金砖国家的土著人民保护体系:法律和诉讼支持概述

Elena Gladun, Maksim Zadorin
{"title":"金砖国家的土著人民保护体系:法律和诉讼支持概述","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":"{\"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}","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

摘要

本文概述了金砖国家成员国在保护土著人民权利方面的国际义务,并讨论了这些国家的民族国家政策的当前趋势。作者得出的结论是,尽管大多数金砖国家都是基本人权协议的缔约国,但在金砖国家框架内,没有关于保护土著人民的全面协议,专门解决土著人民的权利问题,尽管这些国家都有土著社区。与西方国家组成的欧洲-大西洋集团相比,金砖国家不愿在现有协议下承担义务的主要原因之一是,这些国家的民族文化“调色板”五花八门,这使得这一法律关系领域的公共管理变得复杂。印度和中国都是国际劳工组织第107号公约的缔约国,该公约规定了土著居民的“家长制”和“一体化”,但没有明确承认他们的“自决权”和在这种权利框架内的发展权。金砖国家与民族政治相关的主要问题是提供法律框架和诉讼支持,以维护自我认同的权利,保护母语和保存自然资源的传统用途。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
The System of Indigenous Peoples’ Protection in BRICS States: An Overview of Legal and Litigation Support
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.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1