly disregarded the Human Rights of Indigenous Peoples, including freedom from discrimination and the right of Free, Prior and Informed Consent. The proclamation of a National Emergency at the US/Mexico border in order to circumvent domestic civil rights and environmental justice protections to facilitate building the Trump Wall at the border is also yet another example of the systemic violation of the Indigenous Peoples right to Free, Prior, and Informed Consent.
The Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe of Esto'k Gna, whose traditional territories lie on both sides of the Texas, USA/Coahuila, Mexico border have consistently expressed their denial of consent for the D.Trump Border Wall project which in addition to bringing environmental destruction to the territory, will desecrate an ancestral burial site at the location of the Eli Jackson Cemetery. The cemetery also holds the final resting place of US veterans from WWI, WWII, and Korea.
Previously, in our letter to the USMCA Working Group of the US House of Representatives on September 13th 2019, we informed the Working Group members and House Speaker Pelosi that upon review of the public record of debate concerning the Human Rights of Indigenous Peoples in the context of the proposed US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), the systemic disregard for the human rights of Indigenous Peoples is blatantly discriminatory, unacceptable and must be addressed before the agreement be put to vote. Completely disregarding this message, the House of Representatives passed the USMCA on December 19th, and the Senate Finance Committee then passed the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement on January 9, 2020.
On January 1st of 2020, having received urgent and direct testimony and witness from the Indigenous Peoples of Mexico on how the normalization of Human Rights violations under the USMCA will exacerbate an already very dire situation, where Indigenous Human Rights Defenders such as Samir Flores are being openly assassinated, we reissued our initial call to the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission. As of today January 10th 2020, we have received no confirmation nor response to our messages.
The call a public hearing for the purpose of informing the US congressional representatives, trade representatives, and the public at large regarding the right of Indigenous Peoples to Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) in the context of the USMCA is a call to conscience, and to the rule of law.
The USMCA has been promoted as a necessary "update" of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). In distinction from NAFTA which was adopted in 1994 thirteen years before adoption of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2007), the signatories of USMCA must comply with the minimum standards of FPIC or the corporate consortia investing in any development project in violation of FPIC will immediately become financially liable and exposed to the risk of legal challenges and financial penalties that must be presented before their constituencies (states) and shareholders (corporations).
This principle is now well established, having been the subject of the Soft Woods Lumber Dispute (1982) between the US and Canada which acknowledged the proprietary rights of Indigenous Peoples over territories and resources in the international trade tribunals. Recognizing this fact, the World Bank has restructured its procedures, protocols and practices regarding Indigenous Peoples and the right of Free, Prior, and Informed Consent under the Environmental and Social Standard 7 to shield its interests.
The designation of Indigenous Peoples in the proposed text USMCA is definitive, in terms of the recognition of Indigenous Peoples as “peoples”. In the context of the 2007 UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which was not yet in place in 1994 during the original NAFTA agreement, the recognition of Indigenous Peoples in an international commercial agreement necessarily is accompanied and contextualized by the recognition of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples as articulated and affirmed in the principles and articles of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
There can be no approval of USMCA without recognition, respect, and effective mechanisms for the equal protection of the internationally recognized Human Rights of Indigenous Peoples in the trade zone encompassing the three countries, specifically the right of Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC). Consultation is not consent.
Without the full and effective participation of Indigenous Peoples, as Peoples equal to all other peoples, there can be no legitimate approval of the USMCA.
Tupac Enrique Acosta
Honorable Members of the US Senate,
Good greetings. On December 12th of last year we submitted a communique to the email address of the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission requesting a public hearing before the commission for the purpose of informing the US Congressional representatives regarding the right of Indigenous Peoples to Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) as stipulated in the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2007).
Of critical and timely importance to this request has been the attempt by Indigenous Peoples, thus far unsuccessfully, to have this issue addressed before the final vote of approval in the US Senate on the US-Mexico-Canada-Agreement (USMCA).
In this context, also in December of last year, the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination issued a statement expressing concern “by the refusal to consider free, prior and informed consent” in regards to large-scale development projects in Canada, and “alarmed” by the escalating threat of violence against Indigenous Peoples the Committee urged the government of Canada to guarantee no force will be used against them.
These concerns were highlighted in a recent article in The Guardian that reported the RCMP were prepared to use lethal force against Indigenous protesters blocking workers from clearing the Coastal GasLink’s natural gas pipeline route a year ago in unceded Wet’suwet’en territory. On January 4th 2020, Wet’suwet’en Hereditary Chiefs evicted Coastal GasLink corporation from their territory in exercise of the right of Self Determination as Indigenous Peoples. The eviction notice applies to “Camp 9A” on Dark House territory, as well as the neighbouring Gidimt’en, Tsayu, and Laksamshu clan territories.
Meanwhile in Mexico, on December 19th 2020, the Mexico office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (ONU-DH) said that the consultations on the government’s Maya Train project failed to meet all international human rights standards. Such international standards establish that a consultation process with indigenous communities must be carried out prior to a project being executed in a manner that is culturally appropriate, serves to inform and allows free participation.
Yet during information meetings regarding the Maya Train observed by the ONU-DH in Campeche, Yucatán, Quintana Roo, Chiapas and Tabasco, community members asked questions about the possible negative impacts of the project on several occasions “without obtaining a clear and complete response,” the statement said. The ONU-DH said that the absence of studies about the potential impacts or “the failure to disseminate” the studies made it difficult for people to reach an informed opinion about the Maya Train project.
