Cultural and language rights of minorities and indigenous peoples

ABSTRACT

This article introduces the special issue of the International Journal of Human Rights on the cultural and linguistic rights of minorities and indigenous peoples. The right to cultural life is at the core of all human identities but indigenous peoples and minorities have particular rights to protect their collective identities, which are more easily eroded by dominant culture(s) or due to harmful practices such as involuntary assimilation. The conference brought together scholars and activists to examine such threats in practice and to discuss the role of law and social mobilisation by minorities and indigenous peoples in response. The impact of recent events such as Covid-19 and the Black Lives Matter transnational mobilisation are discussed in this introduction to illustrate how these major contemporary events also relate to cultural rights. The article provides an overview of the inter-disciplinary articles included in the special issue, which focus on key illustrative case studies of threats to cultural and linguistic rights across regions. The UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage is a focus in several of the articles, as is with the role of international human rights law in protecting cultural and linguistic rights.

KEYWORDS:

• Minorities
• indigenous peoples
• cultural rights
• language rights
• intangible cultural heritage

This special issue originates in a conference convened in October 2018 at the School of Advanced Study, University of London to mark the 15th anniversary of the UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (2003). Entitled ‘Fulfilling Indigenous Peoples’ and Minority Rights to Culture and Language’, the conference brought together an inter-disciplinary group of scholars and activists to reflect on the particular rights of indigenous peoples and ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities in the domain of cultural and language rights.¹ The focus was not exclusively on intangible cultural heritage, but used the anniversary as a launching point to discuss a range of issues related to culture and language, addressing also links to land rights, community mobilisation, and state responsibility.

The right to cultural life is at the core of all human identities but indigenous peoples and minorities have particular rights to protect their collective identities, which are more easily eroded by dominant culture(s) or due to harmful practices such as involuntary assimilation. There are major weaknesses and also some opportunities in the existing international human rights law framework to address these rights, both in principle and in practice. Instruments such as the UNESCO Intangible Cultural Heritage (ICH) Convention complement existing human rights law and offer additional pathways to protection. The preservation and development of distinct ways of life, languages, values, sciences, legal systems, philosophies, beliefs, and other aspects of culture are both evolving and also under threat.

Protection of cultural and linguistic rights has been the focus of international attention in recent years. The UN declared 2019 the International Year of Indigenous Languages, which registered more than 800 events worldwide and produced a wide range of follow-up recommendations.² Our conference featured a keynote address by Dr Fernand de Varennes, speaking in his capacity as the UN Special Rapporteur on minority issues. The Special Rapporteur has made minority language rights a priority of his mandate. To this end, in 2019, the UN Forum on Minority Issues had as its thematic focus ‘Education, Language and the Human Rights of Minorities’.³ Cultural and linguistic rights are also integral to achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), agreed in 2015. Culture impacts on the right to food (SDG 2), health (SDG 3), education (SDG 4), gender equality (SDG 5), work (SDG 8), and housing (SDG 11), among others. Linguistic rights for minorities and indigenous people similarly can affect equal outcomes in education, the ability to access decent work and the accessibility of public health initiatives.⁴ Attention to minority and indigenous rights is essential also for SDG 10 on reducing inequalities within countries and SDG 16 on achieving peaceful, just and inclusive societies.

We write this introduction at a time of a global crisis that threatens minorities and indigenous peoples in new ways. Covid-19 has had devastating effects everywhere, but across countries, marginalised indigenous peoples and minorities have been disproportionately affected not only by deaths and illness but also by public health policies that exclude them as well as the peripheral effects of the crisis on other human rights. Covid-19 has revealed the ugly face of existing hierarchies at the domestic level. It does not only present a major health crisis but also provides the conditions from which multiple other crises –e.g. environmental, economic– can also spring up. For indigenous peoples and minority groups around the world, these conditions may present an existential threat, in which not only hard-won collective rights are at stake but even the natural and socio-cultural environments in which their communities live. The fear of the disease has pushed states to ignore the vulnerabilities of specific sections of the population, especially minorities and indigenous peoples, and has prevented them from taking special measures to ensure that real equality is guaranteed in the prevention and treatment of the disease.

