NewsletterThe ILO and Indigenous and Tribal Peoples

April 2005

ContentsContents 2I. INTRODUCTION 3ILO web pages on indigenous and tribal peoples 3Editorial: The ILO and indigenous rights - the road ahead 4

II. INTERNATIONAL AND INTERREGIONAL ACTIVITIES 6Indigenous peoples and MDGs 6Indigenous and tribal peoples and Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs): policy issues and challenges 7Studies on indigenous peoples and poverty reduction strategies in Cambodia and Cameroon 9Time to end forced labour in Andean countries 10Workshop on Free Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) and Indigenous Peoples 11Indigenous Fellowship Programme 12Interview with Yuuki Hasegawa, Ainu, Japan, and Tony Khular, Lamkang, India, who participated in the ILO fellowship programme 2004: 12

III. COUNTRIES AND REGIONS 15n Asia 15

ILO Convention No. 169 and peace-building in Nepal 15Community driven development in the Philippines 16Testing indigenous community-driven education approaches against child labour in the Philippines 16Decent employment for tribal peoples in India 16Improving the legislative and policy environment for indigenous peoples in Cambodia 17Case study on ILO work and indigenous peoples in Cambodia 18

n Africa 18

Project to examine indigenous customary law in Morocco 18Legal protection of indigenous rights in Cameroon 19Upcoming: National workshop in Yaoundé, Cameroon, June 2005 20

n Latin America and the Caribbean 20

IPEC and indigenous children in Latin America and the Caribbean 20Understanding child labour in indigenous communities, Peru and Costa Rica 21Indigenous children in the domestic service sector, Guatemala 21Eliminating the worst forms of child labour through education, Honduras 21Prevention and elimination of child labour in the Mayan villages of Toledo, Belize 21

IV. CONTACT 23

2

3

IntroductionI. INTRODUCTIONThe International Labour Organization (ILO) is the UN specialized agency which seeks the promotion ofsocial justice and internationally recognized human and labour rights. It was founded in 1919 andbecame the first specialized agency of the UN in 1946. The ILO has a unique tripartite structure withworkers and employers participating as equal partners with governments in its governing organs. The ILOformulates international labour standards in the form of Conventions and Recommendations, and provides technical assistance that is linked to these standards.

The ILO has adopted two international legal instruments that pertain specifically to indigenous and tribal peoples: The Indigenous and Tribal Populations Convention, 1957 (No. 107) and the Indigenousand Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (No. 169). Convention No. 107 is no longer open for ratification,but remains in force for 18 countries 1. Convention No. 169 has been ratified by 17 countries 2 and isinternationally recognized as the foremost instrument on the subject. It covers a wide range of issues,including land rights, access to natural resources, health, education, vocational training, conditions of employment and contacts across borders.

The ILO has been working with indigenous peoples since the 1920s. Besides adopting the twoConventions on indigenous and tribal peoples’ rights and supervising their application, the ILO is engaged in a broad range of activities that address issues pertaining to these peoples. This newsletterinforms about ILO activities that promote indigenous and tribal peoples’ rights around the world and putsthis information in the context of the broader work of the ILO and the UN system.

ILO web pages on indigenous and tribal peoples The ILO maintains a comprehensive website on indigenous and tribal peoples, which is now available inEnglish, Spanish and French (http://www.ilo.org/indigenous). This site contains a wide range of information on ILO standards relevant to these peoples as well as their implementation and supervision.It also contains links to the web pages of individual ILO projects and programmes, such as the INDIS-CO Programme, PRO 169, and the ILO office in Costa Rica’s indigenous web pages. Through these webpages, a considerable number of publications are accessible, among them the Manual on Convention No. 169, ILO submissions on indigenous issues to UN bodies, as well as various studies and other relevant materials on issues related to indigenous peoples.

Supervision of ILO Conventions Besides Conventions Nos. 107 and 169, a number of other ILO Standards are of relevance to indigenous and tribal peoples. These include, but are not limited to: the Forced Labour Convention,1930 (No. 29); the Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111), theWorst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999 (No. 182); and the Declaration on FundamentalPrinciples and Rights at Work.

The ILO Constitution requires member States to submit periodic reports on the measures taken to applyratified Conventions. The Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations(CEACR), a body of 20 independent experts, examines these reports. Its comments take the form ofobservations or direct requests which governments are thus committed to follow. Observations are theCEACR’s public comments on the application of ILO Conventions. They highlight areas of progress aswell as areas of concern. They might also ask for further information on certain topics. Observations arepublished every year in book format, and on the internet. In contrast, direct requests are sent directly tothe government in question and are made public later. In addition to the regular reporting, the ILO alsohas a number of special procedures to deal with alleged violations of ratified Conventions. Further detailscan be found on the ILO’s indigenous and tribal peoples website at http://www.ilo.org/ /indigenous andon the ILO’s database ILOLEX at http://www.ilo.org/ilolex/.

n 1 Angola, Bangladesh, Belgium, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Egypt, El Salvador, Ghana, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, India, Iraq,Malawi, Pakistan, Panama, Portugal, Syrian Arab Republic and Tunisia.

n 2 Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Denmark, Dominica, Ecuador, Fiji, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico,Netherlands, Norway, Paraguay, Peru and Venezuela

Editorial: The ILO and indigenous rights - the road aheadAs I move from many years of being directly responsible for questions relating to indigenous and tribalpeoples, to a looser association with the subject in my new job, my first impulse is to talk about whatwe have achieved in this fascinating field. And indeed, a great deal has happened: the adoption ofConvention No. 169, a new consciousness of the place and role of indigenous and tribal peoples in societies around the world, increasing account taken inside the ILO of the special needs, requirementsand contributions of these peoples in the process of national development – a great deal indeed.

But the more I thought about it the more I wanted to say something about the future of the subject. TheILO has been the lead agency on the situation of indigenous and tribal peoples since the early 1950s,and while attention to the subject has wavered from time to time, the ILO is still in the lead. What doesthis demand of us?

First of all, it demands continued attention to mainstreaming this issue. This has been a subject of somequestioning by some of our constituents, as indigenous issues do not fall easily within an industrial relations framework – why does the ILO deal with land rights? Why do we deal with bilingual education?And of course there are several answers to these questions.3 One is that the ILO has been given a mandate by the UN system, endorsed by the Conference in 1957 and again in 1989, to adopt standardson behalf of the whole system, on a subject the UN has conspicuously failed to advance. But another isthat indigenous and tribal peoples everywhere in the world are the ILO’s constituents. They are workers,usually in the informal economy – and if they have entered monetary economies they are the most excluded, most exploited workers in every country where they live. This is not a marginal issue for work,or for poverty, or for development – it is core.

The In-focus Programme to Promote the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work(Declaration) and the International Programme on the Elimination of Child Labour (IPEC), as well asother parts of the house, have found that when they are looking at discrimination, forced labour or childlabour, in much of the world they are looking at indigenous peoples. It is time we made a more thoroughand systematic examination of how this affects employment policy, gender equality, safety and health,conditions of work, social security, contributions to achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDG),statistics, application of Conventions on other subjects… all the subjects where our concerns ought tobe concentrated on the worst off.

Second, we must continue to exercise a lead role in the international community. ILO standards are theonly ones adopted on this issue since the beginning of the ILO and the League of Nations. ConventionNo. 169 is therefore – and perhaps also because it is a pretty good instrument – the basis for standardsand policies adopted by the World Bank, the Asian and American Development Banks, the UNDP, theEuropean Commission, several governments, and still others. The ILO has been key in the Inter-AgencySupport Group for Indigenous Affairs (IASG), and in making the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues(UNPFII) a functioning body. We have taken on a responsibility in the international community, and weshould continue to exercise it.

