There are hundreds of cases across the globe where IPLCs are fighting for their rights within their territories of life, even as rich and powerful nations and companies are slowly eating into their territories in the pursuit of minerals, oil and gas, and the extraction of natural resources in large scale, destroying pristine forests and reclaiming water bodies along the way.
By Salam Rajesh
Across third world nations brimming with life unchanged with time, the rising examples of intrusion by States into the ‘Territories of Life’ of the natives had given rise to many forms of protests that primarily illustrates the wish of the natives to be left alone in their own world in the midst of forests, lakes, rivers and the pristine beauty and bounty of nature.
The gross instances of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (IPLCs) rising their voice of protests across the expanse of the globe are nothing but the assertion of their desire to be left alone basically.
This interprets simply with their assertion on their rights over their lands, forests, rivers and lakes that together constitutes their ‘territories of life’, which basically is interpreted as the domain over which they have every right to own, administer and manage in their own time-tested traditional ways of living, generations after generations.
The modern ways of thinking on the concept of ‘development’, and the pursuit of developmental activities by States and private entities that shamelessly intrude into the ancient domain of the natives without their consent and expressed knowledge, is what causes the maximum conflicts of interest between States and local people.
There are hundreds of cases across the globe where IPLCs are fighting for their rights within their territories of life, even as rich and powerful nations and companies are slowly eating into their territories in the pursuit of minerals, oil and gas, and the extraction of natural resources in large scale, destroying pristine forests and reclaiming water bodies along the way.
In India’s North East, the rich tropical rainforests of Digboi in Assam was flatten to give way to the oil companies and again largely replaced with tea plantations during the British Raj. Amazonian tribes are fighting tooth and nail to save the rich tropical rainforests in the Amazon Basin, even as big-time companies are pushing forward relentlessly with their several agendas of oil exploitation, mineral extraction, timber logging and commercial mono-crop plantations.
On this very subject matter, during February earlier this year, Indigenous peoples and nations from Peru and Kenya came together to share their stories on the exclusionary conservation models that had made them invisible in their territories of life for decades, over-shadowed by the larger agendas of the rich and the powerful entities.
Twenty-two Indigenous Kichwa communities from the Ethnic Council of the Kichwa Peoples of the Amazon, the Federation of Indigenous Kichwa Peoples of Chazuta, Amazonia, and the Federation of Indigenous Kichwa Peoples of Bajo Huallaga, San Martin took part at a ‘Gathering of Indigenous Peoples and Nations for Conservation with Respect for their Rights’.
As a follow-up to the congregation, the Indigenous peoples of the Amazon signed a joint declaration reaffirming their self-determination, commitment and solidarity among peoples and nations, with the objective in challenging the ‘fortress conservation’ model and reclaiming their ancestral territories, of which they had been dispossessed entirely.
The gathering enfolded stories of similar patterns of impacts and violence that led to the dispossession of their ancient territories and violating their rights to their territories in the absence of prior consultations and their right to Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC).
The stories revealed how States and other conservation organizations ignored the historical role that the Indigenous peoples and nations played in the protection of the forests, lakes, streams and rivers within their territories of life, that is, the natural landscape upon which they thrive.
One very fundamental issue that the congregation came up with was the superimposition of States’ Protected Areas (PAs) on their ancestral territories without prior consultations and obligations to the free, prior and informed consent of the Indigenous peoples.
This ran concurrently with States’ pressures to create new protected areas on ancestral territories, affecting the lands and the lives of the IPLCs. The gathering thereto called for the advances of communities, peoples, and nations in their self-demarcation within their natural protected areas – governed and managed by them since ages.
This very reflection is found in the instances of the ethnicities in Manipur, too, where there are several issues of local people’s objections to the extension of PAs in areas where IPLCs have the right to the territories. Land in Manipur’s uplands is traditionally owned, managed and administered by the natives in their own best ways and, therefore, any form of intrusion into these territories without the communities’ knowledge and consent can only be met with objections.
The Kichwa peoples’ congregation resulted in their call for solidarity with the tireless struggle of the community of Puerto Franco for the recovery of their ancestral territory. The community, dispossessed and ignored by the creation of the Cordillera Azul National Park and the granting of forestry concessions, is all set to fight it out in court.
On this footnote, the United Nations Environment Program’s Core Human Rights Principles for Private Conservation Organizations and Funders (2024) report notes with some concern that ‘The international community is facing a global loss of biological diversity on a scale unprecedented in human history’.
The report further noted that ‘The biodiversity crisis is also a crisis of human rights. The loss of biodiversity undermines the ability of everyone, everywhere, to enjoy their human rights, but it is especially disastrous for the Indigenous Peoples and others who depend most directly on natural ecosystems for their material, cultural, and spiritual well-being’.
Patricia Kameri-Mbote, Director of UNEP’s Law Division, sharing similar concerns, says that “States are the primary duty-bearers under international human rights law, however, private conservation organizations and funders are crucial in driving conservation efforts and promoting a human rights-based approach. Despite their significance, a common understanding of their human rights responsibilities has been largely lacking”.
This summarizes the general concept that while seeking more areas under the PA networking to re-green Earth, somewhat reflecting upon the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration and the 30×30 agenda, a corresponding process of gross human rights violation to IPLCs is happening undeterred despite international humanitarian laws.