Contextualising ratification and implementation: a critical appraisal of ILO Convention 169 from a social justice perspective

ABSTRACT

The overall concern with ILO Convention 169 is often listed as the dual challenge of promoting its ratification and enhancing effective implementation. This article offers a critical appraisal of the dual challenge by unpacking calls for clarity, guidance and implementation, while exploring the underlying politics of negotiation, interpretation and institutional boundaries potentially undermining the role of the Convention as an instrument of social justice. On the one hand, three decades of implementation have demonstrated the value of international frameworks and standards in helping frame national rights debates. On the other hand, there is a constant risk of lowering the bar and ultimately perpetuating the very inequalities the Convention was set-up to challenge. If indigenous peoples have long employed a ‘cuckoo effect’ relying on the nesting, reporting and filing of representations by others, this article identifies policy and institutional points of leverage to strengthen engagement with indigenous peoples in the ILO world of work.

KEYWORDS:

• Indigenous rights
• social justice
• ILO
• international organisations
• participation
• consultation

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes on contributor

Peter Bille Larsen is a Senior lecturer and research associate at the Environmental Governance and Territorial Development Institute (GEDT) of the University of Geneva. Long-standing engagement with indigenous rights, international standards and social justice through analysis of both international governance systems and national dynamics.

Notes

1 Catherine J. Iorns, ‘Australian Ratification of International Labour Organisation Convention No. 169’, Murdoch University Electronic Journal of Law 1, no. 1 (1993).

2 Sharon Venne, ‘The New Language of Assimilation: A Brief Analysis of Ilo Convention 169’, Without Prejudice: The EAFORD International Review of Racial Discrimination 2, no. 2 (1989): 53–67.

3 Jaap E. Doek, ‘The Crc 20 Years: An Overview of Some of the Major Achievements and Remaining Challenges’, Child Abuse & Neglect 33, no. 11 (2009): 771–82, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0145213409002038 (accessed November 1, 2009).

4 Peris Sean Jones, ‘Powering up the People? The Politics of Indigenous Rights Implementation: International Labour Organisation Convention 169 and Hydroelectric Power in Nepal’, The International Journal of Human Rights 16, no. 4 (2012): 624–47, https://doi.org/10.1080/13642987.2011.627175 (accessed May 1, 2012).

5 Mark Goodale, ‘Dark Matter: Toward a Political Economy of Indigenous Rights and Aspirational Politics’, Critique of Anthropology 36, no. 4 (2016): 439–57, https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0308275X15619017.

6 Peter Bille Larsen, Post-Frontier Resource Governance: Indigenous Rights, Extraction and Conservation in the Peruvian Amazon., International Relations and Development Series (London: Palgrave MacMillan, 2015).

7 Athanasios Yupsanis, ‘The International Labour Organization and Its Contribution to the Protection of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples’, Canadian Yearbook of International Law/Annuaire canadien de droit international 49 (2016): 117–76, https://www.cambridge.org/core/article/international-labour-organization-and-its-contribution-to-the-protection-of-the-rights-of-indigenous-peoples/FEF9F81DCAB7377D3D20D8D569A78005.

8 Roger Merino Acuña, ‘Coloniality and Indigenous Territorial Rights in the Peruvian Amazon: A Critique of the Prior Consultation Law’, in Bath Papers in International Development and Wellbeing (Bath: Centre for Development Studies, University of Bath, 2015).

9 A.M. Fulmer, ‘The Politics of a Strange Right: Consultation, Mining, and Indigenous Mobilization in Latin America’, in The Uses and Misuses of Human Rights, ed. G. Andreopoulos and Z.F.K. Arat (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014).

10 Juan Carlos Ruiz Molleda and Julio César Mejía Tapia, ‘Balance De Los Procesos De Consulta En Minería Y Petróleo En El Perú: De Un Mecanismo Para Armonizar Y Compatibilizar Intereses a Un “Mero Trámite” Burocrático(1)’, in SERVINDI (Lima, 2018), https://www.servindi.org/print/65929.

11 OIT, Foro Regional Sobre Implementación Del Convenio Sobre Pueblos Indígenas Y Tribales, 1989 (Núm. 169): Compartiendo Experiencias, Construyendo Alianzas Y Sosteniendo El Progreso Documento De Trabajo (Lima: OIT Lima, 2017).

12 Larsen, Post-Frontier Resource Governance.

13 Birgitte Feiring, ‘Ilo Convention No. 169:25 Years of Promoting and Protecting the Rights of Indigenous and Tribal Peoples: Background Note’ (paper presented at the Enabling human rights-based development for indigenous peoples: learning from 25 years’ of experience of ILO Con vention 169 Geneva, 2013).