We also have a responsibility to the 350 million or so indigenous and tribal peoples in the world. Overthe last 15 years I have been to meetings of indigenous and tribal peoples where participants arrivedwith battered copies of the Convention in languages I had never heard of, carefully tucked into theirpockets. Tribal people in countries where their governments do not admit the concept of “indigenous”look to us as the only possibility for them to claim the rights being discussed in the UN under that narrow label. NGOs with no formal access to the ILO search for ways to get their information before us.

And an increasing number of governments are coming to the ILO for help in developing policies to copewith a growing awareness that their countries are multicultural and multiethnic. Often it is done quiet-ly, sometimes with more fanfare – but it is a steady progression. And we find that governments some-times approach us and ask us to carry out development of policies for indigenous and tribal peoples, andthat they will contribute to it.

The promotion of indigenous and tribal peoples’ rights is a subject of endless fascination, but insufficient resources. I am grateful that many colleagues have understood the roles of the Convention,and the importance of the subject, in advancing the ILO’s wider agenda. We have not yet had the impactwe should have, and in many parts of the world the situation of indigenous and tribal peoples is moreunder threat than it was when Convention No. 169 was adopted. But in many other countries – in fact,often in the same countries – advocates for development and human rights know where they can turn forinspiration, and often for help.Keep at it colleagues. There’s a long way to go.

Lee Swepston

n Lee Swepston is Senior Adviser on Human Rights in the ILO. Until 1 March 2005 he was Chief of the Equality andEmployment Branch of the International Labour Standards Department, and Coordinator for Human Rights. From 1973 to 2005 he was responsible for supervision of the ILO's Conventions on indigenous and tribal peoples, among others; and wasclosely involved in the adoption of Convention No. 169 in 1989.

n 3 In 1985 when the Governing Body decided to include the adoption of Convention No. 169 on the Conference agenda,Mr. Blanchard called me behind the podium to meet with his much more senior advisers. One of them said, “But DirectorGeneral, they can’t have decided this. There is no constituency for it in the ILO!” And the Director-Generalreplied, “Si - moi.” The Conference discussions in 1988 and 1989 showed that in fact he was not alone.

4

PRO 169 and its priority areas for the coming years

This newsletter has been prepared by the ILO’s Project to Promote ILO Policy on Indigenous and TribalPeoples (PRO 169). The primary aim of PRO 169 is to ensure the promotion and protection of indigenous and tribal peoples’ human rights through legislative and policy development based on ILOstandards, and through capacity-building for these peoples. The project commenced in 1996 and isfinanced by Danish Development Assistance (DANIDA). The principal geographical focus of the projectis on Africa and Asia.

PRO 169 has defined a number of priority areas for the coming years. Associated initiatives will aim topromote indigenous and tribal peoples’ rights through implementation of the principles of ILOConvention No. 169.

n The first priority addresses the issue of indigenous rights at a global scale through the documentationand exchange of good practices for implementation of Convention No. 169. The experiences of the ILOclearly indicate that a focus on good practices and lessons learned from practical implementation is crucial for achieving a fruitful dialogue with governments on indigenous issues. In order to build a con-structive argument to promote national, regional and international dialogue, and to advance the applica-tion of fundamental principles of the Convention, there is an urgent need to document existing experi-ences and good practices related to implementation, with special reference to the principles of consul-tation and participation. The lessons learned and good practices emerging from these cases willbe broadly disseminated and discussed among key actors in Africa, Asia and Latin America.

n The second priority addresses the situation of indigenous peoples in the African region, by supportingthe African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR) in its groundbreaking work on indigenous issues in the African context. ILO support to the ACHPR will be in the context of research onconstitutions and legislation in African countries and a subsequent analysis of the need for further protection of indigenous rights, including the special needs of indigenous children and women. In co-operation with the ACHPR, the ILO will promote a regional dialogue to discuss the main results of theresearch and define follow-up initiatives at regional and national levels, including identification of specific needs for technical assistance to be addressed by the ILO. The ILO will pay special attention tothe involvement of indigenous women in the dialogues.

n The third priority has been identified as training. The ILO will engage in training at both headquartersand regional levels, in order to address the specific capacity-building needs of indigenous organizations,governments and ILO staff at different levels of intervention. In addition, the Project will strengthen itscontribution to the Indigenous Fellowship Programme of the Office of the United Nations HighCommissioner for Human Rights.

n The fourth priority aims at building the capacity of governments and indigenous institutions inCameroon, Cambodia, India, Nepal and Bangladesh, to ensure the implementation of the principles ofrelevant ILO Conventions on indigenous and tribal peoples’ rights (Nos. 107 and 169). In some of thecountries, the activities will address the ethnic dimension of conflict situations and seek solutions at thenational level to tackle social exclusion of indigenous peoples, thus contributing to lasting peace andstability.

5

6

International andinterregional activitiesII. INTERNATIONAL AND INTERREGIONAL ACTIVITIES

Indigenous peoples and MDGsThe MDGs are derived from the Millennium Declaration, which recognizes and reaffirms human rightstreaties, implying that a State cannot achieve the MDGs while disregarding human rights principles,including the principle of non-discrimination. Indigenous and tribal peoples have been largely absentfrom the process of developing strategies and indicators as well as that of monitoring and reporting progress for achieving the MDGs. The Inter-Agency Support Group on Indigenous Issues (IASG), a groupcomprised of various UN programmes, departments and agencies including the ILO, is concerned thatthis omission may lead to the exclusion of indigenous peoples from sharing the benefits of the MDGsand may in fact impact adversely on their communities. As a contribution to the Fourth Session of theUNPFII, the IASG has prepared a position paper that outlines the specific challenges related to indigenous peoples’ development and the steps necessary to ensure that these peoples benefit fromgeneral progress towards the MDGs. Some of the issues highlighted in the paper are that:

n National economies and societies stand to gain from ending the marginalization of indigenous peoples;

n Rights-based approaches and good governance are key issues for achieving the MDGs for indigenous peoples;

n The alignment of the MDGs with indigenous rights and priorities necessitates participatory needsassessments and the development of specific indigenous peoples’ strategies for reaching the MDGs;

n Indigenous peoples should be fully involved in the discussion, definition, monitoring and evaluation of strategies to achieve the MDGs; and

n The establishment of mechanisms for consultation and participation that build on the fundamental principles of free and prior informed consent and full participation in the development process is the starting point for undertaking participatory needs assessments and devel-oping indigenous strategies for achieving and monitoring the MDGs.

The ILO and the Millennium Development Goals (MDG)The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) were developed by the UN Development Group based on theadoption of the Millennium Declaration in 2000 by the UN General Assembly. They comprise eight specific goals to be attained through development policies within a specified time-frame. For eachgoal one or more targets have been set, most for 2015, using 1990 as a benchmark:

n Goal 1. Eradicate extreme poverty and hungern Goal 2. Achieve universal primary education n Goal 3. Promote gender equality and empower womenn Goal 4. Reduce child mortalityn Goal 5. Improve maternal healthn Goal 6. Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseasesn Goal 7. Ensure environmental sustainabilityn Goal 8. Develop a global partnership for developmentThe ILO is greatly involved in the MDG process and the organization’s specific reporting role focuses onthe Goals 3 and 8. The ILO has also participated in the Millennium Project’s UN Expert Group, mainlythrough its involvement in Task Force 1 (Poverty and Economic Development) and Task Force 3 (PrimaryEducation and Gender Equality). In addition, the ILO has commented extensively on the UN MillenniumProject’s draft report "A Global Plan to Achieve the Millennium Development Goals", which was submitted to the UN Secretary-General in January 2005.

