Wednesday, May 18, 2016


Ref: Fact Sheet

May 10, 2016.

Ayotzinapa case.

Brief description of facts

As is widely known, on September 26, 2014 students of the Rural Normal Raúl Isidro Burgos Ayotzinapa, Guerrero were attacked indiscriminately by different security forces of the State with the participation of organized crime, in different places and scenarios of the city of Iguala, Guerrero, with a balance of 43 missing students, 3 killed and five injured. In addition and in different scenarios have been killed 3 people and injured a dozen more.

Current status of the case

Days after the fact the Attorney General's Office (PGR) initiated the preliminary investigation number PGR / SEIDO / UEIDMS / 001/2015 in connection with the disappearance of 43 student teachers. In late 2014 the Attorney General issued a public statement in regards to conclusions in the investigation. This he called the "historical truth" of the case Ayotzinapa. These findings were based mainly on oral evidence.

The testimonies said that 43 students had been delivered by the Municipal Police Iguala and Cocula the criminal group Guerrero Unidos who then murdered them, then built a pyre of wood in which cremated their bodies and ashes have been thrown into Rio San Juan.

In the public dump of Cocula hundreds of skeletal remains were analyzed by experts of the PGR and the Argentine Forensic Anthropology Team (EAAF) found. All of the scientific studies have failed to show that the traces of human remains correspond to the missing students. By contrast, independent surveys as the Interdisciplinary Group of Independent Experts (IGIE) and EAAF have established that there is no physical evidence that leads to the conclusion that on 26 and 27 September there had been a fire of the necessary dimensions to incinerate 43 people.

On November 12, 2014 and as part of the Precautionary Measures MC / 409/14 with the Mexican State, the Commission and representatives of the victims signed a technical assistance agreement by which a group of experts would instituted to help with investigations, recommending lines of inquiry and investigation of the missing and developing a plan of the care victim's kin.

With the cooperation of the Interdisciplinary Group of Independent Experts (IGIE) in our country, the research took a different turn. In September 2015 the IGIE issued its first report. In unveiled data and elements important for further investigations. For the first time the government's "historical truth" came to be questioned and suggestions for new lines of research based upon the existing evidence which was presented in the first report.

Mothers and parents of the 43 missing students and their representatives demanded that the government continue research because there are no truths established in the investigation of the case and called for the creation of a specialized unit within the PGR to conduct the investigations.

At the end of 2015 the Special Unit for the Investigation Case Ayotzinapa (the Unit) composed of a multidisciplinary team that took over the case, establishing new lines of investigation and search was created. The IGIE worked closely with the Unit, with recommendations of diligence and performing searches. However, the new research body did not have the institutional support of the Federal government, and often lacked independence and institutional strength, so that the critical decisions of investigations of the case were assumed by other areas and directors within the PGR. Even further, the Unit it began to hinder the work of IGIE. They repeatedly denied entry to the prisons to interview detainees by Ayotzinapa long case and were given to their applications.

In the months of February and March this year a smear campaign was launched against members of IGIE trying to diminish their prestige, orchestrated by the media, during which the government never issued a public stance of institutional support for the Interdisciplinary Group of International Experts.  Conversely, in many cases the public discourse of senior officials of the Federal Government was in tune with media fabrications.

April 30 of this year marked the end the second term of IGIE without the possibility of a third term because the Mexican government refused to create the conditions to allow for an extension, although pending investigations are not elucidated and still the whereabouts of the normalistas is unknown.

However, on 24 April this year the IGIE gave their second and final report from which there stand three fundamental elements:

a) The report describes a deficient and irregular research with which he hid and obstructed the truth and justice, as shown.

b) That the work is hindered IGIE.

c) That the accused were tortured and mainly those whose statements support the official truth.

d) New data and research were established.

e) As such research must continue the tenor of the data elements described in the reports of IGIE, establishing a new narrative of the facts and emphasizing other routes different to the dustbin of Cocula research that offers no prospects truth and justice.

What's next for the mothers and fathers:
From the perspective of the government, the research on the Ayotzinapa case is purportedly conclusive, the thesis of the Public Dump of Cocula is the official truth, and therefore, the case is solved. With more than 180 arrests the conditions are now so that in the coming months all the preliminary investigation will be presented as appropriate and the case will be declared closed.

A third course of Expert opinion issued by a panel of six incendiary experts, still unfinished, seems to confirm this. On 1 April improperly and without regard to IGIE, the PGR and the panel of incendiary experts made public the conclusions of this third group of experts by establishing three quite confusing conclusions:

a) That, there was an incendiary event of a controlled large fire in the Public Dump of Cocula, b) That the fire were burned 17 people c) that more large-scale testing will be have to be done to determine whether the burning of 43 bodies 43 is possible. 

As can be inferred from the conclusions themselves follows that the third expert report is not a final document, however the media presented it as such, even making tendentious interpretations and assurances of fact and circumstances not expressed by the opinion itself.

