The concept of procedural justice has been promoted as a potential solution in the contest for resources involving indigenous peoples and others. It seeks the formulation of processes that are fair and just both to indigenous peoples and to the other parties affected. Using a comparative approach, this paper analyses processes and mechanisms adopted in some selected common law jurisdictions against the ideal of procedural justice. It seeks to consider mechanisms which conform to the principle of procedural justice to address the issue of indigenous peoples’ rights to land and resources in Malaysia. The principle is relevant in Malaysian common law which also subjects matters affecting fundamental liberties to procedural justice. Comparative perspectives provide models for practical applications of indigenous peoples’ rights. They assist policy analysis through learning from the successes and failures of other jurisdictions in improving legal reform.
Ebenezer Durojaye and Mariam Wallet Med Aboubakrine
This article examines non-communicable diseases (ncds) as a challenge among indigenous population in Africa. From a rights-based perspective, the article considers some of the social determinants of health and other challenges that can aggravate ncds among indigenous groups in Africa. It further examines the recognition of the right to health of indigenous populations under international law. This is followed by a discussion on some of the barriers to addressing ncds among indigenous peoples in the region. It concludes by urging African governments to be more proactive in adopting measures grounded in human rights standards to address the rising incidence of ncds among indigenous peoples in the region.
Hungary has been praised by international monitoring bodies and scholars specializing in minority rights for being a pioneer in establishing a sophisticated cultural autonomy regime for the safeguarding of the cultural rights of its minorities, which could serve as a salient example for other countries too. However, after nearly twenty-five years of implementation, during which a major amendment of the original Act lxxvii of 1993 on the Rights of National and Ethnic Minorities (2005) took place, followed further by the adoption of a new Act clxxix on the Rights of Nationalities (2011), there continue to exist serious problems in the operation of the whole arrangement, putting in question its efficacy to adequately address the cultural needs of Hungary’s minorities and to serve as a model for exportation.
Naomi Birdthistle, Antoinette Flynn and Susan Rushworth
Ethnic entrepreneurship has emerged as an economic, societal, and political panacea to the growing number of refugees on the move across the globe. Employing the 2014 World Economic Forum framework, this article seeks to explore the Australian entrepreneurship ecosystem, to determine whether it is enabling migrants and/or refugees to become entrepreneurs with a focus on Syrian refugees. At its core, the Australian entrepreneurship ecosystem is comparatively strong in terms of human capital, accessible markets, and finance. Even within the three ‘core’ characteristics of the ecosystem, the Australian ecosystem falls short when examined through the lens of refugee entrepreneurs. Recommendations under the 2014 World Economic Forum framework are made that will assist key stakeholders in developing an entrepreneurial ecosystem.
Minority protection under the League of Nations (LoN) generated an unprecedented level of activity and debate on the topic, which in turn contributed to the general advancement of human rights. Nevertheless, it is also important to note that the League’s Secretariat developed rather conservative practices regarding the receivability of minorities’ petitions as well as on some important related decisions. Our perspective here contrasts with what is commonly found in the associated historiography, i.e. that the part played by the Minorities Section was rather neutral. Without downplaying the importance of some states’ resistance to the protection of minorities and its supervision, the Section’s narrow interpretation of the LoN jurisdiction is noteworthy, as is the absence of serious attempts to take advantage of the decisions in favour of minorities made by the LoN Assembly. The way the Section constructed the non-receivability of petitions, especially those which were ‘outside treaties’, illustrates our argument.
A. Aslı Bilgin
The foundation of European Integration is based on economic objectives from the beginning of the 1950s. The founding treaties did not include provisions regarding minority rights. Minority rights have been a foundational value since the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, but there is no legislation related to minority rights or internal minority policy at the European Union (eu) level, because of the absence of competence given to eu institutions. This study analyses how issues relating to minority protection are handled vis-a-vis internal market objectives under eu law in the light of primary, secondary and eu case-law. While determining the legal framework on minority rights in the eu, not only the impact of the case-law of the cjeu on minority protection, but also the possibility of the cjeu’s power to establish an internal minority policy and the Member States’ approaches to an internal minority policy have been taken into consideration.
Anne Imobersteg Harvey
Edited by Gudmundur Alfredsson and Timo Koivurova
- human rights issues, such as autonomy and self-government vs. self-determination, the rights of indigenous peoples to land and natural resources and cultural rights and cultural heritage, indigenous traditional knowledge,
- local, national, regional and international governance issues,
- environmental law, climate change, security and environment implications of climate change, protected areas and species,
- regulatory, governance and management agreements and arrangements for marine environments, marine mammals, fisheries conservation and other biological/mineral/oil resources,
- law of the sea, the retreating sea ice, continental shelf claims,
- territorial claims and border disputes on both land and at sea,
- peace and security, dispute settlement,
- jurisdictional and other issues with regard to the exploration, exploitation and shipping of oil, gas and minerals, bio prospecting,
- trade law, potential shipping lines through the northwest and northeast passages, maritime law and transportation law, and
- the roles and actual involvement of international organizations in the Polar Regions, such as the Arctic Council, the Antarctic Treaty System, the European Union, the International Whaling Commission, the Nordic Council, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and the United Nations, as well as NGOs.
The papers in this volume are based on presentations at the 10th Polar Law Symposium, held in Rovaniemi in September 2017.