7

The World Commission on the Social Dimension of GlobalizationThe ILO’s commitment to the rights of indigenous peoples was forcefully reasserted through the WorldCommission on the Social Dimension of Globalization. This commission was established by the ILO inFebruary 2002 and released its report, A Fair Globalization: Creating Opportunities for All in February2004. Among other things, the report highlights that indigenous peoples have suffered severely, wheretheir integration into the global economy occurred without their free and prior informed consent andwithout adequate protection of their rights, livelihoods, and culture. It points out that there is an urgentneed to recognize and defend the rights of indigenous and tribal peoples to their territories and resources, their cultures and identity, their traditional knowledge and their right to self-determination.The authors of the report conclude that “there is a critical need for both national and local authoritiesto ensure that the rights of indigenous peoples are protected and discrimination against them is eliminated, including the effective implementation of legislation where it exists, and the development ofappropriate legislation where it is absent”. On 2 December 2004, the UN General Assembly adopted byconsensus a resolution that calls on Member States and UN organizations to consider the Commission’sreport within the framework of the high-level review of the Millennium Declaration in 2005. This initiative brings the concern for indigenous peoples’ rights into the mainstream of the debate about howto achieve a fully inclusive and equitable globalization, and puts the promotion of these rights high onthe agenda of the ILO.

The position paper can be found on the UNPFII’s website: http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/

Birgitte Feiring

n UN Millennium ProjectThe final report of the UN Millennium Project, an independent advisory body to the UN Secretary-General, was presented to Secretary-General Annan on 17 January 2005. It contains an operational framework that is intended to allow even the poorest countries to achieve the Millennium DevelopmentGoals by 2015. Unlike earlier drafts, it contains a number of important references that highlight theimportance of a special focus on the needs and rights of indigenous and tribal peoples in MDG-basedstrategies. The report and associated material can be found on the Millennium Project’s website:http://www.unmillenniumproject.org/.

Indigenous and tribal peoples and Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs): policy issues and challengesIndigenous peoples represent about 5 percent of the world’s population, but over 15 percent of thepoor 4. The incidence of extreme poverty is higher among them than among other social groups, and gen-erally, they benefit much less than others from overall declines in poverty. Indigenous and tribal women experience the same disadvantages as their male peers, but often encounter additional barriers relatedto their gender and age. As a result, the deprivations they experience are often harsher than those ofindigenous men.

The widening of ethnic inequalities in countries where indigenous and tribal peoples live demonstratesthat conventional anti-poverty policies fail to tackle the social and economic exclusion facing these peoples. This must be redressed not only for their own benefit, but also for reasons of social equity andpolicy effectiveness. This requires that social and economic policies recognize and accommodate indigenous and tribal peoples’ needs, aspirations and rights. As distinct peoples, they have special rights(group rights) that include, among others, the right to be different and to influence decisions affectingtheir livelihoods and future.

Since 1999 Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSP) have become the overall framework for lending,debt relief and development cooperation in low-income countries. They are intended to contribute to theachievement of the MDGs in the countries concerned. The processes leading to the definition of national PRSPs are intended to be open and participatory and to reach out to “traditionally marginalizedgroups”. Related guidelines, however, are silent on involving indigenous and tribal peoples.

n 4 World Bank: Implementation of Operational Directive 4.20 on Indigenous peoples: an independent desk review, ReportNo. 25332, January 10, 2003, Operations Evaluation Department, Country Evaluation and Regional Relations (OEDCR),World Bank (Washington D. C).

DECLARATION Adopted in 1998, the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work is an expressionof commitment by governments, employers' and workers' organizations to uphold basic human values.

The Declaration covers four areas: n Freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining; n The elimination of forced and compulsory labour; n The abolition of child labour; andn The elimination of discrimination in the workplace.

The Declaration commits Member States to respect and promote principles and rights in these four cat-egories, whether or not they have ratified the relevant Conventions. The Declaration makes it clear thatthese rights are universal, and that they apply to all people in all States - regardless of the level of eco-nomic development. It particularly mentions groups with special needs, including the unemployed andmigrant workers. It recognizes that economic growth alone is not enough to ensure equity, social progressand to eradicate poverty.

The Declaration and its Follow-up provide three ways to help countries, employers and workers achievethe full realisation of the Declaration’s objectives. Firstly, there is an Annual Review composed of reportsfrom countries that have not yet ratified one or more of the ILO Conventions that directly relate to thespecific principles and rights stated in the Declaration. Next, the Global Report each year provides adynamic global picture of the current situation of the principles and rights expressed in the Declaration.Technical co-operation projects - the third way to give effect to the Declaration - are designed to addressidentifiable needs in relation to the Declaration and to strengthen local capacities thereby translatingprinciples into practice.

In the framework of the Follow-up action on the Elimination of Discrimination at Work, the ILO is final-izing an ethnic “audit” of PRSPs in 14 countries. The goal of the audit is to ascertain whether and howthe rights, needs and aspirations of indigenous and tribal peoples have been taken into account andwhether they have been involved in the consultations leading to the formulation of PRSPs.

The 14 countries include: Bangladesh, Bolivia, Cambodia, Guyana, Honduras, Kenya, Lao PDR, Nepal,Nicaragua, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Tanzania, Vietnam and Zambia. Preliminary findings show that there aresignificant differences in terms of whether and how indigenous questions are addressed, both betweenregions, and between countries within regions. Where legal frameworks recognize indigenous peoples’group rights, and institutions and policies respecting and accommodating cultural diversity have beendeveloped, PRSPs are more likely to address the structural causes of indigenous and tribal peoples’poverty and social exclusion. The organization and political assertiveness and mobilization of these peo-ples are other key factors.

The Latin American PRSPs clearly identify the areas that are key to indigenous peoples’ development:the demarcation and titling of the lands traditionally occupied by them; bilingual and intercultural education; and indigenous self-government. The relative size of indigenous populations in the countriesdetermines whether an ethnic mainstreaming approach is pursued or targeted interventions are promot-ed instead. The ratification of ILO Convention No. 169 appears to enhance the likelihood that indige-nous questions be addressed coherently from poverty diagnostics to policy prescriptions.

In Africa, the debate on the identification of indigenous peoples is still at a very early stage. However,there have been some recent encouraging developments in that region. The African PRSPs, to varyingdegrees, are beginning to recognize that large-scale cultivation and irrigation, national boundaries,tourism and the establishment of nature and game reserves are undermining the freedom to graze live-stock over large tracts of land and access to water, which is essential for indigenous pastoralists.

In Asia, the PRSPs range from demonstrating indifference or only a passing concern for indigenous and tribal peoples’ social and political exclusion, to a genuine concern for their unequal development inrelation to other social groups.

Despite these differences, all regions share some common challenges. These include:

n The development and inclusion of poverty indicators that reflect indigenous notions of poverty andwell-being, the present poverty indicators are heavily informed by conventional notions of poverty thatreflect dominant groups’ views about adequacy and inadequacy;

8

n The development, in partnership with indigenous organizations, of consultation methods aimed at ensuring a well-informed and meaningful exchange of views on the content of PRSPs as far as indigenouspeoples are concerned; and

n Capacity-building for indigenous organizations and government authorities on how to engage in localdevelopment planning, implementation and monitoring that is responsive to the aspirations, needs andrights of indigenous peoples. Decentralization has a great potential for narrowing the differences inopportunities and assets between the indigenous and non-indigenous populations. But this requiresunderstanding that greater equality for indigenous and tribal peoples and social inclusion entails differentialtreatment.

This study is intended to be the first step of a longer, multi-staged process. It constitutes an initial, limited (both in scope and depth) assessment, based on a desk audit, of the extent to which indigenousand tribal peoples and their concerns have been incorporated into PRSPs. The intention is to proposefurther work at national and international levels to fill gaps in knowledge and develop sound policy recommendations. Follow-up activities could include:

n Studies requiring more detailed analysis and research;

n Testing of indigenous specific indicators in a set of key countries;

n Development and testing of methodologies for culturally-sensitive and meaningful consultations ondevelopment and anti-poverty policies with indigenous and tribal communities or organizations; and

n Consultations with national governments, the World Bank and other UN agencies, and bilateral donorsthat have a role to play in PRSP processes.