The EAAF has clearly refuted this third report, and even made public the scientific issues in debate to generate an informed public. Stressing that there is no physical evidence that the skeletal remains found belong to the 43 students of Ayotzinapa; or that the fire mentioned by the third report corresponds to that of 26 and 27 September 2014, because there multiple fires events have occurred.

In fact, to date the whereabouts of the normalistas has not been established, the government thesis of the Public Dump of Cocula still has a number of inconsistencies that only gives more uncertainty to parents.

In the second report as we have expressed realizes the existence several elements, testing and research that needs o be exhausted to clarify what happened to the 43 normalistas. Far from closing the case the IGIE has expressed the need to establish a new narrative of facts, the removal from office of officials who have obstructed the truth and follow up on the recommendations of its reports.

From the perspective of parents and students what is necessary is an objective, prompt and impartial investigation with international scrutiny. Therefore, the demand is that the Mexican State act to implement the Special Mechanism for follow-up which was called for by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights at its 157th session on 14 April 2016, since the Mexican government has refused to answer the call by the Commission to finalize the monitoring mechanism in reference to the case of Ayotzinapa.




Tuesday, May 17, 2016



Tema 5. Pueblos indígenas: conflicto, paz y resolución 

Muchas gracias Sr. Presidentnte Álvaro Pop,

Antes que nada quiero manifestar nuestro reconocimiento, respeto y beneplácito de que un hermano maya, que lucha por la liberación de los pueblos latinoamericanos, ocupe la presidencia de esta importante instancia de las Naciones Unidas.

Los indígenas y nuestros pueblos, nos encontramos actualmente en una situación crítica. El modelo económico vigente está basado en la depredación, el despojo forzado de nuestros recursos naturales y en la destrucción de los territorios ancestrales que nos dieron en resguardo por nuestros abuelos y padres para que entregásemos a su vez a nuestros hijos.

La imposición de megaproyectos, así como el extractivismo o el neoextractivismo bajo la lógica del racismo medioambiental, ha desatado un “boom” de conflictos sociales por la resistencia presentada por nuestros pueblos. Ante tal oposición, los Estados han respondido en diversos  casos con el uso faccioso de la ley penal, lo cual es fácil de constatar al ver como las organizaciones indígenas e instancias internacionales como del Consejo de Derechos Humanos de la ONU se han pronunciado reiteradamente en contra de las detenciones ilegales, la tortura, la desaparición forzada y en diversos casos, contra las ejecuciones sumarias y extrajudiciales de dirigentes indígenas, tal y como ocurrió con nuestra hermana Bertha Cáceres.

Hoy en día, México se ha convertido en un país sumamente peligroso para los periodistas, defensores de derechos humanos o activistas ambientales e indígenas. Genocidios como Acteal en Chiapas, El Charco, Aguas Blancas y la desaparición forzada de 43 estudiantes de la Normal Rural “Raúl Isidro Burgos” de Ayotzinapa en Guerrero, hoy aún impunes, así lo constatan. A la  impunidad que caracteriza los crímenes políticos en México, debemos agregar que otros fenómenos forman parte de una estrategia que diversas organizaciones denunciaron en la pasada sesión especial de abril en la ONU: que la llamada “guerra contra las drogas” no es otra cosa que una “guerra contra los pueblos”, ya que el saldo de 10 años de “guerra contra el narco” arroja cifras oficial de cerca de 170,000 víctimas mortales y más de 27,000 personas desaparecidas.

Por otra parte, les comparto que tomando como referencia un ejercicio realizado previamente en Guatemala por el Organismo Naleb sobre el grado de implementación de la Declaración de las Naciones Unidas sobre los Derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas (la Declaración), es que decidimos realizar un encuentro nacional en el Congreso Mexicano con diversas organizaciones y las instituciones de la administración publica de México. Fue un foro donde analizamos el grado de implementación y armonización de la Declaración en México, concluyendo que aún falta incorporar los estándares internacionales en nuestra legislación nacional y que no existen  políticas públicas ad hoc a nuestra identidad, diversidad y cultura de los pueblos indígenas en México. Por el contrario, cada día que pasa se recrudece, se vulneran y se violan nuestros derechos humanos indígenas por parte del Estado mexicano.

Como ex parlamentario indígena quiero externar mi preocupación porque la armonización legislativa es una asignatura pendiente en mi país, a pesar del compromiso que hiciera el jefe del Estado Mexicano en la pasada Conferencia Mundial de Pueblos Indígenas celebrada en esta misma sede de la ONU. El presente gobierno federal anunció al inicio de su mandato, a través de la Comisión para el Dialogo con los Pueblos Indígenas de México “una reforma de gran calado” en materia indígena; dicha dependencia está adscrita estratégicamente a la Secretaría de Gobernación (ministerio del interior). Sin embargo, a pesar de la importancia vital para la estabilidad y para la previsión de los conflictos indígenas, no se ha podido concretar dicha armonización, medida que en su momento también fue recomendada por el anterior relator, el Dr. Rodolfo Stavenhagen en su visita oficial que hiciera al país en el año 2003.