14 Øyvind Ravna, ‘Norway and Its Obligations under Ilo 169–Some Considerations after the Recent Stjernøy Supreme Court Case’, Arctic Review 7, no. 2 (2016).

15 Nick Middeldorp, Carlos Morales, and Gemma van der Haar, ‘Social Mobilisation and Violence at the Mining Frontier: The Case of Honduras’, The Extractive Industries and Society 3, no. 4 (2016): 930–8, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214790X16301836 (accessed November 1, 2016).

16 Molleda and Tapia, ‘Balance De Los Procesos De Consulta En Minería Y Petróleo En El Perú’.

17 OIT, Convenio Núm. 169 De La Oit Sobre Pueblos Indígenas Y Tribales En Países Independientes Y La Consulta Previa a Los Pueblos Indígenas En Proyectos De Inversión. Reporte Regional: Colombia, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Chile (Lima: OIT, Oficina Regional para América Latina yel Caribe, 2016, 2016), 5.

18 OIT, Convenio Núm. 169 De La Oit Sobre Pueblos Indígenas Y Tribales En Países Independientes Y La Consulta Previa a Los Pueblos Indígenas En Proyectos De Inversión, 6.

19 Ibid., 61.

20 Ibid., 62.

21 Robert I. Rotberg, ‘The Corruption of Latin America’, in Corruption in Latin America: How Politicians and Corporations Steal from Citizens, ed. Robert I. Rotberg (Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2019).

22 IWGIA, ‘“Defending the Defenders: New Alliances for Protecting Indigenous Peoples’ Rights”, Outcome Document, 5–6 September 2018 in Copenhagen’ (2018).

23 CEACR, General Observation (Convention 169), Observation 2010/81 (Geneva: ILO, 2010).

24 Peter Bille Larsen, ‘The “New Jungle Law”: Development, Indigenous Rights and Ilo Convention 169 in Latin America’, International Development Policy 7, no. 1 (2016).

25 ILO, Understanding the Indigenous and Tribal People Convention, 1989 (No. 169). Handbook for Ilo Tripartite Constituents (Geneva: International Labour standards Department. International Labour Organization, 2013), 16.

26 CEACR, General Observation (Convention 169), Observation 2010/81.

27 ILO, ‘Statement by Guy Ryder, Director-General of the Ilo’ (ILO, 2018), https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_protect/---protrav/---ilo_aids/documents/genericdocument/wcms_645652.pdf.

28 EMRIP, ‘Free, Prior and Informed Consent: A Human Rights-Based Approach, Study of the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, Human Rights Council Thirty-Ninth Session 10–28 September 2018, Agenda Items 3 and 5, a/Hrc/39/62’ (Geneva, 2018).

29 ILO, ‘Comments Submitted by the Ilo’ (Human Rights Council, Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, Eleventh Session, 9–13 July 2018, Item 4: Study on free, prior and informed consent: https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_protect/---protrav/---ilo_aids/documents/genericdocument/wcms_634380.pdf, 2018).

30 Edward John and Dalee Sambo Dorough, ‘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, E/C.19/2016/4’ (Un Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, 2016).

31 John Henriksen, ‘Key Principles in Implementing Ilo Convention No. 169’, in Research on Best Practices for the Implementation of the Principles of ILO Convention No. 169 (Geneva: ILO, 2008).

32 Henriksen, ‘Key Principles in Implementing Ilo Convention No. 169’, 83

33 Steve Hughes, ‘The International Labour Organisation’, New Political Economy 10, no. 3 (2005): 413–25, https://doi.org/10.1080/13563460500204324 (accessed September 1, 2005).

34 Daniel Augenstein, ‘Negotiating the Hard/Soft Law Divide in Business and Human Rights: The Implementation of the Ungps in the European Union’, Global Policy 9, no. 2 (2018): 254–63, https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1758-5899.12530.

35 Barnali Choudhury, ‘Balancing Soft and Hard Law for Business and Human Rights’, International and Comparative Law Quarterly (2018): 1–26, https://www.cambridge.org/core/article/balancing-soft-and-hard-law-for-business-and-human-rights/4C1AAC694C25E1C8F192BBD63036F38C.

36 OIT, Nota Informativa Sobre El Régimen De Denuncia Del Convenio 169 De La Oit (Lima, 2018).

37 ILO, Greening with Jobs: World Employment Social Outlook (Geneva: ILO, 2018).

38 ILC, ‘The Ilo Centenary Declaration for the Future of Work’, ed. 108th session International Labour Conference, 2019 (https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_norm/---relconf/documents/meetingdocument/wcms_711674.pdf, 2019).