This “ethnic audit” is part of the ILO’s contribution to the Fourth Session of the UNPFII.

Manuela Tomei

Studies on indigenous peoples and poverty reduction strategies in Cambodia and CameroonIn order to supplement the ethnic audit of PRSPs, PRO 169 has supported two case studies onCambodia and Cameroon to:

n Document indigenous and tribal peoples’ own perceptions of poverty and poverty reduction strategiesand existing gaps, similarities and contradictions with national poverty reduction efforts; and

n Give recommendations for follow-up to ensure the consultation and participation of indigenous peoples in national poverty reduction efforts.

At the country level, the case studies are being undertaken in collaboration with indigenous communities andorganizations, and co-ordinated by the Centre for Advanced Study, and the Centre pour l’environnement et ledéveloppement respectively. Within this overall framework, the two country case studies aim to:

n Assess the extent of indigenous participation in the formulation of the PRSP (taking account of menand women in this process);

n Analyse the relevance of the PRSP for indigenous and tribal peoples (including an analysis of indigenouspeoples’ own perceptions of poverty);

n Develop recommendations on indigenous and tribal peoples’ consultation and participation in povertyreduction efforts; and

n Identify capacity-building needs in respect of indigenous participation in the PRSP (this may includecapacity-building for indigenous peoples, government, NGOs and other relevant actors).

The main methodology for both case studies is culturally appropriate consultations with selected indigenouscommunities to gather their views on:

n Indigenous concepts and notions of poverty

9

n Indigenous indicators of poverty

n Indigenous strategies to combat poverty

n Effect of poverty alleviation programs on indigenous communities (including different impacts on menand women)

n Consultations and participation in national poverty reduction efforts.

n Use of indigenous knowledge in poverty reduction strategies

Based on some preliminary findings, it is clear that the PRSP processes examined have not taken intoconsideration indigenous and tribal peoples’ own perceptions of poverty, or their own strategies foraddressing poverty. It has also been brought to the fore that, without adequate consultation and partic-ipation of these peoples in the PRSP process, strategies to address poverty among indigenous peopleswill not be in a position to take into account their cultural specificities. This creates a risk that povertyreduction strategies aimed at these peoples will fail. Any poverty reduction strategy aimed at indigenousand tribal peoples should also take into account the collective aspects of their rights, and their humanrights situation, with specific reference to land and resource rights, labour and employment rights, cul-tural rights and rights to participate in the public life of the States in which they live. It should also takeinto consideration the pervasive discrimination against these peoples, and the effect that this might haveon their ability to participate in processes that affect them.

Follow-up to the case-studies will be ensured within the context of ongoing ILO activities in Cambodiaand Cameroon.

Francesca Thornberry

Time to end forced labour in Andean countriesA number of Andean countries are now putting in place stronger policies to eradicate debt bondage andother forms of forced labour 5 to which indigenous people are too often subjected. These measuresdemonstrate the commitment towards fundamental principles and rights at work and towards a fair glob-alisation based on decent work for all. An ILO special action programme to combat forced labour (SAP-FL) is supporting governments and social partners in their effort to document and eliminate forcedlabour.

In Peru, a recent investigation has confirmed the existence of forced labour in the context of illegal log-ging activities in the Departments of Ucayali and Madre de Dios – which are located in the country’sAmazon basin. Forced labour often takes place within indigenous community lands, for the extraction ofmahogany and cedar wood. Advances are made by intermediaries to indigenous communities in the formof food or goods in exchange for a quantity of wood to be delivered later. This gives rise to a debt, whichis later manipulated to extract unpaid forced labour. In other instances, labour camps are established inthe forest and intermediaries recruit between 20 and 40 workers, either from distant cities or from near-by indigenous communities. These workers receive wage advances, which are later used to extract forcedlabour.

In Bolivia, another study has also documented the existence of forced labour against indigenous people.The most extreme situation was observed in the Chaco region, where a number of workers are held inlarge farms under conditions close to serfdom. Whole communities are sometimes held captive throughdebt bondage and through the open use of violence. Such situations are also likely to exist on theParaguayan side of the Chaco region. But forced labour is not limited to these extreme situations. Theenganche or habilitacion labour systems, which are based on wage advances made to workers before theharvest in exchange for a commitment to work, are still used in Bolivia’s agriculture. Too often they resultin debt bondage and unpaid forced labour. The bonded workers are usually male, but often workers’wives and children are also involved and expected to provide free labour.

n 5 Forced labour is defined in ILO Convention 29 as all work or services exacted under the menace of a penalty and for whicha person has not offered himself or herself voluntarily.

10

In both countries, it is clear that forced labour is an extreme manifestation of discrimination and theconsequences for the victims are continued poverty and the lack of access to basic human rights. BothBolivia and Peru have reacted quickly to the findings of the studies – which will soon be made publicand accessible at the ILO website: http://www.ilo.org/forcedlabour. In December 2004, the Governmentof Bolivia created a National Commission for the Eradication of Forced Labour to develop and implement- with the involvement of social partners and the support of the ILO – a set of effective policy measures.Consultations have already been held with employers, workers, and the directors of regional labourinspectors. Peru is also in the process of setting up a Multisectoral Commission, with a view to design-ing a national policy to eliminate forced labour and strengthen the rule of law in the regions where forcedlabour occurs. In both countries, governments are realizing that it is time to end forced labour.

Patrick Belser

Workshop on Free Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) and Indigenous Peoples The UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues held an international workshop on methodologiesregarding FPIC and Indigenous Peoples from January 17 – 19, 2005 at United Nations Headquarters inNew York. A broad range of issues were discussed, including:

n The current understanding of FPIC as a methodological issue;

n Relevant policy frameworks of various inter-governmental organizations; and

n Examples of the application of the principle of FPIC at the national and international levels.

The ILO contributed to the workshop by detailing the understanding of FPIC in the context of ConventionNo. 169, within the framework of ILO supervisory work concerning this Convention, and based on theILO’s experience in technical cooperation on indigenous issues.

ILO experience in supervising the Convention, as well as experience gained from technical co-operationactivities, has given considerable attention to the methodologies and challenges associated with the con-cept of FPIC than has been given in other arenas. In particular it has highlighted the dangers of differ-ent organizations applying different methodologies to their work with indigenous peoples, and a numberof challenges in the application of the concepts of consultation and participation. Convention No. 169not only requires the principles of consultation and participation to be applied in the context of specif-ic development projects, but places this within the wider context of governance, and the participation ofindigenous and tribal peoples in public life. Indigenous peoples should not be seen as objects of devel-opment, but as partners in a process. General discussions at the workshop reflected the view of mostindigenous participants that FPIC should be framed as a right, within the framework of a rights-basedapproach to development, and not simply as a methodology.

The recommendation made to the ILO by the workshop was to analyse and document best practices inthe implementation of the principles of consultation and participation as outlined in Convention No.169, with a view to using this information for capacity-building purposes. This will constitute an inte-gral component of PRO 169’s proposed work programme for the coming years, part of which will focuson documentation of best practices in a broader sense. This work can not only feed into the ILO’s ongo-ing technical assistance programme on indigenous issues, but will also be made available to the Forumwith a view to providing technical information for the UNPFII to continue its examination of FPIC.

ILO’s contribution to the workshop can be found on the indigenous and tribal peoples website.

Francesca Thornberry

11

12Indigenous Fellowship ProgrammeIn 2004, PRO 169 carried out a 3-month Indigenous Fellowship Programme. The overall objective ofthis programme was to equip participants with some of the skills and knowledge necessary for the pro-motion and protection of the rights of their peoples. The Programme was designed to provide the fellowswith the opportunity to experience first hand various relevant activities in the ILO and the wider UN sys-tem - and for ILO staff to learn about the fellows’ own work in promoting and protecting the rights oftheir peoples. This year’s participants were: Yuuki Hasegawa, who is Ainu from Japan; Tony Khular fromthe Lamkang community in Manipur, India; and Walther Benedictus Para from Suriname.