Por lo anterior, hacemos las siguientes RECOMENDACIONES:

La escalada de conflictos sociales indígenas se encuentra en un nivel alarmante y seguirá en aumento en México mientras no se cambie el actual modelo de desarrollo y no se garantice el derecho a la consulta y al consentimiento libre, previo e informado. Ante tal situación, reiteramos nuestra petición ya presentada en diversos foros, sobre la urgencia y la necesidad de que la Relatora Especial sobre los Derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas realicé una visita oficial para conocer e informar de la situación que guardan los derechos humanos de los indígenas mexicanos, y realice las recomendaciones pertinentes. Me permito anexar al presente la invitación que le presentamos diversos representantes indígenas, así como el exhorto que hiciéramos desde el Poder Legislativo Federal a la cancillería mexicana solicitándole concretar dicha visita oficial.

Por lo anterior expuesto y en el contexto de la crisis de derechos humanos que se vive en México, en la cual los pueblos originarios son los más vulnerados y los más violentados, considero vital  que este Foro Permanente exhorte al Estado mexicano a crear la figura del Ombudsman Indígena, como instancia de carácter nacional especializada en promover, respetar y garantizar los derechos humanos de cerca de 18 millones de indígenas que formamos parte de la nación mexicana.

El reconocimiento y cumplimiento cabal de los derechos de los pueblos indígenas consagrados en los diversos instrumentos jurídicos internacionales como el Convenio 169 de la OIT y la Declaración de Naciones Unidas por parte de los Estados Nacionales, es indispensable para alcanzar gradualmente la paz y la resolución de conflictos, y en consecuencia el desarrollo con identidad de nuestros pueblos.

Es cuanto Sr. presidente y desde aquí mandamos un saludo y nuestra solidaridad al pueblo brasileño a la vez que condenamos el golpe de Estado legislativo.

Naciones Unidas, Nueva York a 17 de mayo de 2016.


Participacion de Carlos de Jesus Alejandro Foro Permanente ONU

Monday, May 16, 2016

Intervencion de Antonio Tizampa, Padre Ayotzinapa en el Foro Permanente ONU

Foro Permanente de Cuestiones Indígenas de las Naciones Unidas
Punto 9(b) Dialogo con La Relatora Especial sobre los Derechos de Pueblos Indígenas y el Presidente del Mecanismo de Expertos sobre los Derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas
16 de mayo, 2016


Muchas gracias y buenos días a todos los presentes. Me dirijo a ustedes los miembros del Foro Permanente de las Cuestiones Indígenas, a los miembros estados de las Naciones Unidas, a los pueblos indígenas de la madre tierra, y a la consciencia y corazón de la humanidad en representación de los padres y madres de Ayotzinapa.

Yo soy Antonio Tizapa y pertenezco a un pueblo indígena en Guerrero, México. Soy padre de Jorge Antonio Tizapa Legideño, uno de los 43 estudiantes de la Escuela Normal Rural “Raúl Isidro Burgos”  de Ayotzinapa, desaparecidos forzadamente por el gobierno mexicano el día 26 de septiembre del 2014 en Iguala Guerrero, México.

Solo tengo una petición; a nombre de los padres, reiteramos la invitación a la Señora Victoria Tauli-Corpuz, Relatora Especial de Derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas de la ONU, misma que le hizo el año pasado María de Jesús Tlatempa Bello, madre de José Eduardo Bartolo Tlatempa,  con el fin de el Gobierno Mexicano le abra las puertas de México para visitar Ayotzinapa y que se de cuenta de la represión por parte del gobierno mexicano hacia los estudiantes y pueblos indígenas, para que la comunidad internacional conozca al verdadero gobierno mexicano.

Tengo conocimiento que el tema del foro de este año es Conflicto, Resolución y Paz. El conflicto sigue, pero no tenemos a nuestros hijos. La resolución esperada es que sean entregados con vida a nuestras familias y de esa manera encontraremos paz momentánea. Una paz momentánea pues mientras el gobierno siga reprimiendo y desapareciendo, con ayuda de grupos criminales, a nuestros pueblos indígenas no habrá paz nacional.

Gracias al Grupo Interdisciplinario de Expertos Independientes y al equipo Argentino de Antropólogos Forenses sabemos que nuestros hijos están vivos. Gracias a la investigación de los expertos de la Comisión Interamericana de Derechos Humanos sabemos que el gobierno mexicano nos ha mentido diciendo que nuestros hijos fueron asesinados.