The lack of information in minority and indigenous peoples’ languages is evidence of such neglect. In Europe, for example, the Council of Europe’s Committee of Experts of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages has been striving to bring attention to the poor provision of public health information in minority languages.⁵ Among the most vulnerable of minority groups in the region to Covid-19 are the Roma, who have faced shocking attacks and increased harassment during the pandemic, frequently being scapegoated as transmitters of the virus.⁶ The Council of Europe and European Union have increased pressure on states to protect Roma from discrimination in the crisis and also to ensure that the particular inequalities they face already in access to water and sanitation, adequate housing, decent work and education do not become further entrenched by Covid-19 policies that do not account for such disparities. In the UK, for example, Gypsy and Traveller communities have mobilised to seek greater protection from evictions during the crisis but this has not been uniformly applied and families living in crowded settlements with precarious employment are highly vulnerable to the virus.⁷

In Latin America, many indigenous communities are at significantly higher risk of Covid-19. In Brazil, indigenous and quilombola populations, as well as low-income residents of the urban peripheries, are experiencing the devastating effects of the pandemic in a much more accentuated way than the rest of the population. Especially in areas with difficult access to health facilities, as is the case in many parts of the Amazon, the indigenous populations are particularly vulnerable to the coronavirus often transmitted by illegal miners and loggers who regularly invade their territories, but also by missionaries and even health agents. As the virus is decimating an entire generation of elderly indigenous leaders, the younger generations lament the incalculable damage their losses inflict on their linguistic and cultural diversity and collective future. Brazil’s far-right president Jair Bolsonaro was denounced, in July 2020, for crimes against humanity at the International Criminal Court. In the complaint, signed by more than 60 organisations and social movements, Bolsonaro is accused of genocide for incentivising actions that promoted the risk of contamination and for refusing to implement public policies for the protection of minorities.⁸ Raoni Metuktire, a world-renowned indigenous activist and Kayapó leader, argued that the Brazilian president is ‘taking advantage of the present moment’ to exterminate the country’s indigenous people.⁹

At the same time, indigenous cultures have an important role to play in the fight against Covid-19. The practice of isolation in the face of threat, for example, is well-known among indigenous communities¹⁰ and the sharing of their good practice could prove invaluable to national societies. Traditional medicines may be invaluable to minimize the effects of the disease. Yet, states have not taken the opportunity to include indigenous traditional knowledge in the programmes to fight the disease despite assurances of intercultural societies.¹¹ States apart from a couple, such as Australia and New Zealand, have not even included indigenous representatives in the creation of preventative programmes directed towards indigenous people, despite guarantees of respecting free, prior and informed consent (FPIC).¹²

Yet, minority and indigenous communities have not remained passive in the face of Covid-19 but have shown leadership with some strong protection initiatives. In several places they are creating their own protocols in response to the pandemic. In Ecuador, for example, indigenous groups have launched an information dashboard to monitor the spread and identify contagion hotspots across the Amazon. Speaking on behalf of the lead organisation, CONFENIAE, Marlon Vargas said ‘We have lost a lot of elders - they are the keepers of our traditions, our ancestral knowledge, our languages,’ starkly illustrating the direct impact of Covid-19 on cultural and linguistic rights.¹³ The Mayan Language Academy (AMG) has taken the lead in translating different prevention messages to deal with Covid-19 into indigenous languages.¹⁴ In Nepal, ‘the customary institutions and representative organisations of indigenous peoples have focused on increasing their immunity to survive the disease, building on their knowledge and practice of using herbs and wild spices’.¹⁵ Traditional knowledge around health and sanitation is playing a vital role in the pandemic. For example, traditional indigenous midwives in Guatemala are key actors in the front-line response to the health crisis, whilst traditional medicines and plant-based disinfectants of the Amazigh are being used to prevent the spread of the pandemic.¹⁶

This follows the general trend of minorities and indigenous peoples to get mobilised in the face of threats to their culture and language. Papers at the conference discussed various forms of community mobilisation, including cases from the Sami, Ainu and indigenous peoples of Australia. The conference also featured activists from Free Tibet and Tibet Watch, including poet Tenzin Tsundue, who discussed the situation of Tashi Wangchuk, imprisoned for advocating for Tibetan language rights. Tibetans have strived to keep their culture alive in exile and through transnational support.