A number of international organizations contributed to brief the fellows and to provide training on a widerange of issues pertaining to indigenous and tribal peoples. The fellows worked with ILO staff on indi-vidual and collective assignments, allowing them to apply and deepen their knowledge according to theirspecific interests and needs, and based on their own experience and knowledge. In order to link newknowledge and skills to the needs of the fellows’ communities, they prepared proposals for activities thatpromote indigenous rights among their people, intended to be carried out by their respective organiza-tions. The specific projects chosen by the participants reflect the considerable differences in the situa-tions and needs of their peoples, and different levels of capacity among their respective organizations.PRO 169 is supporting the fellows in implementing the projects they have proposed.

In order to maximize the impact of available resources for training and capacity-building, PRO 169 hasdecided not to run a Fellowship Programme in Geneva in 2005. Instead, PRO 169 will divert trainingactivities to the regions, in order to address the specific capacity-building needs of indigenous organiza-tions, governments and ILO staff at different levels of intervention. In addition, the Project will strength-en its contribution to the Indigenous Fellowship Programme of the Office of the United Nations HighCommissioner for Human Rights. For more information on that programme, see:(http://www.unhchr.ch/indigenous/fellowship.htm).

Francesca Thornberry

Interview with Yuuki Hasegawa, Ainu, Japan, and Tony Khular, Lamkang, India, whoparticipated in the ILO fellowship programme 20046 :

You are coming from very different countries. The situation of your peoples and the contexts in whichyour organizations operate are very different, too. What similarities did you discover during the pro-gramme and what are the major differences?Yuuki Hasegawa (YH): The situation of our groups is very different indeed. For example, the Ainus inJapan have almost lost their language and now we want to revive it. In contrast, the Lamkang in Indiastill maintain their language and culture, so we can learn from them. The level of recognition of ourgroups and their rights is very different as well. In India, there are a number of constitutional provisions,which grant certain rights to ‘scheduled tribes’. In Japan, there are no such rights. India has at least rat-ified ILO Convention No. 107 and advocacy for indigenous peoples can build on its provisions. In Japan,ratification is too difficult and we have to find other ways to promote indigenous rights. Generally, oursituation is very different, but our goals tend to be the same, and we work through the UN System toachieve these goals.

Tony Khular (TK): Yes, in India we have a number of constitutional provisions and legislation, whichrecognize our rights as ‘scheduled tribes’ but not as‘indigenous peoples’. At any rate, the problem is theimplementation of these provisions. In both of our cases, there are no national organizations to promote our rights. Through Walter Para, who alsoparticipated in the Fellowship Programme, welearned about Suriname, where there is a strongnational indigenous organization.

n 6 The opinions expressed here are those of the interviewees.

13

What does the concept of ‘indigenous peoples’ means to you?TK: ‘Indigenous’ refers to an extremely diverse set of groups and these groups’ struggles take place invery different national settings. This diversity is reflected in the fact that there is no internationallyagreed definition of indigenous peoples and ILO Convention No. 169 rightly makes self-identification afundamental criterion. In India, we have the categories of ‘scheduled tribes’ and ‘scheduled castes’.Some people identify as indigenous while others do not.

How widely are the ILO and Convention No. 169 known in your country and among people in your com-munities?YH: Japan has not ratified Convention No. 169 yet and few Ainu know about the ILO and its mandatefor indigenous peoples. Members of my community are realizing little-by-little the significance ofprocesses at the international level and learning how to use international organizations. So far, only someold Ainu people have attended UN meetings and I am the first young Ainu to come to Geneva. Ironically,I was already in Geneva when I contacted the ILO in Tokyo for the first time. However, I hope to havegood discussions with them in the future.

TK: People in Lamkang communities do not know about the ILO and Convention No. 169. I learnedabout the ILO and this Fellowship Programme only by chance and in Delhi. I am also the first young per-son from my community to come to Geneva. The situation in other Indian states might be different.People in the hills do not have access to and are not aware of the ILO and its Conventions. When I arriveat home I will share the knowledge I have gained during the Programme.

What can the ILO do to raise awareness of indigenous rights and to promote them?TK: Most people in my community do not speak Hindi, and Geneva as well as Delhi are far away. Everythingis far away from the indigenous communities in the Northeast of India. ILO Convention No. 169 and sup-porting materials should be translated into our languages. In addition, it is important to create links betweenlocal communities and international organizations as well as between indigenous peoples in different coun-tries. The Fellowship Programme contributes to both. However, other communities and peoples should havethe opportunity to participate, and for that the Programme should be expanded.

YH: I agree that it is important to strengthen networking among various indigenous organizations and theILO. I thought there was more such networking already going on and learnt otherwise during thisProgramme. The lack of operational detail in Convention No. 169 could make its effective implementa-tion difficult. Therefore, it is useful that the ILO will now initiate a project to collect and disseminatebest practices regarding the implementation of the Convention and its various provisions, and to initiateprojects to create good practice in Cambodia and Cameroon. Through this Programme, I realized also thelimitations of the ILO and other international organizations. In my opinion, the Convention does not gofar enough with regard to consultation and participation in matters of political representation and legis-lation. Moreover, it is important that various organizations co-operate more closely. However, we also haveto realize that the UN system is not a perfect place to get our rights. Still, we have to use existing mech-anisms more effectively.

Which mechanisms do you find useful?YH: The UN Treaty monitoring bodies, for example. The Japanese government did not mention Ainu atall in the 1980s. The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights then expressed its concernabout discrimination against Ainu as a ‘minority group’ and triggered a debate. Today, the governmentaccepts that Ainu are a legitimate minority while the Committee considers Ainu an indigenous people.The Committee requested data about Ainu from the Japanese government but the government does nothave such data. My organization wants to carry out a survey on the socio-economic situation of Ainu andsubmit our data to the Committee. All in all, the UN is a useful system.

What can the ILO do for you and your people, and what is the role of regional ILO offices in this process?YH: The ILO can work with governments through its regional offices. For people in Japan, it is very dif-ficult to access organizations in Geneva and it would be good to connect through regional ILO offices.After all, the ILO is the only international organization with a normative mandate for indigenous peoples.Now that we are in contact with the ILO’s Tokyo office we can initiate closer co-operation. We are only asmall NGO, but the ILO is an international organization. Together we have good chances to influence thegovernment.

TK: The Programme is a great opportunity for us to co-operate more closely with the ILO and other UNorganizations, and I think these organizations can do a lot for my community. However, people in thehills do not have the opportunity to access these organizations. Many people there do not even know the

14

rights they have according to the Indian Constitution and it is important to teach them. Now I am in con-tact with the ILO office in Delhi. I will go and visit the office and discuss with office staff how we cancooperate in the future. My hope is that they can contribute to supporting my project to raise awarenessabout the right to education among members of my community.

YH: Only rights are not enough. We can’t eat rights. Our organizations are weak and it is very difficult toraise funds and train staff. With more skills and staff, our organizations are stronger and can work moreindependently.

What will you do once you are back in your country?YH: First, I will inform my organization and other interested Ainu about what I learned here. After that,I want to discuss with ILO Tokyo and possibly with trade unions and other Japanese NGOs to mobilizesupport for my project.

TK: I will first meet the ILO in Delhi. Based on that I will decide how to continue. People back home arewaiting for me to learn about my trip and the knowledge I have gained here in Geneva. I am planning toorganize a workshop and prepare a newsletter, in order to disseminate this information.

Self-IdentificationILO Convention 169 does not define who are indigenous and tribal peoples. It only describes the peoples it aims to protect:

Elements of tribal peoples include:

n Traditional life-styles;

n Culture and way of life different from the other segments of the national population; and

n Own social organization and traditional customs and laws.