No creemos, ni  confiamos en el gobierno Mexicano, por eso solicitamos ayuda internacional, así como  la creación y permanencia de un mecanismo de seguimiento puntual, a cada una de las recomendaciones del GIEI y del EAAF, es esencial  que le exijan al gobierno Mexicano que nos entregue a nuestros hijos.

La evidencia del informe del GIEI, confirma que fue el Estado en todos los niveles, exigimos así mismo el enjuiciamiento al Gobierno Mexicano.

19 meses sin saber de nuestros hijos, 19 meses buscándolos, 19 meses, exigiendo la aparición con vida, 19 meses pidiendo justicia.

Esperamos la visita de la Relatora Especial de Derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas de la ONU, Victoria Tauli-Corpus a México para la resolución del conflicto de 43 familias y para encontrar paz, aunque sabemos que no solo son 43, son miles de 43.

Esperando contar con su ayuda, respaldo y su solidaridad les doy las más sinceras gracias a cada uno de ustedes.

Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues United Nations
Agenda Item 9b
Interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on Human Rights
May 16, 2016

Statement from Antonio Tizapa, Tonatierra
Thank you very much and good morning to everyone present. I appeal to you, the members of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, Member States, indigenous peoples of Mother Earth, and to the conscience and heart of humanity on behalf of the parents of Ayotzinapa.

My name is Antonio Tizapa, I belong to the indigenous people of Guerrero, Mexico. I am the father of Jorge Antonio Tizapa Legideño, one of 43 students from the Raúl Isidro Burgos Rural School Ayotzinapa, forcibly disappeared by the Mexican Government on September 26, 2014 in Iguala Guerrero in Mexico.

We have one request; we reiterate an invitation to Victoria Tauli-Corpuz, Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples of the UN, which was first extended last year by Maria Tlatempa Bello, mother of Jose Eduardo Bartolo Tlatempa so that the Mexican government permits her to visit Ayotzinapa. We hope for her to assess the repression the Mexican government makes towards students and indigenous peoples, and that the international community be made aware of the true nature of the Mexican government towards us as indigenous people.

I am aware that the theme of this year’s forum is Conflict, Resolution and Peace. Our conflict is ongoing, and we do not have our children. The resolution is simple: we expect our children delivered back alive to our families in order to find peace and tranquility. This would, of course, only be a momentary peace because so long as the government continues to repress and disappear our indigenous peoples then there will not be a national peace.

Thanks to the Interdisciplinary Group of Independent Experts (GIEI) and the Argentine team of forensic anthropologists (EAAF), we know that our children are alive. 
Thanks to international investigators who were working independently with international backing, we know that the Mexican government has lied by repeating our children were killed in Cocula.

We do not believe the Mexican government; it is not trustworthy so we request international assistance and monitoring. The creation of a mechanism that monitors the implementation of each of the recommendations made by GIEI and EAAF ensure the fulfillment of our demand that the Mexican government return our children.

Evidence from the report of GIEI, confirms that it was the state at all levels, and we demand the same prosecution to the Mexican government.

19 months have passed without us knowing our children’s whereabouts; 19 months searching for them; 19 months of us demanding justice.

We await the visit of the Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples of the UN, Vicky Tauli-Corpus in Mexico. 43 families want to find peace, want to resolve this conflict, but we know that there are still tens of thousands of people in the same situation as the disappeared “43”.

I give my sincere thanks to each one of you, and hope for your support and solidarity.

"They were taken alive, we want them back alive"
  Comision Continental Abya Yala:
La Impunidad en Mexico / Impunity in Mexico : Continental Commission Abya Yala
Monday, May 16 
6 PM - 9 PM
Church Center, New York
777 United Nations Way

Intervencion de Mario Luna en el Foro Permanente de la ONU

Foro Permanente de Cuestiones Indigenas de las Naciones Unidas
Punto 9(b) Dialogo con la Relatora Especial de los Derechos de los Pueblos Indigenas y el Presidente del Mecanismo de Expertos sobre los Derechos de los Pueblos Indigenas
16 de mayo, 2016

Buen dia a todos los presentes, buen dia señora relatora,  buen dia a todos los miembros de este foro permanente. 

Mi nombre es Mario Luna Romero, vengo en representación de mi pueblo, el pueblo Yaqui de Sonora, México; un pueblo milenario que se niega a desaparecer, un pueblo que sigue resistiendo los embates de políticas racistas que pretenden despojar del territorio ancestral a los sobrevivientes que somos nosotros; sobrevivientes a campañas de deportación y un estado de guerra continuo por mas de doscientos años en el pasado reciente. 

A pesar de haber sobrevivido a deportaciones masivas de niños y mujeres en los principios de 1900 a 1910 , de haber soportado bombardeos aéreos en defensa de la integridad territorial en los años 20; hoy en dia seguimos enfrentando la misma ansia de despojo por parte de programas de estado diseñados desde un escritorio que reflejan el desprecio por la vida de nuestros pueblos originarios al promover desde las esferas de gobierno desde 2010 la redistribución de volúmenes de agua sin importar que con esta acción de gobierno se despoje del vital liquido a una región para beneficiar a otra con mayor capacidad tecnológica y económica. 