We also write as the transnational Black Lives Matter movement is asserting claims to justice and recognition that are impacting also on culture. Racist historical narratives are being confronted and offensive cultural appropriation is being dismantled. Culture remains also a conduit for protest, with artists of African descent using various media to advocate alongside Black Lives Matter movements. Black Lives Matter movements have become adjusted to national specificities as with the Vidas Negras Importam movement in Brazil and are instigating local anti-racist manifestations. A significant number of such manifestations draw special attention to contestations over cultural history and representation, asking for a revaluation of specific regimes of historicity and culture as these are recounted in formal education and the built environment. In June 2020, a statue of Edward Colston in Bristol, UK, was toppled from its plinth and thrown into the city’s docks by protesters who argued there was ‘no place’ in the city for honouring slave traders. Such initiatives draw inspiration from movements such as the 2015 Rhodes Must Fall in South Africa, which initially began as a protest movement for the removal of British colonist Cecil Rhodes’s statue at the University of Cape Town and quickly grew as a global movement promoting the decolonisation of higher education.

In international law, the protection of cultural rights, including intangible cultural heritage, is an obligation of states. Rights-holders, such as minority or indigenous communities, have a range of rights that entitle them to have a say in how these obligations are fulfilled. The power of states to eradicate or suppress cultural identity remains a serious threat in many countries. Even in initiatives such as the UNESCO ICH Convention, it is states that nominate and approve forms of ICH for official recognition. Article 15 of the ICH Convention emphasises participation rights: ‘Within the framework of its safeguarding activities of the intangible cultural heritage, each State Party shall endeavour to ensure the widest possible participation of communities, groups and, where appropriate, individuals that create, maintain and transmit such heritage, and to involve them actively in its management.’¹⁷ In practice, however, we know that the power of minorities and indigenous peoples to protect their culture or language is weak in the face of state oppression or indifference. In this special issue, some proposals to remedy this imbalance are offered by several of the authors.

In her contribution to this special issue, Katerina Hatzikidi brings anthropological reflections on the commercialisation of culture by ethnic minorities and its impact on communities involved. Exploring the case of a black rural quilombo (Afro-Brazilian) community in the eastern Amazon frontier, Hatzikidi sets out to analyse the complex relations between local potters and ‘cultural mediators’ (understood as connecting links between quilombolas and the market) in the production and management of ‘quilombo heritage’ and community identity representations. In doing so, she discusses how global hierarchies of value applied to the recognition and protection of cultural heritage are shaping local responses to safeguarding cultural practices. Drawing on ethnographic data collected during long-term field research with quilombolas in Maranhão, Brazil, Hatzikidi analyses some of the major advances achieved and challenges faced by the local actors in the protection of their cultural rights, showing that protecting cultural rights equals protecting collective land rights. In her closing remarks, Hatzikidi considers the broader implications of cultural identity as precondition for obtaining land rights and other forms of self-determination, as is often required by land titling mechanisms, and stresses the need for effective –that is, horizontal and inclusive– community participation in the drafting and implementation of cultural heritage policies.

Ross Holder also explores connections between cultural and other human rights, such as territorial and religious rights, in his discussion of China’s Uyghur religious identity. Setting off from the premise that the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has ratified the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) but not yet the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), Holder examines the applicability of the cultural rights provision included in Article 15 of the ICESCR to the protection of the Uyghur’s religious identity. Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region’s municipal government actions for combatting religious extremism have been strongly criticised for repressing religious freedom and pushing for cultural assimilation of the region’s Uyghur, a Sunni Muslim minority, as well as other Muslim minorities in the country. However, the PRC has not yet been held accountable for its policies over religion in the public sphere that conflict in important ways with the UN's broad definition of culture which includes the protection of minority rights. After examining the limitations and inefficacies of domestic legal protections, Holder turns to the PRC’s international human rights commitments in his effort to explore whether, and to what extent, these provisions may protect the Uyghurs’ religious identity. In analysing the ICESCR’s cultural rights provisions in light of religious regulations in Xinjiang, Holder focuses on underexplored aspects of Article 15 that conceives of culture broadly and recognises its interrelatedness with religion. The implications of this interpretation, the author suggests, are important to all of China’s religious minorities, as well as to the Han majority population, for reconfiguring religious freedoms and preventing minorities’ cultural repression.

