Culture – the foundation of Maori Governance

The structure of a governance system specifies the distribution of rights and responsibilities among different participants dictating the mutually agreed rules and procedures for making decisions on business affairs. For Maori, an indigenous people, the unique and pivotal factor that provides the point of difference, for governance, is the importance of their culture. Notwithstanding this point of difference, there exists a paucity of governance structures that adequately cater and provide for culture

Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues: Report on the thirteenth session (12-23 May 2014)

The Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues recommends to the Economic and Social Council the adoption of the following draft decisions: Draft decision I International expert group meeting on the theme “Dialogue on an optional protocol to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples” Draft decision II Venue and dates of the fourteenth session of the Permanent Forum Draft decision III Report of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues on its thirteenth session and provisional agenda for its fourteenth session Draft decision IV Change of name of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues Draft decision V Additional one-day meetin

Legal responses to mental health: Is therapeutic jurisprudence the answer – the experience in New Zealand

The orthodox understanding of ‘ethics’ encompasses a system of moral principles that define good and bad behavior. When applied to mental health, various jurisdictions, including New Zealand, have codified these principles together with the obligations on health service providers to meet these codified principles and standards. Underpinning this relationship is one of mutual trust where the physician has a responsibility, for example, to secure informed consent prior to any treatment. The existence of this therapeutic relationship can be applied when an offender who presents with a mental illness is subject to the criminal justice system

The issues of the criminal justice system and of resources in Aotearoa/New Zealand

Within the seven regions, recognized by the United Nations, various jurisdictions have acknowledged Indigenous rights within their respective constitutions. Although not explicit, some constitutional provisions, such as those included in the Norwegian Constitution, when read together with other articles, provide tentative opportunities for the implementation of an Indigenous legal system and an Indigenous court. Some Constitutions, such as that of Ecuador, are more explicit in providing constitutional recognition of an Indigenous legal system as well as rights to nature and, the interim Constitution of Nepal, courts for Indigenous Peoples

An indigenous voice at WIPO

The demands for the recognition of rights for Indigenous peoples over time has led to the emergence of a common body of opinion based on long standing principles of international human rights law and policy. The existence of these rights for Indigenous people is unequivocal. The road to recognition has been arduous. The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples [the Declaration] is the only international instrument that views Indigenous rights through an indigenous lens, crystallising many of the fundamental human rights of Indigenous peoples. The Declaration provides a framework and benchmark for the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues [the Permanent Forum]. This note reviews the background to the Declaration, and examines the role of the Permanent Forum, highlighting the connection between the two with a case study on intellectual property rights. It also offers comments about the future of Indigenous rights and the role of the Permanent Forum in promoting them

DO UNIVERSAL HUMAN RIGHTS PROMOTE INDIGENOUS RIGHTS?

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights proclaims a common standard of achievement for all peoples and nations. There is no specific reference to Maori or other Indigenous peoples. Recourse for a breach or non recognition of these universal human rights lie within an application to the relevant United Nation bodies. For Maori, there has always been an expectation that the rights and duties will be adhered to. This has not always been the case. Despite respected international human rights bodies finding that the actions of the New Zealand Government towards Maori are discriminatory this has not been heeded. For Pacific peoples, the effects of colonisation and past events suggest that any proposed regional human rights mechanism for the Pacific should be developed through an Indigenous lens. With an Indigenous starting point the mechanism can then draw not only on universal human rights but, more importantly it can also be sourced to core Pacific values. Nevertheless, any human rights mechanism for the Pacific peoples must be a culturally legitimate one to effectively promote and protect Pacific human rights.This conference has been generously sponsored by the School of Social and Political Sciences and the Sydney Law School, University of Sydney, in collaboration with the School of Law, University of Western Sydne

Indigenous Children and Youth: The Case of Marae Courts in Aotearoa/Newzealand

Marae-based Courts are an initiative of the Judiciary that builds on existing programmes for offenders such as Te Whanau Awhina, and informed by the Koori Courts in Australia. This is the first time that a New Zealand court has conducted criminal cases on a Marae within the jurisdiction of the Youth Court. Most offenders referred to the programme are Maori and the process incorporates Maori tikanga (Maori customs)

An Indigenous Pacific Human Rights Mechanism: Some Building Blocks

This article explores the possibility of  a Pacific regional human rights mechanism, in particular in regard to how the rights contained in such a mechanism should be framed. It provides a case study of the New Zealand seabed and foreshore legislation and its impact in New Zealand as well as the CERD Committee's reaction to the challenge to that legislation.  Secondly, the article using the case study as a starting point, discusses the importance of an indigenous "lens" to develop the composition of rights in a Pacific regional mechanism

Respecting and recognising Indigenous rights when challenged by commercial activities

The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples was hailed as a triumph among Indigenous peoples, signalling a long-awaited recognition of their fundamental human rights. Despite this, many violations of these basic rights continue, particularly in relation to extractive industries and business activities. In response, a business reference guide seeks to inform industries of their responsibilities. This article examines the tenuous relationship between Indigenous rights, state responsibilities and business expectations

Indigenous Rights Hollow Rights?

The Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (“the Declaration”) was the initiative of the Working Group on Indigenous Populations (“WGIP”). Established in 1982, the mandate of the WGIP was to develop international standards concerning Indigenous peoples’ rights. The Declaration was a manifestation of this mandate and a clear articulation of international standards on the rights of Indigenous peoples. It was not until 25 years later, in September 2007, that the final text was adopted by the General Assembly with a majority of 143 states in favour. Eleven states offered abstentions. Four states opposed adoption: Australia, Canada, the United States of America (“the United States”) and New Zealand