Contrario a lo que pudiera imaginarse mi pueblo a agotado todas las instancias institucionales que otorga el estado mexicano en defensa de nuestro derecho humano al agua y a la vida, tan es asi que agotamos todos los recursos legales hasta llegar a la suprema corte de justicia de la nación donde nos conceden la razón, ordenan se respete y otorgue el derecho de audiencia al pueblo por medio de una consulta basado en estándares internacionales que sea libre, previa, informada, de buena fé. 

Este ordenamiento judicial de alto nivel en México, hasta el momento no ha sido cumplido cabalmente; ya que las instituciones encargadas de aplicar dicha consulta han sido omisas en su actuar y en la mayor parte del proceso han demostrado la tendencia a tomar la consulta como un mero requisito para validar el despojo de nuestro derecho ancestral, constitucional y humano al agua del rio yaqui que da nombre y articula históricamente nuestra existencia comunitaria. 

Cabe agregar que en una sentencia aclaratoria que solicitaron las instituciones mexicanas a la SCJN se puntualiza que en caso de apreciarse, denunciar o demostrar que este megaproyecto de trasvases de agua por medio del acueducto independencia afectara de forma irreparable la disponibilidad de agua al que tiene derecho el pueblo yaqui, en ese momento se cancelaria y suspendería el acueducto en mención sin importar la fase en la que se encuentre el proceso de consulta ordenada. 

Para resolver este punto y como parte del proceso de consulta la semarnat, conagua y el mismo pueblo yaqui solicitaron al INAH realizar un peritaje para determinar el grado de afectación de dicha construcción y operación al citado pueblo quejoso, determinando esta institución especializada y publica que la operación del acueducto independencia afecta grave mente la disponibilidad presente y futura del agua y mas aún recomienda la cancelación inmediata de dicha obra.

Ante los resultados negativos de dicho peritaje el estado mexicano a permanecido callado y solo se ha mantenido en la exigencia de dar por terminada la consulta y dejar que la citada obra siga manteniendo su operación mínima sin importar que con esto violentan el estado de derecho al mismo tiempo que permiten el funcionamiento de una obra sin el manifiesto de impacto ambiental dejando con esto en indefensión jurídica al pueblo yaqui que solo exige el cumplimiento cabal de las leyes que los representantes gubernamentales en turno juraron cumplir y hacer cumplir.

Como es evidente el estado mexicano no ha satisfecho la exigencia de nuestro pueblo en su reclamo de respeto y justicia por lo que creemos necesario la intervención de usted señora relatora para que en corto tiempo pueda constatar en el lugar de los hechos lo que aquí se denuncia y expone a la opinión de esta honorable asamblea; en el entendido que de no tomar en sus manos la situación planteada se pueden repetir actos de prepotencia e impunidad como la criminalización de la protesta y la aplicación selectiva de las leyes en contra de nuestros defensores. 

Solo quiero agregar que ya existe antecedente en la CIDH del grado de riesgo en que se encuentran los voceros y defensores de los derechos humanos del pueblo yaqui, motivo por el cual ya se han emitido mas de seis medidas cautelares para los principales activistas y de igual manera la CNDH ha emitido recomendaciones al gobierno de México para que no se repitan las acciones de violación a los derechos de Fernando Jiménez y Mario Luna mismos que permanecieron en prisión por mas de un año sin haberse comprobado delito alguno.

Thursday, May 12, 2016

NAIPC: Intervention Agenda Item 6: Interactive Dialogue UNPFII

Intervention of the North American Indigenous Peoples Caucus UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues
Agenda Item 6: Interactive Dialogue May 12, 2016

My name is Tamara Starblanket.

I am taking the floor on behalf of the North American Indigenous Peoples Caucus to voice our concern of what has been the complete censorship of our region’s deliberations over the past two years, as a result of the PF’s methods of work. The justification for these new rules are in the name of efficiency, scheduled economy and detail, but considering history, how can the Permanent Forum ensure that the new rules will not be used as a classic case of the manipulation of process to control content? We are concerned that a process is being used in which states utilize international institutions to mediate legal and political relationships with Indigenous Peoples in an effort to modify radical resistance into a deradicalized form, or even a nonresistance – effectively quelling substantive legal and political claims through process and procedure.

The United Nations recognizes the seven official regions of the world, and North America is one of those regions. The PF experts are nominated and seated based on these regions.  The PF itself requested the regions to develop collective statements over the past several years. But now, the PF refuses to recognize or hear our regional interventions. How does the PF reconcile the regional organization of work at the UN, yet refuse to hear from the regions?