Jessika Eichler’s article examines the rights of minorities and indigenous peoples in relation to the intangible cultural heritage regime, exemplified in the UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. She argues that international human rights law, as it pertains to these groups, can work to remedy some of the weaknesses in international law on intangible cultural heritage. The latter is poorly equipped to address inequalities in access to power in applying the protection regime, while the former is imbued with rights on participation in decision making and self-determination, which can give minority and indigenous groups more influence in determining legal recognition of intangible cultural heritage. She illustrates these dynamics by drawing on two case examples of carnival celebration practices in the Andean region in Bolivia and Colombia. The case studies provide a backdrop for considering the particular challenges surrounding the commodification of intangible cultural heritage through tourism activities. Hatzikidi’s article similarly examines the impact of market forces on cultural rights recognition. Eichler argues that tourism demands can distort cultural practice and disempower local communities without specific measures to ensure their equal participation in cultural heritage protection and the terms of its reproduction. At the same time, tourism can also provide opportunities for protection of cultural rights, particularly by enhancing capacities for cultural transmission.

Rehnuma Sazzad offers an historical analysis of minority language rights in two South Asian countries. Drawing on Johann Gottfried Herder’s notion of cultural nationalism, Sazzad analyses the centrality of languages in the formation of modern nation states. By comparing the 1930s Vernacular Movement in Sri Lanka to the 1952 Language Movement in undivided Pakistan, she shows the intersection of linguistic and cultural rights with other human rights. In doing so, she pays attention to the fact that while peoples in these two case studies defined themselves primarily in ethnic terms during decolonisation, they began to emphasize a religious-linguistic identity after independence. Sazzad traces the evolution of these two movements, which started mainly as cultural and linguistic movements and turned into political movements for autonomy and group identity. With Herder’s example as a core thread of her discussion throughout the paper, Sazzad suggests that, in the context of multilingual states, the imposition of a single language as official risks creating ethnic competition instead of fostering the construction of a unified national spirit.

Ekaterina Arutyunova and Konstantin Zamyatin provide a detailed analysis of changes in minority language rights in education in Russia and the role of social mobilisation. In the early 1990s, Russia established a strong constitutional and legal regime for the protection of the ‘titular’ languages of the various republics and autonomous regions. This included rights to teach these languages in schools as compulsory and helped to safeguard minority languages and cultural transmission whilst also bolstering political autonomy. The authors describe these minority language policies as an important aspect of conflict prevention and stability. Opposition to this compulsory language learning began to emerge in the late 1990s from among Russian-speaking parents and has accelerated under the more centrist and authoritarian policies of President Putin aimed at weakening the autonomy of the republics. The authors refer to this practice as ‘linguistic nationalism’, which include a recent constitutional amendment in July 2020 that privileges the Russian language. The imposition of cultural assimilation by reducing minority language education forecasts further oppression of ethnic minorities in Russia and points to language rights as a key tool of political exclusion.

Jayden Houghton discusses the breaches of the New Zealand state to allow Māori to exercise tino rangatiratanga (the unqualified exercise of our chieftainship) over their mātauranga Māori (the body of knowledge originating from Māori ancestors, including the Māori worldview and cultural practices) and taonga (tangible and intangible treasures). Houghton analyses the Wai 262 claim, where six Māori claimant groups sought the affirmation by the Tribunal that the Crown had indeed breached its Treaty of Waitangi guarantees. The Tribunal released its report on the claim in 2011 and following several years of internal engagement with the report, the state proposed Te Pae Tawhiti: a work programme to address the breaches that the Tribunal revealed. In this piece, Houghton provides unprecedented insights into the government’s repeated change of policy in responding to the Wai 262 report. Stocktaking by the national government were repeatedly not published, they were not used to fully address the gaps and the reactions were ad hoc. Based on the unpublished stocktakes and other sources, Houghton argues that, whilst Māori should engage in Te Pae Tawhiti, they should do so cautiously and with a full appreciation of the failures of the state so far to fully address the report’s findings.