Elements of indigenous peoples include:

n Traditional life-styles;

n Culture and way of life different from the other segments of the national population;

n Own social organization and traditional customs and laws; and

n Living in historical continuity in a certain area, or before others “invaded” or came to the area.

Self-identification as indigenous or tribal is a fundamental criterion for determining the groups to whichthe provisions of Convention No. 169 apply.

Countries and regionsIII. COUNTRIES AND REGIONS

n AsiaILO Convention No. 169 and peace-buildingin Nepal.Nepal is currently in the tenth year of a severearmed conflict, which is partly related to themarginalized position of large sections of soci-ety, including indigenous peoples, who makeup approximately 37% of the population.Widespread poverty, unemployment, lack ofconsultation and participation of indigenouspeoples (and other disadvantaged groups),combined with the emergence of a culture ofconflict, continue to fuel political instability inthe country. Within this context, ILO work inNepal, and the sub-region as a whole, has high-lighted the special vulnerability of indigenousand tribal peoples in the areas of under-employment, migration, bonded labour, discrimination, traffickingand child labour, among other areas of concern to the ILO.

Lobbying for ratification of the ILO’s Indigenous and Tribal People's Convention and disseminating informa-tion on its provisions has been one of the major objectives of the indigenous rights movement in Nepal. TheILO has been actively supporting these initiatives, through the provision of technical and financial assistance.Convention No. 169 has been translated into Nepali, along with the accompanying manual, which has beenadapted to the Nepali context, using national examples and realities. ILO-Nepal and representative indige-nous organizations have been working closely with government, employers and workers organizations toincrease awareness of indigenous issues and Convention No. 169 and to strengthen participatory politics andpromote socially inclusive policies for the establishment of lasting peace. Addressing specific issues affect-ing Nepal’s indigenous peoples is one of the priorities of the Government's Tenth Five–Year DevelopmentPlan, which also acknowledges the failure of past efforts to improve the status of many of the indigenous peo-ples. The ILO has provided inputs to the Plan’s chapter on “Indigenous Nationalities” and to the govern-ment’s PRSP. A comparative legal study on Convention No. 169 and national legislation and policy is cur-rently underway, as well as a pilot study on ethnicity and child labour.

The ILO has consistently promoted dialogue between government and representative indigenous organisa-tions, and has offered and explored the possibility of using ILO Convention No. 169 as a framework for peacetalks (as was the case in Guatemala in 1996). A recent consultation on these issues (organised by the ILOand indigenous partners in January 2005) convened more than 150 government and indigenous representa-tives, The Kathmandu Adivasi-Janjati Declaration on ILO Convention No. 169 and Peace-Building in Nepalwas unanimously adopted and provides concrete guidelines for action to relevant parties to promote the rightsof indigenous peoples and facilitate social justice and participatory peace-building within the framework ofConvention No. 169.

Despite the deteriorating political situation in Nepal, which on February 1st 2005, resulted in the dissolu-tion of the cabinet and the declaration of a state of emergency by the King, the conference succeeded in ini-tiating a positive first step towards stakeholder negotiations and conflict resolution in Nepal, within the frame-work of Convention No. 169.

The ILO intends, to the extent possible, to facilitate a continuous dialogue between the government andindigenous peoples, offering training and capacity-building on indigenous rights and identifying main ele-ments of a “Decent Work Agenda” for indigenous peoples, in order to improve their economic and employ-ment situation. "Decent Work" is at the centre of ILO’s mandate and activities, and brings together the goalsof rights at work, employment and income, social protection, and social dialogue. The development of DecentWork Agendas also offers an opportunity for ILO constituents (workers’ and employers’ organisations) to workin partnership with indigenous peoples. The study on national legislation as well as the study on ethnicityand child labour and the Kathmandu Adivasi-Janjati Declaration are available on the ILO’s indigenous andtribal peoples website.

Sarah Webster

15

Community driven development in the PhilippinesAccording to recent estimates, there are 12 to 13 million indigenous and tribal persons in thePhilippines, constituting approximately 18% of the total population. Although their situation varies con-siderably according to regions, recent surveys confirm that indigenous peoples are particularly affectedby poverty. Often this situation is linked by a variety of broader issues, such as lack of recognition of landtenure and decreasing livelihood opportunities.

INDISCO’s involvement in the country goes back to 1994, the beginning of the First Decade of theWorld’s Indigenous Peoples. Working in collaboration with its partner agencies in the government andamong the indigenous peoples themselves, INDISCO piloted their community driven and participatoryapproach throughout the country. INDISCO currently manages a small project fund, which has beenmade available through the financial support of the Finnish Embassy. The participatory approach in proj-ect planning and implementation means that INDISCO assists the indigenous communities in identify-ing their own development processes and limits itself to a purely facilitative role. Typically projectsinvolve development activities like creating sustainable livelihoods and cooperatives that do not harm orthreaten indigenous peoples’ domain.

As part of the Decent Work Country Programme in the Philippines and through a partnership with UNDP,INDISCO provides technical support to the National Commission of Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) in orderto ensure the full implementation of the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA). Activities include capac-ity building for community leaders and the development of specific tools for the implementation of theIndigenous Peoples Rights Act. In this context, INDISCO has also contributed to the Medium-termPhilippine Development Plan for Indigenous Peoples 2004-08, which has been endorsed by thePresident’s office.

Hüseyin Polat

Testing indigenous community-driven education approaches against child labour in the PhilippinesBased on the legal and policy framework provided by the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA) and thegovernment policy on non-formal education, this IPEC-INDISCO action programme aims to test innova-tive approaches to education for indigenous peoples. The programme assists them in developing thecapacity to take responsibility for the prevention of child labour and rehabilitation of child labourersamong their members. It aims to make education not only attractive and suitable but also accessible toindigenous peoples.

As part of this project, which began implementation in 2003, a curriculum for children and adults hasbeen prepared that integrates basic education and aspects of livelihood development. The basic educa-tion component includes writing, reading and arithmetic as well as indigenous culture and world views,customary law, spirituality and rituals, music and dance, ancestral domain management and indigenousrights. The livelihood component includes skills development involving existing alternative sources ofincome such as abaca fibre production, handicraft making and cash crop production.

Maria José Chamorro

Decent employment for tribal peoples in IndiaTribal peoples constitute 8% of India’s total population and represent an enormous wealth of cultures,languages and knowledge systems. However, as elsewhere, they are socially, economically and geograph-ically marginalized in society, and are disproportionably affected by extreme poverty. Since 1994 theINDISCO-Programme has been working to promote decent employment for tribal peoples through coop-eratives and self-help organizations, while safeguarding their traditional and cultural values. In 2004 theINDISCO Project in India entered its phasing out-period with financial support from MIGROS coopera-tive federation of Switzerland. A cluster of 40 tribal villages has been supported in establishing and man-aging legally recognized cooperatives and other self help-organizations providing loans and credit, healthand education. The lessons learned from INDISCO grassroots interventions are now being disseminatedas studies of best practices of community development. Recent INDISCO publications in India includecase studies on tribal cooperatives in India, and a case study on a particularly vulnerable tribal group inIndia, the Bondo Highlanders. The study highlights that development programmes need to respect theprinciple of consultation and participation of the peoples concerned in order to work effectively.

16

The ILO-INDISCO Programme This programme works primarily at the grassroots level, and aims to strengthen the capacities of indige-nous and tribal peoples, helping them design and implement their own development plans and initia-tives through their own organizations while safeguarding their traditional and cultural values. INDISCOhas implemented numerous projects in Asia and Africa, including Tanzania, Cameroon, India, Vietnam,Thailand and the Philippines. In its most recent activities INDISCO has been concentrating on linkinggrassroots level experiences with the policy environment. Good practices of community-driven participa-tory projects run by the indigenous peoples themselves have been disseminated and used to influencethe policy environment, and to strengthen national policies and programmes aimed at protecting therights and reducing poverty of indigenous and tribal peoples.