The NAIPC has held preparatory meetings prior to the PF every year at great expense and effort by the Indigenous Peoples and Nations in our region. Yet, in the past two years the PF has refused to hear any of our interventions, or even put the NAIPC Final Report on the PF website, in the documents section, despite our specific requests to do so. What notice was given to the regional and global caucuses that this rule was being considered, and what opportunity for comment was provided to the regional and global caucus? Further, what rules of procedures of the Secretariat can be cited that allowed it to promulgate this rule?

Once again we have substantive interventions to deliver to the PF in the formal sessions. Since this is an informal session, meaning off the record, we will not give those interventions here.

NAIPC representatives will continue to give the NAIPC interventions in the formal sessions, and will be vocal if the censorship continues throughout the remainder of the 15th session. 

The Permanent Forum’s new procedural rules for the speakers list silences the collective issues of the NAIPC and other global and regional caucuses. We remind you that this meeting is on Great Turtle Island and you are here as visitors to our territories.  The PF is urged to reconsider its policies as they can be construed to function as exclusion and diminishment our region’s positions. Further, we once again request that the full NAIPC Report be posted to the PF website. We expect nothing less than full transparency and fair treatment by the PF.

Intervention of the North American Indigenous Peoples Caucus NAIPC at UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues


Organizational Details

The NAIPC meeting took place from March 22-24, 2016 in Treaty 4 Territory. The NAIPC would like to acknowledge and give thanks to the Original Nations and Peoples for hosting this meeting in their territory. The meeting was generously hosted by the Ochapowace Nation in what is now Saskatchewan. Individuals representing Original Nations and Peoples discussed and agreed by consensus on the positions and recommendations contained in this report. 

The NAIPC meeting was opened and carried out with traditional ceremonies and protocols. The Drummers offered the opening Prayer Song and Victory Song. Okimaw Iskwew Margaret Bear of the Ochapowace Cree Nation provided the opening address and welcome to the meeting participants.

Preeminent legal scholar, Tamara Starblanket, of the Ahtahkakoop Cree Nation in Treaty Six Territory gave a presentation on her ground-breaking legal research on genocide in the context of the colonial experience of the Original Nations and Peoples on Great Turtle Island and the world over. Her research concludes that the state of Canada is culpable for crimes of genocide and that it violates customary laws on genocide.

NAIPC selected Wes George (Ochapowace Cree Nation) and Tamara Starblanket (Ahtahkakoop Cree Nation) to serve as Rapporteurs for the meeting, and Janice Makokis (Saddle Lake Cree Nation) and Debra Harry (Numu-Kooyooe Dukaddo) to serve as NAIPC’s co-chairs for the meeting. 

The meeting participants expressed their participation in this meeting as the free and independent Peoples and Nations with the full right of self-determination. We advance the  original  interpretations of our Treaties as intended and agreed to by our ancestors. We are the original Peoples and independent Nations on our Great Turtle Island.

Our deliberations are guided by the ongoing responsibilities and obligations of our original laws and instructions as the Original Nations and Peoples of Great Turtle Island. We uphold the international character and meaning of our Treaties. Our Treaties are for peace and friendship, not cessation, with standing in international law. The claim that we are minorities in our lands and territories must be abolished. The dehumanizing attempts by states to designate our status as minorities implies that we have no claim to our lands.  In international law minorities have no claim to land.

An explanation on our use of terminology is important. We note that Shawnee and Lenape scholar Steven Newcomb accurately explains that the term, Indigenous Peoples, means dominated peoples. This critical distinction is noted and this report clarifies that Indigenous Nations and Peoples means the Original Nations and Peoples of Great Turtle Island, and will use the term interchangeably.

The NAIPC would like to acknowledge and thank the following sponsors for financial and in-kind contributions:

·   Lonesome Prairie Sand &Gravel Ltd.
·   Boudreau Law
·   Peace Hills Trust
·   Phillips & Co.
·   Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations (FSIN)
·   Ozirny Law Firm
In addition, the NAIPC would like to acknowledge the ceremony keepers, singers, cooks, and community members who all contributed to make the meeting a success. 

The NAIPC participants selected Debra Harry (Numu-Kooyooe Dukaddo) and Tamara Starblanket (Ahtahkakoop Cree Nation) to serve as NAIPC’s co-chairs for the next year.

Agenda item 5:  discussion on the theme - “Indigenous peoples: conflict, peace and resolution.”

