top of page

Group

Public·10 members

Convenio 169 De La Oit Pdf Free NEW!


Publications of the Library of Congress are works of the United States Government as defined in the United States Code 17 U.S.C. 105 and therefore are not subject to copyright and are free to use and reuse. The Library of Congress has no objection to the international use and reuse of Library U.S. Government works on loc.gov. These works are also available for worldwide use and reuse under CC0 1.0 Universal.




Convenio 169 De La Oit Pdf Free


Download File: https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Furluso.com%2F2ubg0W&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AOvVaw2qImC4gNowsuSvlJJKfmKe



Thus the important next stage in the construction of an intercultural education is related with the signature of ILO Convention No. 169. This international legal instrument establishes the principles and obligations of national states with respect to indigenous peoples (COURTIS, 2009COURTIS, Christian. Apuntes sobre la aplicación del Convenio 169 de la oit sobre pueblos indígenas por los Tribunales de América Latina. Revista Internacional sobre Derechos Humanos, São Paulo, v. 6, n. 10, p. 53-78, 2009.). It was ratified in most Latin American countries immediately after it had been signed at the Convention held in Geneva, Switzerland, in 1989. Mexico ratified it in 1990 and Brazil in 2002 (ASSIES, 2007ASSIES, Willem. Los pueblos indígenas, la tierra, el territorio y la autonomía en tiempos de globalización. In: MARTÍ I PUIG, Salvador (ed.). Pueblos indígenas y política en América Latina. Barcelona: Cidob, 2007. p. 227-246.); Chile on the other hand, abstained, and did not ratify this Convention until 2007 (DONOSO, 2008DONOSO, Sebastián. Chile y el convenio 169 de la OIT: reflexiones sobre un desencuentro. Temas de la Agenda Pública, Santiago de Chile, v. 3, n. 16, p. 1-13, 2008. Disponible en: -content/uploads/2015/02/chile-y-el-convenio-169-de-laoit-reflexiones-sobre-un-desencuentro.pdf. Acceso en: 20 jul. 2019. -conten... ).


The right to free, prior and informed consent before taking actions on lands of Indigenous peoples guaranteed under the International Labour Organisation (ILO) convention No 169 (ratified by Nepal in 2007) and the United Nations Declaration on Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) increased awareness of the land rights of Indigenous communities and has spurred action.


Thus, through the extensive interpretation of article 21, the Court recognized the protection of the indissoluble bond between indigenous communities and their ancestral territories, recognizing the state's duty to delimit, demarcate, title, and to perform the saneamiento of the lands, and to refrain from any act prejudicial to the enjoyment of property. The right to collective property includes the right to natural resources indispensable to the physical and cultural survival of indigenous peoples. For mineral exploration, the Court established three procedural safeguards: the right to free, prior, and informed consultation, benefit sharing, and the elaboration of a prior socio-environmental impact study. The objective is to guarantee the cultural and physical continuity of the peoples.


Therefore, the Declaration is considered the broadest and most progressive instrument in terms of recognizing the rights of indigenous peoples (TOMASELLI, 2016; BARELLI, 2009). The Declaration recognizes the right to self-determination and self-government (arts. 3 and 4) of indigenous peoples, as well as the right to the demarcation and protection of ancestral lands (arts. 25 to 20), the right to free, prior and informed consent (arts. 28 and 29), in addition to multiple social and cultural rights, such as education, with the protection of indigenous children and the teaching of their traditions also to other social segments; health; cultural heritage; the right to free, prior and informed consent, advancing the right to consultation.


With a few exceptions, there is unanimous recognition of the right to cultural identity as well as to possession or ownership of ancestrally occupied territories. Most constitutions also recognize the right to prior participation for the exploitation of natural resources in indigenous territories, although only Ecuador and Bolivia expressly mention the right to free, prior, and informed consultation. Paraguay and Peru do not recognize the right to consultation constitutionally, but the absence is partially remedied by the ratification of Convention 169. In relation to procedural rights, there is a trend toward recognition of collective legal personality (Brazil, Argentina, Guyana, and Peru). Some countries establish parameters for political participation (Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, Guyana, Paraguay, and Venezuela) and indigenous jurisdiction is constitutionally recognized in Colombia and Ecuador. Finally, the right to self-government is recognized in Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, and Paraguay (see Table 1 in the appendix).