Siu Lang Carrillo Yap discusses the role of the UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (ICH Convention) in the protection of traditional forest-related knowledge (TFRK) of Amazonian indigenous peoples. This is a very interesting discussion as the Amazon Basin has been considered as one of the three core areas with the highest level of biocultural diversity in the world. Yet, Carrillo Yap notes that the forest management plan that has to be implemented for the extraction of forest resources is not fully compatible with the Amazon indigenous peoples’ knowledge, values and practices. She argues also that the national norms that regulate such process are not consistent with the indigenous rights to self-determination, lands and natural resources. Carrillo Yap discusses the gaps and opportunities that the ICH Convention offers for the protection of the Amazonian traditional forest related knowledge. She concludes that the ICH Convention has an important role to play in the preservation of the Amazonian rainforest through the identification, documentation, research, preservation, protection, promotion, enhancement, transmission and development of TFRK. She urges states to ensure that Amazonian people lead such a process.

Following the conclusion of the conference, participants joined two events held to celebrate cultural and linguistic rights of indigenous peoples and minorities. Senate House Library, University of London, offered an exhibition of indigenous language publications curated from among their special collections.¹⁸ The materials on display included a book about the language and culture of the Yanomami from Venezuela, an Araucano (Mapuche) to Spanish dictionary, and a dictionary of the Barasana and Taibano languages of Colombia. The opening night of the Native Spirit Film Festival 2018 was also hosted.¹⁹ This annual festival celebrates the cultural heritage of indigenous peoples by showcasing their cinematic work. The launch event included films developed through the Open World Research Initiative (OWRI) Cross-Language Dynamics project, focusing on engagement with minority language communities.²⁰ These events were strong examples of the myriad ways that culture and language are preserved, exercised and disseminated to wider audiences. Such initiatives, led by indigenous peoples and minorities, confront the many forces that seek to destroy language and culture and provide new narratives of identity.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Katerina Hatzikidi

Katerina Hatzikidi is a Postdoctoral Researcher at the University of Tübingen. She is a social anthropologist (DPhil Oxford) interested in questions of race and ethnicity, heritage, land rights, religious movements, populism, and conspiracy theories. She is a Research Affiliate at the Institute of Social and Cultural Anthropology, University of Oxford, and Associate Fellow at the Institute of Latin American Studies, University of London.

Corinne Lennox

Corinne Lennox is Senior Lecturer in Human Rights at the School of Advanced Study, University of London and Co-Director of the Human Rights Consortium. Her research focuses on issues of minority and indigenous rights protection, civil society mobilisation for human rights and on human rights and development. She has been an advisor on minority and indigenous rights to governments, the UNDP and the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.

Alexandra Xanthaki

Alexandra Xanthaki is a Professor at Brunel University London and an expert on the rights of minorities and indigenous peoples in international law. Currently, she is working on a H2020 project on the rights of migrants in Europe.

Notes

1 The conference was organised jointly by the Human Rights Consortium and Institute of Modern Languages Research, School of Advanced Study, University of London, and Brunel University Law School. The conference was supported by the Open World Research Initiative (OWRI) project entitled ‘Cross-language dynamics: reshaping community’, funded by the UK Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC). The conference organisers are grateful for additional funding from the Cassal Trust.

2 See UN International Year of Indigenous Languages: https://en.iyil2019.org/; UNESCO, Strategic Outcome Document of the 2019 International Year of Indigenous Languages, UN Doc. 40 C/68 (15 November 2019).

3 Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, ‘Education, Language and the Human Rights of Minorities Twelfth Session of the Forum on Minority Issues’, available at: https://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/HRC/Minority/Pages/Session12.aspx (accessed 8 October 2020).

4 Deena R Hurwitz and Ellen-Rose Kambel, ‘Redressing language-based exclusion and punishment in education and the Language Friendly School initiative’ (2020) 4 Global Campus Human Rights Journal 5–24; Stéphanie Chouinard and Martin Normand. ‘Talk COVID to Me: Language Rights and Canadian Government Responses to the Pandemic.’ Canadian Journal of Political Science. Revue Canadienne De Science Politique 1–6. 28 Apr. 2020.