The NAIPC discussed the theme of the 15th session: “Indigenous peoples: conflict, peace and resolution.” One Elder noted that “we cannot have peace and conflict in the same sentence.” Language is critical to the way our Peoples and Nations continue to be dominated and dehumanized by settler state governments. There cannot be peace if oppressive state regimes continue to deny the rights of Original Nations and Peoples. The NAIPC recommends the Permanent Forum include the issue of genocide in this theme. Indigenous Peoples need to be able to utilize the Genocide Convention to address acts of genocide. Genocide is a crime against Nations and Peoples in the colonization process. Our experience with the systematic and widespread colonial invasion constitutes genocide against our Nations. These genocidal laws and policies originate from the Christian Doctrine of Discovery and the illegitimate claiming of our lands and territories. The genocidal projects stem from the dehumanizing belief that we are less than human with words such as pagan, heathen and savage. We reject all colonial frameworks and processes (i.e. reconciliation) utilized to address issues of state genocide.  Language has the ability to snare Indigenous Peoples  into believing that justice has been achieved. The destructive framework embedded in reconciliation is an example of the entrapment that Indigenous Peoples face if we continue to accept colonial processes as the way to achieve peace. The synonym for reconciliation is vanquish or crush. Reconciliation is not a peaceful process. The following list are some examples of the acts of genocide against our peoples that is ongoing in its various forms.

1. The theft of our land and forcible transferring of our children are violations of the treaties.
2.The residential/boarding school system is a decades long process that systemically destroys Nations and Peoples, culture, language and families and communities with serious ongoing traumatic effects.
3. The negatives effects are intergenerational and a continuation of the colonial objective.
4. The traumatic parenting patterns created by the residential school system are the conditions utilized by the state in the child welfare systems to forcibly remove children into present times.
5. The death rates of Indigenous children must be addressed and acknowledged.
6. Ongoing laws and policies of the settler state system must be addressed.

The NAIPC recommends the following: 

1.   That the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues decide to identify the theme for a future UNPFII Session “Genocide and its Effects on Indigenous Peoples” in accordance with Article 7 of the UNDRIP. 
2.   That the Doctrine of Discovery be denounced as it is the foundation and genesis of Genocide. 
3.   That an expert seminar on genocide and indigenous peoples be identified and held prior to the UNPFII session that is identified for that purpose. 
4.   That the UN Special Advisor on Genocide be invited to attend the proposed UNPFII as a presenter and how his office – program and services have integrated the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the United Nations World Conference on Indigenous Peoples Outcome Document into his scope of work and mandate. 
5.   That the United Nations permanent Forum authorize a study on Genocide and its Effects on Indigenous Peoples at the most immediate opportunity and be presented at the proposed UNPFII Session. 
6.   That the UNPFII develop an appropriate ongoing education program on Genocide and its application and Impacts on Indigenous Peoples for use and utility in a system wide programme of action including at the national level.
 7.   That Genocide of Indigenous Peoples has occurred and a declaration be issued by the United Nations to recognize and take measures to effectively address and combat by the United Nations.

Item 9: (b) Dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples and the Chair of the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

1.  The NAIPC has reviewed the current mandate of the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (EMRIP) and does not support the expanded mandate of EMRIP but makes the following recommendations.
2.  In light of the recurring trend of the UN to recognize state recognized organizations to  represent Indigenous Peoples in international meetings, we recommend that the Original Nations and Peoples be given the same authority to speak on behalf of their Nations and Peoples. The NAIPC is concerned about the role state recognized organizations have in representing Indigenous Peoples issues at the United Nations and other international fora.
3.  We recommend that the United Nations create a space within the UN to give Indigenous Peoples and Nations a place to share and express their experiences, issues and concerns about what is taking place in their territories.
4.  We recommend that the UN OHCHR Secretariat insure that Indigenous Peoples have their own Secretariat and to stop trying to merge Indigenous Peoples with minorities.

Agenda Item 4: Implementation of the Six Mandated Areas of the Permanent Forum with Reference to the United Nations Declaration On the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (Six (6) mandated areas: Health education, human rights, economic and social development, environment and culture)

The NAIPC discussed the six mandated areas with respect to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. 

The NAIPC noted the importance of quality and access to healthcare for Indigenous Peoples well- being. For Indigenous Peoples who made treaty with the Crown there was an understanding that there would be full access to healthcare. Indigenous Peoples receive substandard health care, services and quality medicines despite our Indigenous Peoples Rights and Treaty and that a plan of action be identified and developed as a priority to address this state-imposed deficiency. Specific recommendations related to Indigenous health include:

1.   With a view of improving health standards and effectively addressing the issues of health of
2.  Original Nations and Peoples, we recommend to the UNPFII that they initiate a study in North America to examine the health disparities, poor quality of medicines distributed to Indigenous Peoples, inadequate funding given towards Indigenous peoples health and examine how this impacts the quality of healthcare and lack of access to health.
3.    We recommend that the UNPFII gather and compile all data within the UN system related to Indigenous health and prepare a report on these findings.
4.    That our understanding of health and healthcare under the Treaties we made with the Crown be fully enforced and to ensure we have quality access to healthcare.