The Mexico office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (ONU-DH) said in a statement that during the month-long consultation process in southeastern states it observed that the information presented to indigenous communities only outlined the potential benefits of the project and not the negative impacts it may cause. According to public reports from Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (AMLO), US President D.Trump has offered support and financial backing for the Maya Train project, in spite of the concerns over Human Rights violations and the unawareness in the general American public of the role of their government in the scheme.
Going back to the fast tracking of the Dakota Access Pipeline in the Treaty Territories of the Oceti Sakuwin by President D.Trump as soon as he got into office in 2017, the current administration in Washington has blatantly disregarded the Human Rights of Indigenous Peoples, including freedom from discrimination and the right of Free, Prior and Informed Consent. The proclamation of a National Emergency at the US/Mexico border in order to circumvent domestic civil rights and environmental justice protections to facilitate building the Trump Wall at the border is also yet another example of the systemic violation of the Indigenous Peoples right to Free, Prior, and Informed Consent.
The Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe of Esto'k Gna, whose traditional territories lie on both sides of the Texas, USA/Coahuila, Mexico border have consistently expressed their denial of consent for the D.Trump Border Wall project which in addition to bringing environmental destruction to the territory, will desecrate an ancestral burial site at the location of the Eli Jackson Cemetery. The cemetery also holds the final resting place of US veterans from WWI, WWII, and Korea.
Previously, in our letter to the USMCA Working Group of the US House of Representatives on September 13th 2019, we informed the Working Group members and House Speaker Pelosi that upon review of the public record of debate concerning the Human Rights of Indigenous Peoples in the context of the proposed US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), the systemic disregard for the human rights of Indigenous Peoples is blatantly discriminatory, unacceptable and must be addressed before the agreement be put to vote. Completely disregarding this message, the House of Representatives passed the USMCA on December 19th, and the Senate Finance Committee then passed the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement on January 9, 2020.
On January 1st of 2020, having received urgent and direct testimony and witness from the Indigenous Peoples of Mexico on how the normalization of Human Rights violations under the USMCA will exacerbate an already very dire situation, where Indigenous Human Rights Defenders such as Samir Flores are being openly assassinated, we reissued our initial call to the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission. As of today January 10th 2020, we have received no confirmation nor response to our messages.
The call a public hearing for the purpose of informing the US congressional representatives, trade representatives, and the public at large regarding the right of Indigenous Peoples to Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) in the context of the USMCA is a call to conscience, and to the rule of law.
The USMCA has been promoted as a necessary "update" of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). In distinction from NAFTA which was adopted in 1994 thirteen years before adoption of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2007), the signatories of USMCA must comply with the minimum standards of FPIC or the corporate consortia investing in any development project in violation of FPIC will immediately become financially liable and exposed to the risk of legal challenges and financial penalties that must be presented before their constituencies (states) and shareholders (corporations).
This principle is now well established, having been the subject of the Soft Woods Lumber Dispute (1982) between the US and Canada which acknowledged the proprietary rights of Indigenous Peoples over territories and resources in the international trade tribunals. Recognizing this fact, the World Bank has restructured its procedures, protocols and practices regarding Indigenous Peoples and the right of Free, Prior, and Informed Consent under the Environmental and Social Standard 7 to shield its interests.
The designation of Indigenous Peoples in the proposed text USMCA is definitive, in terms of the recognition of Indigenous Peoples as “peoples”. In the context of the 2007 UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which was not yet in place in 1994 during the original NAFTA agreement, the recognition of Indigenous Peoples in an international commercial agreement necessarily is accompanied and contextualized by the recognition of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples as articulated and affirmed in the principles and articles of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
There can be no approval of USMCA without recognition, respect, and effective mechanisms for the equal protection of the internationally recognized Human Rights of Indigenous Peoples in the trade zone encompassing the three countries, specifically the right of Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC). Consultation is not consent.
Without the full and effective participation of Indigenous Peoples, as Peoples equal to all other peoples, there can be no legitimate approval of the USMCA.
Tupac Enrique Acosta
TONATIERRA
Free Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC)
All Peoples have the right to self-determination. It is a fundamental principle in international law, embodied in the Charter of the United Nations and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
The standard, Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC), as well as Indigenous Peoples’ rights to lands, territories and natural resources are embedded within the universal right to self- determination. The normative framework for FPIC consists of a series of international legal instruments including the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), the International Labour Organization Convention 169 (ILO 169), and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), among many others.
FPIC is a specific right that pertains to Indigenous Peoples and is recognized in the UNDRIP. It allows them to give or withhold consent to a project that may affect them or their territories. Once they have given their consent, they can withdraw it at any stage. Furthermore, FPIC enables them to negotiate the conditions under which the project will be designed, implemented, monitored and evaluated.
Consultation is not consent.
January 14, 2020
MEXICO: Maya Council obtains Order of Protection against AMLO Mayan Train
 |
This preliminary study establishes that the Doctrine of Discovery has been institutionalized in law and policy, on national and international levels, and lies at the root of the violations of indigenous peoples’ human rights, both individual and collective. This has resulted in State claims to and the mass appropriation of the lands, territories and resources of indigenous peoples. Both the Doctrine of Discovery and a holistic structure that we term the Framework of Dominance have resulted in centuries of virtually unlimited resource extraction from the traditional territories of indigenous peoples. This, in turn, has resulted in the dispossession and impoverishment of indigenous peoples, and the host of problems that they face today on a daily basis.
No comments:
Post a Comment