Author:
Federica Cittadino
Search for other papers by Federica Cittadino in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
Free access

Abstract:

In Incorporating Indigenous Rights in the International Regime on Biodiversity Protection Federica Cittadino convincingly interprets the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and its related instruments in light of indigenous rights and the principle of self-determination. Cittadino’s harmonisation of these formally separated regimes serves at least two main purposes. First, it ensures respect for the human rights framework that protects indigenous rights whilst implementing the biodiversity regime. Second, harmonisation allows for the full operationalisation of the indigenous related provisions of the CBD framework that concern traditional knowledge, genetic resources, and protected areas. Federica Cittadino successfully demonstrates that the CBD may allow for the protection of indigenous rights in ways that are more advanced than under current human rights law.

ICJ

  • Case concerning the Corfu Channel (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland v. Albania), Judgment (25 March 1948)

  • Case concerning Right of Passage over Indian Territory (Portugal v. India), Preliminary Objections, Judgment (26 November 1957)

  • Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (South West Africa) notwithstanding Security Council Resolution 276 (1970), Advisory opinion (21 June 1971)

  • Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America), Judgment (27 June 1986)

  • Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion (8 July 1996)

  • Case concerning the Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary v. Slovakia), Judgment (25 September 1997)

  • Case concerning East Timor (Portugal v. Australia), Judgment (30 June 2005)

  • Case concerning Armed Activities in the Territory of the Congo (drc v. Uganda), Judgment (19 December 2005)

  • Case concerning Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina v. Uruguay), Judgment (20 April 2010)

Arbitrations

  • Texaco Overseas Petroleum Company and California Asiatic Oil Company v. the Government of the Lybian Arab Republic (1977), 53 ilm 422

  • Iron Rhine Arbitration, Belgium v Netherlands (24 May 2005), Award, icgj 373 (pca 2005)

Human Rights Committee

  • Sandra Lovelace v. Canada, Communication No. 24/1977 (31 July 1980), UN Doc. CCPR/C/13/D/24/1977

  • Ivan Kitok v. Sweden, Communication No. 197/1985 (27 July 1988), UN Doc. CCPR/C/33/D/197/1985

  • Lubicon Lake Band v. Canada, Communication No. 167/1984 (26 March 1990), UN Doc. CCPR/C/38/D/167/1984

  • Ilmari Länsman et al. v. Finland, Communication No. 511/1992 (26 October 1994), UN Doc. CCPR/C/52/D/511/1992

  • Jouni E. Länsman et al. v. Finland, Communication No. 671/1995 (30 October 1996), UN Doc. CCPR/C/58/D/671/1995

  • Francis Hopu and Tepoaitu Bessert v. France, Communication No 549/1993 (29 July 1997), UN Doc. CCPR/C/60/D/549/1993/Rev.1

  • J.G.A. Diergaardt (late Captain of the Rehoboth Baster Community) et al. v. Namibia, Communication No. 760/1997 (6 September 2000), UN Doc. CCPR/C/69/D/760/1997

  • Apirana Mahuika et al. v. New Zealand, Communication No. 547/1993 (15 November 2000), UN Doc. CCPR/C/70/D/547/1993

  • Anni Äärelä and Jouni Näkkäläjärvi v. Finland, Communication No. 779/1997 (24 October 2001), UN Doc. CCPR/C/73/D/779/1997

  • Jouni Länsman, Eino Länsman and the Muotkatunturi Herdsmen’s Committee v. Finland, Communication No. 1023/2001 (17 March 2005), UN Doc. CCPR/C/83/D/1023/2001

  • George Howard v. Canada, Communication No. 879/1999 (26 July 2005), UN Doc. CCPR/C/84/D/879/1999

  • Ángela Poma Poma v. Peru, Communication No. 1457/2006 (27 March 2009), UN Doc. CCPR/C/95/D/1457/2006

cerd (Early Warning Procedure)

  • Decision on Suriname 3 (62), UN Doc. CERD/C/62/Dec/3 (3 June 2003)

  • Decision on New Zealand Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004 1 (66), UN Doc. CERD/C/DEC/NZL/1 (25 April 2005)

  • Decision on Suriname 1 (67), UN Doc. CERD/C/DEC/SUR/2 (18 August 2005)

  • Decision on United States of America 1 (68), UN Doc. CERD/C/USA/DEC/1 (11 April 2006)

  • Decision on Suriname 1 (69), UN Doc. CERD/C/DEC/SUR/5 (18 August 2006)

Inter-American Commission on Human Rights

  • Yanomami v. Brazil, Merits, Case 76/15, Resolution No. 12/85 (5 March 1985)

  • Village of Moiwana v. Suriname, Admissibility, Case 11,821, Report No. 26/00 (7 March 2000)

  • Mary and Carrie Dann v. United States, Merits, Case 11,140, Report No. 75/02 (27 December 2002)

  • Maya Indigenous Communities of the Toledo District v. Belize, Merits, Case 12,053, Report No. 40/04 (12 October 2004)

  • Community of San Mateo de Huanchor and its members v. Peru, Petition 504/03, Admissibility, Report No. 69/04 (15 October 2004)

  • Garífuna Community of ‘Triunfo de la Cruz’ and its Members v. Honduras, Admissibility, Petition 906-03, Report No. 29/06 (14 May 2006)

  • Kuna Indigenous People of Madungandi and Embera Indigenous People of Bayano and Their Members v. Panama, Merits, Case 12,354, Report No. 125/12 (13 November 2012)