The NAIPC declared that education is another area of disparity and inequity in funding and requires our immediate attention. Indigenous Peoples are invisible in the education system. There are no supports to succeed in post-secondary education including university and college. There needs to be support to our peoples and nations to develop their own education systems and institutions consistent with their own cultures.  Our education is to be recognized as a lifelong learning process.

1. The UNPFII call on states to address the ongoing inequities in level of funding for on and off reserve children.
2. The UNPFII should take effective measures to advance the UN Study on Indigenous Peoples right to Education


The NAIPC affirm that the Original Nations and Peoples have natural laws and instructions to protect and honour the land. Our natural connection to our lands, waters and territories and in through this sacred relationship we have a responsibility to protect our lands. We have always maintained that we had and continue to have control and jurisdiction over our lands, waters and resources within our territories. We are living through a time where there is destruction occurring on our lands and corporations are entering into our territories unlawfully without our Free Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC). Companies are gaining access to our lands, waters and territories through state represented organizations and are side stepping the Original Peoples who hold underlying title and spiritual connection to the lands.  When national and international corporations come onto our territories they  do not adhere to FPIC and ignore the environmental concerns we identify. In light of this, the NAIPC recommends the following:

1. The UNPFII recommends that there be follow up on the special rapporteur study on extractive industries on how FPIC is being enforced and implemented in relation to Indigenous lands and territories.
2. We recommend to other UN bodies like WTO and the human rights commission to monitor  and oversee extractive industry activities and violations of Indigenous rights on Indigenous lands.
3. We recommend that the UNPFII call on the state government to cease criminalization of Indigenous Peoples and Nations who are peacefully exercising their rights and responsibilities to protect our lands, waters and resources.

Agenda Item 3 (C): Follow-up on the recommendations of the Permanent Forum:

The NAIPC reminds this forum that we are the original, free and independent peoples of our lands and territories, and hold a sacred responsibility to protect all life, our knowledge systems, and ways of life within our traditional lands and territories for future generations. We note with concern the negotiations undertaken at WIPO that address genetic resources, traditional knowledge, and traditional cultural expressions. Regarding document E/C.19/2016/4, in the “Study on how States exploit weak procedural rules in international organizations to devalue the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and other international human rights law,” point 43, suggests that Indigenous Peoples should have access to the intellectual property rights system by virtue of the right of self- determination. Certainly Indigenous peoples may currently access the intellectual property regime freely; however, what is lacking is any discussion at WIPO that adequately protects the inherent and prior rights of Indigenous Peoples to keep and protect all aspects of their cultural heritage outside of the intellectual property regime. Since WIPO has failed to ensure the broad-based participation of Indigenous peoples in it’s processes, such discussions which affect the collective rights of Indigenous peoples should be halted and moved to more neutral fora. We recommend the UNPFII include in its study, an exploration of strategies to prevent the negative effect of the intellectual property regime on the collective cultural heritage of Indigenous Peoples, and the appropriate alternative fora that will focus on protection strategies from an Indigenous collective rights framework.

Other Items

The NAIPC decided that the following issues are outstanding and must be addressed by the UNPFII:

Treaties agreements and other constructive arrangements

1.  That the United Nations study on treaties agreements and other constructive arrangements between States and indigenous populations E/CN.4/Sub.2/1999/20 be reintroduced as outstanding unfinished business of the appropriate United Nations bodies and an action plan to complete the work be developed
2.  That the United Nations study on treatiesagreements and other constructive arrangements between states and indigenous populations is a foundational document that affirms the indigenous peoples opinions concerning Treaties and forms an integral part of international law that must be adhered to by the United Nations

3.  That the United Nations study on treaties agreements and other constructive arrangements has identified and affirmed the original Sovereign Status of indigenous Nations and must be recognized by the United Nations system. 

4.  That a UN Study on Border Crossing Rights be authorized by the UNPFII at the most immediate instant.

1. That the Self-Determination of Indigenous Nations be recognized by the UNPFII and that this critical element be included in a system wide action plan and all relevant bodies.

2. That Article 18 of the UNDRIP recognizes our right to speak for ourselves as sovereign nations (Article 9)

World Court and Access to Justice 

In accordance with international standards including the UNDRIP that a reform of the World Court of Justice occur in the most immediate instant so that justice and equality can be accessed and applied to Indigenous Peoples and their legal issues that that have been subverted and denied in the domestic courts.

That the NAIPC as a result of not being consulted to gain our consent in accordance with the UNDRIP and in particular Article 18, that the process of selecting and appointing expert members to the UNPFII did not achieve the minimum standards, and the NAIPC decides to not endorse any North American nominee to the Permanent Forum.

The NAIPC notes with concern that the new accreditation process as identified by the United Nations is destructive and disallows the original Indigenous Nations to speak and present their specific situations for themselves.

The NAIPC urges that the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues honor and include the North American Indigenous Peoples Caucus involvement and right to participate in decision making and accept the 2016 NAIPC Final Report for distribution on the PF website as an information document for the 15th Session.