The methodology of the INDISCO Programme is based on a community-driven participatory approach toproject design and implementation in which the participation and consultation of the indigenous andtribal peoples is a core principle. The design, development and implementation of project activities areundertaken by the indigenous peoples themselves, facilitated by local partner NGOs and associated withpolicy development at the government level. This gives the ILO a mediating and facilitating role betweenthe various involved stakeholders. Priority areas for future include West Papua where a proposal has beendeveloped through a participatory and consultative project formulation exercise, and the Mekong sub-region in Asia, where INDISCO continues its collaboration with its German partners.

Hüseyin Polat

Improving the legislative and policy environment for indigenous peoples in CambodiaThere is currently no active policy in Cambodia concerning indigenous peoples. A Highland PeoplesDevelopment Policy was drafted in 1997, but has not yet been adopted. Some reasons for this are theadoption since 1997 of several laws, including the 2001 Land Law, that have changed the legislativeframework for the protection of certain rights of indigenous peoples, and the passage of the decentral-ization process, which has affected the governance structures on which the draft policy was based. Workon the reformulation of this policy is currently underway. The decentralization process has become thefocal point of most ongoing activities of relevance to indigenous peoples. However, there are a numberof factors that limit indigenous peoples’ capacity to take an active role in decision-making through thelocal commune councils, such as limited access to and cultural inappropriateness of education, lack ofacknowledgement of indigenous languages in decision-making bodies, and problems of physical accessto indigenous communities.

In order to contribute to the development of national legislation and policies that integrate the rights,needs and priorities of indigenous and tribal peoples in Cambodia, PRO 169 and INDISCO will initiatea project in Cambodia in April 2005. The project will be facilitated by a national co-ordinator, and imple-mented by project partners at national and local levels, including the Department for Ethnic MinorityDevelopment in the Ministry of Rural Development, which has a broad mandate to address indigenousissues in Cambodia. The immediate objectives of this project are:

1. Improvement of the legislative and policy environment concerning indigenous and tribal peoples inCambodia and facilitation of the effective implementation of such policies and legislation.

2. Strengthening of indigenous and tribal peoples’ own representative organizations to play a more activerole in decision-making and development processes.

The project strategy in Cambodia will be twofold, comprising strategic activities and assistance at bothgrassroots and national levels, and making linkages between the two through provincial level facilitation.

Francesca Thornberry

17

Case study on ILO work and indigenous peoples in Cambodia The ILO has recently conducted a desk review on ILO activities and indigenous and tribal peoples inCambodia. The specific objectives of this case study were to

n Better understand how ILO activities in Cambodia affect indigenous and tribal peoples;

n Assess ways to better integrate the promotion of these peoples’ rights in the ILO’s projects and pro-grammes in Cambodia; and

n Provide information that contributes to raise awareness for and strengthen the internal dialogue onindigenous issues within the ILO.

The study is an initial step in the identification of effective ways to mainstream indigenous issues bothin Cambodia and more generally in ILO activities. It suggests that most ongoing ILO projects in Cambodiado not operate in areas in which indigenous peoples reside and do not have a specific focus on thesepeoples. However, this is likely to change in the future with the initiation of new projects, or the expan-sion of existing ones into areas with indigenous populations. The study concludes that the ILO could fur-ther promote indigenous and tribal peoples in Cambodia, with activities specifically focused on thesegroups’ distinct rights and needs. The study makes various recommendations for a more proactiveapproach to mainstreaming indigenous and tribal peoples’ concerns, in order to:

n Seek potential synergies between various ILO activities;

n Integrate indigenous issues in relevant ILO activities; and

n Build coalitions and partnerships for promoting indigenous and tribal peoples’ rights.

Such a “mainstreaming approach” also involves addressing the specific training needs of ILO staff atheadquarters and in the field and developing and adapting tools for promoting the rights of indigenousand tribal peoples. The ILO wants to use the findings of this case study to develop a broader strategy formainstreaming the rights of indigenous and tribal peoples across its operations.

Stefan Ehrentraut

n AfricaProject to examine indigenous customary law in Morocco.In 2003, PRO 169, in association with an indigenous partner organization, TAMAYNUT, held a workshopon the rights of indigenous peoples and ILO Convention No. 169. The workshop brought together repre-sentatives of indigenous peoples from across Morocco, as well as representatives of Government, and anumber of UN agencies, including the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and theUNPFII.

The objective of the seminar was to examine the human rights situation of indigenous peoples inMorocco, according to three priority themes identified by TAMAYNUT, and to make recommendations onaction to address the issues identified. The three priority themes were:

1. The right to education and identity;

2. Consultation and participation; and

3. Rights to lands and resources.

18

The workshop made a number of recommendations on these themes. Among the recommendations madeby workshop participants, the following were considered of basic importance and singled out for furtherfollow-up by TAMAYNUT:

To the Government of Morocco:

n Involvement of indigenous men and women in the development of legislation that regulates land andresource issues;

n Address legal issues that impede indigenous peoples’ access to lands and resources; and

n Work in partnership with indigenous peoples in the elaboration, implementation and evaluation of projects and programmes that affect their lands and resources.

To the ILO:

n Support Amazigh organizations’ efforts to address issues pertaining to lands and resources; and

n Encourage respect for, and application of, the principles of consultation and participation with indigenousand tribal peoples.

As a follow-up, the ILO and TAMAYNUT have entered into a collaboration to address these recommendationsin the framework of a 1-year project. The focus of the project will be on the customary laws, which govern a number of aspects of Amazigh lives, such as land and resource ownership and management, social structures and cultural life. The project will examine and document customary laws and their compatibilitywith national legislation and international law, and promote a national dialogue on the integration of certainaspects of indigenous customary law into the legal system. The project will also look at ways in which customary laws governing societal structures could be used as a basis for the conceptualisation of mechanisms for dialogue with indigenous peoples.

Francesca Thornberry

Legal protection of indigenous rights in CameroonIn Cameroon, the ILO, and a number of other organizations, have been working on issues concerning indige-nous and tribal peoples for a number of years. ILO efforts have been aimed primarily at improving the localliving and working conditions of Baka communities. The Government of Cameroon has recently begun to takespecific account of the situation of indigenous and tribal peoples - notably the Baka, Bagyeli and Bakola peoples - especially with respect to poverty alleviation issues. Indigenous peoples themselves in Cameroonhave begun to organize at the national and international level to promote and protect their rights, and raise awareness of their situation. In addition, a number of NGOs are addressing various issues pertaining toindigenous and tribal peoples in Cameroon.

PRO 169 has just finalized a study on the legal framework for the protection of the rights of indigenous andtribal peoples in Cameroon undertaken by Dr Albert Barume. The study examines the impact of the legalframework on the living and working conditions of the peoples concerned. The study process included provin-cial consultations with representatives of indigenous peoples, to ensure that their own perspectives on theissues raised were brought to the fore in the final publication.

The major findings of this study point to a real need to address indigenous issues in a systematic manner,taking into account their cultural specificities. Some of the major recommendations of the study were:

n To address indigenous communities’ lack of access to land and resource rights, based on a better understanding of indigenous peoples’ conceptions of land and land use, which are different from those ofthe dominant population;

n To address discrimination against indigenous peoples, which is pervasive in many aspects of their lives, inparticular in education, public administration, and labour and employment issues; and

n Ensure the effective participation and consultation of indigenous peoples in legal and development initiatives that are relevant to them. This is the only manner to ensure that these initiatives will be appropri-ate and sustainable.

The study, as well as the experiences of a number of indigenous organizations in Cameroon, will be discussedin a national workshop in April (see below). This workshop will develop a plan of action to continue thenational dialogue on the protection of the human rights of indigenous and tribal peoples in Cameroon,and develop follow-up on the recommendations of the legal study. The study is available on the ILO’sindigenous peoples website.

