Popular in Law

Human Rights Law

Human Rights and Corruption: Problems and Potential of Individualising a Systemic Problem

Max Planck Institute Anne Peters

Law

A statistical approach to law school citation rankings

University of Virginia Joshua Fischman

Constitutional Law

What is constitutional ideology?

University of Oxford Nick Barber

Civil Procedure Law

Politics, Identity, and Class Certification on the U.S. Courts of Appeals

University of Pennsylvania Sean Farhang

Law

Diversity and Social Mobility in the UK legal profession

Law Society I. Stephanie Boyce

Internet Law

The Law of AI for Good

University of San Diego Orly Lobel

Human Rights Law

Transforming Restorative Justice for Transitional Settings

University of Nottingham Kerry Clamp

Cultural heritage rights and Indigenous peoples

View more insights in Professional - Law - Human Rights Law - International Law

View more figures from University of South Australia

View the page of Ayla Do Vale Alves

Read the Study

Next in Human Rights Law

The Discursive Evolution of Human Rights Law

Renana Keydar, Vera Shikhelman | Hebrew University of Jerusalem

Human Rights and Corruption: Problems and Potential of Individualising a Systemic Problem

Anne Peters | Max Planck Institute

Ayla Do Vale Alves discusses how human rights law be reformed or strengthened to better protect Indigenous peoples’ cultural heritage

Image courtesy of interviewee. October 22, 2024

Log-in or Sign-up to Faculti
Currently viewing this subject insight as a guest. You have insight(s) remaining for this month. Login to view 8000+ figures on the platform.

Generating Workspace...

Export as PDF

This video outlines a chapter that analyzes the relationship between indigenous peoples and international law, particularly focusing on the cultural heritage rights of these communities. The author discusses the historical context, rooted in colonialism, which has led to current challenges in recognizing indigenous peoples as subjects of international law rather than mere objects. The chapter evaluates three primary regimes: international culture heritage law, intellectual property law, and human rights law, assessing their effectiveness in protecting indigenous heritage through an indigenous-oriented lens.

Key themes addressed include the inadequacy of international frameworks in safeguarding indigenous heritage, the fragmentation of legal protections, and the lack of a holistic approach that aligns with indigenous perspectives on communal rights. The chapter emphasizes the need for indigenous voices to be included actively in legal discussions and decision-making processes, advocating for reforms that better recognize collective rights.

The challenges posed by cultural appropriation are highlighted, illustrating how the absence of adequate legal protections can threaten indigenous identities and economic development. The author proposes practical pathways to improve existing legal frameworks, calling for an integrated approach that respects indigenous worldviews and offers perpetual protection for heritage elements.

The chapter concludes with a call for greater acknowledgment of indigenous interests in international law, emphasizing the importance of incorporating indigenous perspectives into discussions about heritage protection to foster better practices and improve the overall legal framework for safeguarding indigenous cultures.

Language:

Export as PDF

Export as PDF
Here are five key points from the video:

1. **Cultural Heritage Rights and International Law**: The chapter focuses on the complex relationship between indigenous peoples and international law, particularly emphasizing cultural heritage rights. It highlights how historical colonialism has shaped this relationship, leaving legacies that still influence contemporary interactions and protections.

2. **Framework of Protection**: The analysis maps the current state of international law concerning indigenous heritage, examining three regulatory regimes: international cultural heritage law, intellectual property law, and human rights law. The chapter assesses how these frameworks interact with indigenous heritage rights and identifies existing gaps in their protections.

3. **Challenges in Current Legal Structures**: The video discusses the fragmentation and inadequacy within international law regarding indigenous heritage protection. It notes that laws often treat aspects of culture separately rather than recognizing the holistic understanding indigenous peoples have of their heritage, which can lead to insufficient protection for communal rights and identities.

