Self-determination for Aboriginal people in Australia has been a long sought after yet difficult objective to reach. The recently concluded Noongar Settlement in the state of Western Australia opens new opportunities and could potentially set a new benchmark for non-territorial autonomy and self-government for an Aboriginal community. The Noongar Settlement exceeds the more traditional settlements of a native title claim since it provides elaborate institutions for self-government albeit by way of private bodies corporate. The bodies corporate for the Noongar people would enable them to make and administer decisions; offer services; undertake management of public conservation areas; and advocate for the best interests of their community. This privatised form of self-government may not only provide new impetus to other land claim processes in Australia, it may also address the often-heard demands from Aboriginal people for a treaty to be entered into between themselves and the government of Australia.
Immigrants in the United States of America (usa) face challenges regarding the utilisation of healthcare services. Issues include difficulty to access healthcare services. Qualitative descriptive phenomenological design was used in the analysis. Data were collected using a semi-structured interview format with eight conveniently selected Eritrean immigrants living in Indianapolis. Data were analysed using Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis Framework for data analysis. The findings indicate that the cultural beliefs, socioeconomic status, immigration status of Eritrean emigrants and the policies related to financing healthcare services for migrants in Indianapolis have a huge impact on determining the utilisation of healthcare services by Eritrean immigrants in Indianapolis. It is concluded that there is limited access by Eritrean immigrants in Indianapolis to healthcare services. There is a need for policy revision regarding the financing of healthcare services for immigrants and the provision of services to improve access and accommodate cultural diversity.
Worldwide, 2.5 billion people today depend on lands managed through customary, community-based tenure systems. Although land and natural resources are recognised as essential elements for the realisation of many human rights, international human rights law does not recognise a human right to land, except for indigenous peoples. With the recent adoption of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Peasants and other people working in rural areas (undrop), the right to land is now recognised for new categories of rural workers. This article explores the governance of land and natural resources beyond the case of indigenous peoples’ rights. It argues that undrop contains key and mutually reinforcing elements of the human rights and collective action approaches to the governance of land and natural resources, and therefore has the potential to ensure the social and environmental ‘viability’ of the commons.
Hindu women’s limited right to inheritance in Bangladesh is a story of state-sponsored deprivation; a frustrating legacy of the political authority’s systematic indifference and failure in protecting minority women’s right to property for nearly half a century. Bangladesh, from its early decades, has experienced the resurgence of religion as one of the driving factors behind gender and minority-sensitive policy formulation and implementation. Under the veil of constitutional secularism, religion has become one of the most pervasive tools in the hands of the political authorities for methodical marginalisation of religious minority groups especially of Hindu community. Consequently, Bangladesh has failed to move forward with appropriate legislative measures for improving the present status of Hindu women’s right to property. This article argues that the underlying reasons behind such failure is intrinsically intertwined with power-centric electoral politics rather than normative socio-religious practices.
The aim of this article is to examine Turkey’s reservation to Article 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (iccpr) and to advance a plausible argument for its invalidity based upon the relevant secondary rules of international law.
Despite the constitutional and legislative guarantee to land in Uganda, customary land tenure seems to suffer from inadequate legal protection, a situation that is analogous to that in the colonial and the immediate post-independence era. This article critically examines the normative content of the constitutional and legislative right to land in Uganda and argues that the customary land right is not adequately protected as the other categories of land tenure, in which land is owned and legally recognised in Uganda. It also serves to illustrate that the inadequate protection of customary land rights is analogous to the situation in the colonial and immediate post-independence era, and that weak customary land rights could be susceptible to the occupants’ deprivation during land grabbing. There is a need to address this situation in order to holistically ensure and promote an effective land governance regime that respects and protect customary land tenure.
More than 75 per cent of the world’s known stateless belong to minorities. Building upon ethnographic research conducted between 2008–2017, this paper considers the case of ethnic Vietnamese minority populations in Cambodia. Members of this group are long-term residents, having been born and raised in the country for generations, with the exception of the period during the Khmer Rouge regime when they were forcibly deported to Vietnam. Since their return to Cambodia in the early 1980s, individuals from this group have been regarded by Cambodian authorities as ‘immigrants’. This paper examines how discriminatory policies, laws and administrative practices regulate individual and collective identities, while creating categories that determine social inclusion and exclusion. In doing so, this paper makes visible the ambivalence of law and rights – both as tools for the construction of exclusionary citizenship, but also as instruments which minorities to contest their social exclusion.
This article investigates the economic status of Christians in Syria and Egypt during the era of Presidents Hosni Mubarak (1981–2011) and Hafez al-Assad (1971–2000). As they were discriminated against politically, socially, religiously and culturally, this article answers the puzzle of why the Christians in Syria and Egypt did not face any discrimination at the economic level in the era of the aforementioned authoritarian regimes.
State accommodation of plural identity has remained very much subject to the contestations of a majority/minority paradigm, through which autonomy and tolerance are still negotiated and filtered. These social reconfigurations, including those oriented towards internal self-determination and minority rights regimes, reveal glimpses of a dark neo-colonial underbelly to state rule. A comparison between the Ottoman millet system and the Israeli control system illustrates that imperial modes of ‘divide and rule’, or ‘segmented pluralism’, continue to operate, and are sometimes even enhanced, through the deployment of minority rights. Using a selective Marxist reading, this paper will initially explore the parallels between imperial and modern state rule in the face of pluralism before discussing the methods used for hegemony-maintenance, including: segmentation; dependence; and cooptation. Finally, a socio-legal discussion on the ways in which the forces of hegemony are heavily guised and sustained will follow.