19

Upcoming: National workshop in Yaoundé, Cameroon, June 2005A three-day national workshop will be held in Yaoundé in June 2005. The overall objective of the workshopis to lay the groundwork for the establishment of regular mechanisms to ensure that indigenous and tribalpeoples are consulted and can participate effectively at all stages of development, legislative and otherprocesses that affect them. Specifically, the workshop aims at initiating a process of constructive dialoguebetween indigenous peoples, government, trade unions, and other relevant stakeholders. The three thematicareas to be addressed by the national workshop in relation to indigenous and tribal peoples are poverty reduc-tion, human rights and governance. The workshop will draw on various case studies from indigenous peoples’organizations, the ILO study on the legislative framework for the protection of the rights of indigenous andtribal peoples in Cameroon, the ILO case study on the participation of indigenous peoples in the PRSPprocess and the experience of the ILO-INDISCO Programme in Cameroon. The workshop is expected to resultin recommendations for the improvement of the human rights situation and the living and working conditionsof indigenous peoples in Cameroon as well as a common action plan.

Francesca Thornberry

n Latin America and the CaribbeanIPEC and indigenous children in Latin America and the CaribbeanBecause of a systematic pattern of social exclusion and lack of economic opportunities, indigenous com-munities are usually at the bottom of the social scale. Among them, children and adolescents are themost vulnerable groups. There is documented evidence indicating indigenous children frequently startto work and drop out of school at an early age. They are at a particularly high risk of ending in the worstforms of child labour. For instance, indigenous children are found as victims of debt-bondage, traffick-ing and commercial sexual exploitation in Asia, and as agricultural wageworkers on plantations in LatinAmerica.

The ILO is helping countries to progressively eliminate child labour through the International Programmeon the Elimination of Child Labour (IPEC). IPEC recognizes that projects with a specific focus on indige-nous issues are crucial to better respond to the demands and needs of indigenous children. Associatedefforts aim to eliminate child labour by promoting education that is sensitive to indigenous cultures andtraditions. Different strategies are being pursued, such as: development of more relevant curricula;organizing tailor-made training courses for indigenous teachers; and assistance in the implementation ofintercultural bilingual education.

IPECIPEC is the ILO’s International Programme on the Elimination of Child Labour. The programme waslaunched in 1992 within the framework of the ILO Minimum Age Convention, 1973 (No. 138) and aimsto work towards the progressive elimination of child labour by strengthening national capacities toaddress child labour problems, and by creating a worldwide movement to combat it. Following the adop-tion of the Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999 (No. 182), this goal was reformulated to givepriority to the elimination of the worst forms of child labour. IPEC’s priority target groups are bondedchild labourers, child soldiers, children who are victims of commercial sexual exploitation, children work-ing in hazardous conditions and children who are particularly vulnerable, mainly girls. IPEC’s workreflects the ILO’s policy on child labour enshrined in the ILO Child Labour Conventions and contributesto the ILO’s Decent Work Agenda by promoting education alternatives for children and training andemployment opportunities for families. Since its creation, IPEC has supported more than 1000 projectsto prevent and withdraw children from exploitative work and reintegrate them into school. Many projectson specific issues such as child trafficking, or child domestic labour, as well as statistical surveys andresearch on child labour, especially its worst forms, reach indigenous children even when the projectsare not exclusively targeting them.

20

Understanding child labour in indigenous communities, Peru and Costa RicaIn order to achieve a better understanding of the reality of child labour in indigenous communities, twospecific studies were conducted. One study was carried out among four ethnic groups in the AmazonBasin in Peru (Ashaninka, Aguaruna, Cocama and Shipibo), and the other in Costa Rica, in three com-munities of the Brunca Region (Boruca, Bribri and Ngobe). The major goal of each of these studies wasto understand the protection and risk factors associated with child labour in indigenous communitiesfrom an intercultural and gender perspective. The results show the limitations of existing legal frame-works to address the problem.

Indigenous children in the domestic service sector, GuatemalaA Direct Action Programme focusing on indigenous children hasbeen implemented in Guatemala in the domestic service sector.Given the prevalence of indigenous girl domestic workers inGuatemala, the project has worked with the Asociación Conradode la Cruz - an institution that strengthens the cultural identitiesof child-domestic workers as part of the process of withdrawingchildren from work and improving their living conditions. Parts ofthe programme were developed in the indigenous languages ofthe girls concerned. The Programme also promoted indigenouscultural practices, and developed awareness-raising materials(radio programmes, posters, etc.) for child-domestic workers andtheir families in the language of three of the main ethnic groupsof Guatemala (Mam, Quiché, and Cackchiquel).

Eliminating the worst forms of child labour through education,HondurasLa Mosquitia is one of the most remote areas of Honduras, wherepublic services are very poor or non-existent. This area is a hubin the narcotics route into North America, and this constitutes,along with sea diving for lobster and other molluscs, the only source of income for the Mosquitiadwellers. Children’s involvement in these high risk and/or illicit trades is notorious, and traditionallyextends to related activities, such as the sexual exploitation of underage girls. Boys usually go to the seain the lobster boats just after they complete the limited schooling available to them.

The ILO is implementing a direct action project to withdraw children from these high-risk occupationsand to enrol them in schools. To guarantee that the needs and particularities of Misquitos are taken intoaccount the project is being implemented by a local NGO (MOPAWI: La Mosquitia Development Agency)that has dealt with indigenous peoples’ development in La Mosquitia for more than 20 years.

The main achievement of this project has been to build the keen awareness of children’s rights and theimportance of education now shown by the population and local authorities. In every community localcommittees have been set up, to address the most pressing problems, such as health, education, orabuses by government officials, and to deal with the worst forms of child labour. The appeal of school-ing for children and their families is now significantly stronger, due to the increasing availability of cul-turally appropriate education. The project also set up a network of donors and development agencies,which resulted in the engagement of other actors in the area.

Prevention and elimination of child labour in the Mayan villages of Toledo, BelizeThis IPEC programme targets two rural Mayan villages in the district of Toledo. The programme attemptsto withdraw 75 children from work, providing them direct services such as education, health and othersocial services. Furthermore, it seeks to prevent approximately 200 children in the same or neighbour-ing communities from engaging in child labour, by focusing on parenting, public education and otheractivities that encourage families to keep their children in school and offer tangible support to childrento do so. The programme draws on the resources within the community to facilitate outreach and edu-cational activities on the dangers and consequences of child labour. The programme also includes directaction to strengthen social institutions and organizations in the area and build their capacities to imple-ment initiatives geared toward the elimination of child labour.

Maria José Chamorro

21

ContactIV. CONTACT

If you require further information on anything you have read in this newsletter, advice, or copies of ourpublications, please do not hesitate to contact us:

Project to Promote ILO Policy on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples (PRO 169)Standards Department International Labour Office 4 Route des Morillons CH - 1211 Geneva 22 Switzerland

Birgitte Feiring Francesca ThornberryChief Technical Adviser Project Co-ordinatorTel: + 41 (0)22 799 7921 Tel: + 41 (0)22 799 7685Fax: + 41 (0)22 799 6344 Fax: + 41 (0)22 799 6344E-mail: feiring@ilo.org E-mail: thornber@ilo.org

Mangeye Terumalai Secretariat Tel: + 41 (0)22 799 7556 Fax: + 41 (0)22 799 6344 E-mail: terumalai@ilo.org

You can also write directly to the persons indicated at the end of each article:

Patrick Belser belser@ilo.org

Maria José Chamorro chamorro@ilo.org

Stefan Ehrentraut stefan.ehrentraut@gmx.de

Hüseyin Polat polat@ilo.org

Lee Swepston swepston@ilo.org

Manuela Tomei tomei@ilo.org

Sarah Webster webster@ilodel.org.in

23