5 Council of Europe, Minority languages matter - particularly in a health crisis, 2020, available at https://www.coe.int/en/web/portal/covid-19-minority-languages (accessed 8 October 2020)

6 European Roma Rights Centre, Roma Rights in the Time of Covid, European Roma Rights Centre, September 2020, available at http://www.errc.org/uploads/upload_en/file/5265_file1_roma-rights-in-the-time-of-covid..pdf (accessed 8 October 2020)

7 Katharine Quarmby, ‘“A disaster waiting to happen” - Traveller communities buckling from the impact of the pandemic’, Open Democracy, 4 May 2020, available at: https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/a-disaster-waiting-to-happen-traveller-communities-buckling-from-the-impact-of-the-pandemic/ (accessed 8 October 2020)

8 For the full text of the criminal complaint see: https://uniglobalunion.org/sites/default/files/imce/english_denuncia_presidente_icc_final.pdf (accessed 8 October 2020).

9 ‘Bolsonaro “se aproveita” da pandemia para eliminar indígenas, diz cacique Raoni’, O Globo, 5 June 2020, available at https://oglobo.globo.com/sociedade/bolsonaro-se-aproveita-da-pandemia-para-eliminar-indigenas-diz-cacique-raoni-24464578 (accessed 8 October 2020).

10 UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs, ‘COVID-19 and Indigenous peoples’, n.d., https://www.un.org/development/desa/indigenouspeoples/covid-19.html (accessed 21 November 2020). The practice of isolation may not always be available considering, for example, complex networks of trade and commerce and the extent of land invasions, even if certain populations would have wished to do so.

11 UN Inter-Agency Support Group on Indigenous Issues, ‘Indigenous Peoples and COVID-19, A Guidance Note for the UN System prepared by the UN Inter-Agency Support Group on Indigenous Issues’, 23 April 2020, in https://www.un.org/development/desa/indigenouspeoples/wp-content/uploads/sites/19/2020/04/Indigenous-peoples-and-COVID_IASG_23.04.2020-EN.pdf (accessed 21 November 2020).

12 UN OHCHR, ‘COVID-19 and Indigenous Peoples’ Rights, What is the Impact of COVID-19 on Indigenous Peoples’ Rights?’, 29 June 2020, in https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/IPeoples/OHCHRGuidance_COVID19_IndigenouspeoplesRights.pdf (accessed 21 November 2020).

13 Anastasia Moloney, ‘Ecuador's Amazon tribes turn to tech to track COVID-19 cases’, Reuters, 21 July 2020, available at: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-ecuador-indigenous/ecuadors-amazon-tribes-turn-to-tech-to-track-covid-19-cases-idUSKCN24M30Y (accessed 8 October 2020).

14 UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs, ‘UN/DESA Policy Brief #70: The Impact of COVID-19 on Indigenous Peoples’, 8 May 2020, in https://www.un.org/development/desa/dpad/publication/un-desa-policy-brief-70-the-impact-of-covid-19-on-indigenous-peoples/ (accessed 23 November 2020).

15 Supra note 12, UN OHCHR ‘COVID-19 and Indigenous Peoples’ Rights, What is the Impact of COVID-19 on Indigenous Peoples’ Rights?’; p. 3.

16 Supra note 12, UN OHCHR ‘COVID-19 and Indigenous Peoples’ Rights, What is the Impact of COVID-19 on Indigenous Peoples’ Rights?’; pp. 2–3.

17 See also the Operational Directives for the Implementation of the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, especially Chapter III. Participation in the implementation of the Convention; available at https://ich.unesco.org/en/directives (accessed 8 October 2020).

18 Cheryl Bellisario, ‘Indigenous Languages are Essential’, Talking Humanities, 15 November 2018. https://talkinghumanities.blogs.sas.ac.uk/2018/11/15/indigenous-languages-are-essential/ (accessed 8 October 2020).

19 Native Spirit Film Festival: https://nativespiritfoundation.org/

20 Open World Research Initiative (OWRI) Cross-Language Dynamics project https://crosslanguagedynamics.blogs.sas.ac.uk/