Despite advances in the legislation and the case law, violations of the rights of indigenous communities persist. Despite their recognition, the effective exercise of these rights is not observed. According to the Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, these populations have historically been subject to structural discrimination and, due to the prevalence of commercial interests, indigenous communities have always been victims of aggression when seeking to protect their lands (TAULI-CORPUZ, 2018). This has led to an increase in protests by indigenous peoples and their advocates against these projects that threaten the survival of these communities (IACHR, 2019). The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights has indicated that the free, prior and informed consent of indigenous peoples is not obtained to grant concessions to extractive companies, and the state does not control these projects (IACHR, 2019).


Likewise, the work of indigenous rights defenders is often criminalized, a situation that is increasingly common in Latin America (IACHR, 2015). Countries in the region use criminal law in retaliation against those who expose the adverse effects they would have on the survival of indigenous communities. Rodolfo Stavenhagen, former UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous peoples, pointed out that the criminalization of peaceful protest activities aimed at claiming fundamental rights of indigenous communities should be seen today as one of the most serious failures in the defense of human rights (STAVENHAGEN, 2004).


The Inter-American system has examined the use of the crime of terrorism to impede the claims of indigenous peoples. In Norín Catrimán et al. v. Chile, the Court indicated the pattern of application of the crime of terrorism against the Mapuche people. This situation was also recognized by the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous peoples, who denounced the use of the crime of terrorism to deter members of the Mapuche people from their protests, stressing that the social demands of indigenous organizations should not be criminalized (STAVENHAGEN, 2003).


One of the forms of compliance carried out by the state is the conventionality control, a doctrine disseminated by the Inter-American Court and defined as an obligation of any state agent (mainly courts and judges) to apply the American Convention in the domestic interpretation of rights (MAC-GREGOR, 2015). The legal basis for the doctrine is the Convention articles 1.1 (duty to respect rights and freedoms), 2 (duty to adapt domestic system by adapting it to the Convention), and 29 (extensive or pro personae interpretation). Also, the doctrine is related to the principles of good faith, effectiveness and pacta sunt servanda, according to articles 26 and 27 of the Vienna Convention (MAC-GREGOR, 2015; MAC-GREGOR, 2016).


We declare this so that our future generations be free as the rivers, mountains, lagoons, and the birds that flood us with their songs. We declare this in the name of our ancestors who reside in these forests, mountains, rivers, and lagoons. We declare this in the honor of our struggle that has always demanded respect and dignity. We have the right to choose how we want to live, how we want to feel, how we want to breathe. The rights of Mother Earth and the rights of Indigenous peoples must not be violated, this is fundamental if we really want to live in harmony and preserve humanity.


To estimate the ecological impact of planned dams, we developed a multi-factor framework focusing on river connectivity and forest loss caused by dam-related infrastructure. This framework identified dams that would, 1) represent a major new source of river fragmentation in relation to existing dams, 2) disrupt the connectivity of free-flowing rivers that link protected Andean headwaters to the lowland Amazon, 3) require new road or 4) transmission line routes, or 5) directly cause significant environmental impacts (located within a national protected area or a confirmed long-distance migratory fish route, or flood at least 100 km2 of forest). For roads and transmission lines, we used a distance criterion to identify only those projects that require major new systems, not minor infrastructure additions. We defined dams that were positive for at least three factors as high impact, two factors as moderate impact, and zero or one factor as low impact. See the Materials and Methods for full details.


Considering the six major Andean tributaries of the Amazon (Caqueta, Madeira, Napo, Marañon, Putumayo, and Ucayali), new dams threaten to break the now largely free-flowing nature of five. Most threatened are rivers originating in the Ecuadorian and northern Peruvian Andes, while those in Colombia are the least threatened (Table 1; Figure 2A).


More than half (81) of all planned dams are located on the Marañon River and its sprawling tributaries (including the Huallaga, Pastaza, and Zamora Rivers) across Ecuador and Peru (Table 1; Figure S6). Much of the existing hydropower for Ecuador comes from four large dams on two northern tributaries of the Marañon, but the rest of the river complex is free-flowing. However, there are plans for over 60 new dams on these free-flowing stretches. In April 2011, the outgoing administration of President Alan Garcia issued a decree declaring that the construction of 20 of these dams, all located on the main-stem, were in the national interest. All 20 of these prioritized Marañon dams would exceed 100 MW, including three new mega dams (Escuprebraga, Rentema, and Manseriche). Also noteworthy is a cluster of large and mega dams slated for the Zamora River and the first large dams for the Huallaga.


About

Welcome to the group! You can connect with other members, ge...
bottom of page