Inter-American Court on Human Rights

  • Case of the Mayagna (Sumo) Awas Tingni Community v. Nicaragua, Merits, Reparations and Costs, Judgment, Case No. 11,577 (31 August 2001)

  • Case of the Moiwana Community v. Suriname, Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs, Judgment, Case No. 11,821 (15 June 2005)

  • Case of the Yakye Axa Indigenous Community v. Paraguay, Merits, Reparations and Costs, Judgment, Case No. 12,313 (17 June 2005)

  • Case of Sawhoyamaxa Indigenous Community v. Paraguay, Merits, Reparations and Costs, Judgment, Series C No. 146 (29 March 2006)

  • Case of the Saramaka People v. Suriname, Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs, Judgment, Case No. 12,338 (28 November 2007)

  • Case of the Saramaka People v. Suriname, Interpretation of the Judgment of Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs, Judgment, Case No. 12,338 (12 August 2008)

  • Case of the Xákmok Kásek Indigenous Community v. Paraguay, Merits, Reparations, and Costs, Judgment, Case No. 12,440 (24 August 2010)

  • Case of the Kichwa Indigenous People of Sarayaku v. Ecuador, Merits and Reparations, Judgment, Case No. 12,465 (27 June 2012)

  • Comunidad Garífuna de Punta Piedra and its Members v. Honduras, Case No. 12,548, Merits, Judgment (8 October 2015)

  • Case of Kaliña and Lokono v. Suriname, Judgment, Merits, Reparations and Costs, Case No. 12,639 (25 November 2015)

African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights

  • Social and Economic Rights Action Centre and Centre for Economic and Social Rights v. Nigeria, Communication No. 155/96 (27 October 2001)

  • Centre for Minority Rights Development (Kenya) and Minority Rights Group International on behalf of Endorois Welfare Council v. Kenya, Communication No. 276/2003 (25 November 2009)

African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights

  • African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights v. Republic of Kenya, Application No. 006/2012, Judgment (26 May 2017)

European Commission on Human Rights

  • Halvar From v. Sweden, Application No. 34776/97 (4 March 1998)

  • Könkämä and 38 other Saami villages v. Sweden, Application No. 27033/95 (25 November 2006)

ecthr

  • G. and E. v. Norway, Applications No. 9278/81 and 9415/81 (3 October 1983)

  • López Ostra v. Spain, Application No. 16798/90 (9 December 1994)

  • Guerra and Others v. Italy, Application No. 14967/89 (19 February 1998)

  • Kyrtakos v. Greece, Application no. 41666/98 (22 May 2003)

  • Johtti Sapmelaccat Ry and others v. Finland, Application No. 42969/98 (18 January 2005)

  • Hingitaq 53 and others v. Denmark, Application No.18584/04 (12 January 2006)

  • Hamer v. Belgium, Application No. 21861/03 (27 November 2007)

  • Tatar v. Romania, Application No. 67021/01 (27 January 2009)

  • Handölsdalen Sami Village v. Sweden, Application No. 39013/04 (17 February 2009)

  • Chagos Islanders v. UK, Application No. 35622/04 (11 December 2012)

National Courts

  • Supreme Court of Canada, Calder v. Attorney-General of British Columbia, [1973] SCR 313

  • High Court of New Zealand, Te Weehi v. Regional Fisheries Officer (19 August 1986), [1986] 1 NZLR 680

  • Supreme Court of Australia, Mabo v. Queensland (No. 1) (1988) 166 CLR 188

  • Supreme Court of Australia, Mabo v. Queensland (No. 2) (1992) 175 CLR 1

  • Supreme Court of Philippines, Minors Oposa v. Secretary of Department of the Environment and Natural Resources 33 ILM 173 (1994)

  • Supreme Court of Canada, Delgamuukw v. British Columbia, [1997] 3 SCR 1010 (11 December 1997)

  • Supreme Court of Canada, Reference re Secession of Quebec (20 August 1998), (1998) 2 SCR 217

  • Sapporo District Court, Kayano et al. v. Hokkaido Expropriation Committee (27 March 1997), (1999) 38 ILM 397

  • Supreme Court of the Philippines, Isagani Cruz and Cesar Europa v. Secretary of Environment and Natural Resources, Secretary of Budget and Management and Chairman and Commissioners of the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples, GR No. 135385 (6 December 2000)

  • High Court of Australia, Commonwealth v. Yarmirr (11 October 2001), [2001] HCA 56

  • Constitutional Court of South Africa, Richtersveld Community and Others v. Alexkor Ltd and Another, Case No. CCT 19/03 (14 October 2003), [2003] ZACC 18

  • Federal Court of Australia, Attorney-General of the Northern Territory v. Ward (9 December 2003), [2003] FCAFC 283

  • Supreme Court of Canada, Haida Nation v. British Columbia (Minister of Forests), [2004] 3 SCR 511

  • Supreme Court of Canada, Taku River Tlingit First Nation v. British Columbia (Project Assessment Director), [2004] 3 SCR 550

  • Supreme Court of Belize, Aurelio Cal, in his own behalf and on behalf of the Maya Village of Santa Cruz, et al. v. The Attorney General of Belize and the Minister of Natural Resources and the Environment, Claim No. 171/2007 (18 October 2007)

  • High Court of Australia, Northern Territory of Australia v. Arnhem Land Aboriginal Land Trust (30 July 2008), [2008] HCA 29

  • Supreme Court of Sweden, Nordmaling case, Case No. T 4028-07 (27 April 2011), 109 NJA 2011

  • Collapse
  • Expand