{"title":"The System of Indigenous Peoples’ Protection in BRICS States: An Overview of Legal and Litigation Support","authors":"Elena Gladun, Maksim Zadorin","doi":"10.21684/2412-2343-2023-10-4-121-141","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article provides an overview of the international obligations of the BRICS member states related to the protection of indigenous peoples’ rights, as well as discusses the current trends in the ethno-national policies of those countries. The authors arrive at the conclusion that though the majority of the BRICS states are parties to the basic human rights agreements, there is no full-fledged agreement on the protection of indigenous peoples within the BRICS framework specifically addressing the rights of indigenous people, even though the countries collectively have aboriginal communities. One of the primary and major reasons why the BRICS countries are reluctant to assume obligations under the existing agreements compared to the Euro-Atlantic bloc of Western states is the motley ethno-cultural “palette” of these countries, which complicates public administration in this area of legal relations. Both India and China are state parties to the International Labor Organization Convention 107, which provides for “paternalism” and “integration” of the indigenous population without explicitly recognizing their “right to self-determination” and development within the framework of this right. The main problems associated with ethnopolitics in the BRICS countries are those pertaining to the provision of legal frameworks and litigation support to uphold the right to self-identification, protection of the native language and the preservation of traditional uses of natural resources.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-12-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21684/2412-2343-2023-10-4-121-141","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This article provides an overview of the international obligations of the BRICS member states related to the protection of indigenous peoples’ rights, as well as discusses the current trends in the ethno-national policies of those countries. The authors arrive at the conclusion that though the majority of the BRICS states are parties to the basic human rights agreements, there is no full-fledged agreement on the protection of indigenous peoples within the BRICS framework specifically addressing the rights of indigenous people, even though the countries collectively have aboriginal communities. One of the primary and major reasons why the BRICS countries are reluctant to assume obligations under the existing agreements compared to the Euro-Atlantic bloc of Western states is the motley ethno-cultural “palette” of these countries, which complicates public administration in this area of legal relations. Both India and China are state parties to the International Labor Organization Convention 107, which provides for “paternalism” and “integration” of the indigenous population without explicitly recognizing their “right to self-determination” and development within the framework of this right. The main problems associated with ethnopolitics in the BRICS countries are those pertaining to the provision of legal frameworks and litigation support to uphold the right to self-identification, protection of the native language and the preservation of traditional uses of natural resources.