4. **Need for Indigenous Representation**: A critical point made is the lack of genuine participation from indigenous representatives in decision-making processes at international organizations like WIPO. Indigenous voices should not only be heard as observers but should also be empowered to have decision-making authority in matters affecting their heritage.

5. **Pathways for Improvement**: The chapter proposes that international law needs to evolve to recognize the collective rights of indigenous peoples and accommodate their cultural needs. This includes revising legal frameworks to allow for perpetual protection of heritage, as indigenous communities often require, and creating opportunities for indigenous participation in creating legal standards that affect their heritage rights.

Export as PDF
Here are some key quotes extracted from the video, which effectively capture the main themes and messages discussed regarding the relationship between indigenous peoples and international law, particularly focusing on cultural heritage rights:

1. **Cultural Heritage and Identity**:
- "I think we really need to acknowledge the particular importance of heritage for indigenous peoples. It's pervasive. It reflects their identity, their stories, their ancestors, their spirituality."

2. **Challenges of International Law**:
- "When international law fails to protect heritage or fails to provide a response to a threat to heritage, then all these elements can be affected."
- "International law was not created or developed, taking indigenous people's concerns, needs, interests into account."

3. **Disconnection and Fragmentation**:
- "International law is very fragmented, which means that, in protecting culture or heritage, international regimes will separate elements of culture."
- "Indigenous communities tend to perceive the heritage holistically. So all the elements are interconnected, they're integrated."

4. **Inadequate Legal Framework**:
- "International law will either offer insufficient protection or fragmented protection, and ultimately doesn't provide adequate, culturally adequate responses to those threats."

5. **Need for Indigenous Representation**:
- "Indigenous representatives only have an observer status in that committee. So they can speak, but they don't have any decision-making power, which is definitely not ideal."
- "If we are negotiating new treaties that are affecting indigenous peoples, first and foremost, because they will be the key stakeholders, we need to hear from them and we need to take their perspectives and concerns into account."

6. **Cultural Appropriation**:
- "When there is a gap or, or there are weaknesses in the existing protection of international law, all these elements will be affected."

7. **Call for Change**:
- "The first thing is that indigenous peoples need to be at the forefront of the discussion."
- "There are some states and some regions that have been taking significant moves in the direction of incorporating more indigenous voices."

8. **Proposed Solutions**:
- "I do propose ways forward. I propose solutions, very clear pathways to address the shortcomings."
- "What are the key interests or concerns of indigenous communities? And also what kind of protection they need considering their cultural convideo."

9. **Holistic Approach**:
- "Taking an indigenous oriented approach is thinking... of how to offer that kind of protection, which will require some adjustments in the existing law."

10. **Advancing Better Practices**:
- "I hope that chapters like this... can help advance the field, can help other countries, other international organizations to think of how things can be made better."

These quotes synthesize the chapter's exploration of the ongoing challenges within international law regarding the protection of indigenous cultural heritage and underscore the necessity for a more inclusive framework that recognizes indigenous perspectives and rights.

X-TIMESTAMP-MAP=LOCAL:00:00:00.000,MPEGTS:90000

1
00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:02.365
Book explored many of the key aspects in

2
00:00:02.365 --> 00:00:04.565
that relationship, and my chapter focuses

3
00:00:05.265 --> 00:00:08.085
on the cultural heritage rights aspect of the relationship

4
00:00:08.085 --> 00:00:10.405
between indigenous peoples and international law.

5
00:00:10.865 --> 00:00:14.445
In the chapter, I focus on indigenous peoples rights in

6
00:00:14.605 --> 00:00:17.485
relation to their heritage, considering that relationship

7
00:00:18.005 --> 00:00:19.765
somewhat problematic historically

8
00:00:19.885 --> 00:00:21.765
because it originated in colonialism

9
00:00:22.345 --> 00:00:26.485
and still finding some traces of those issues today,

10
00:00:27.015 --> 00:00:28.685
especially in how international law,

11
00:00:28.685 --> 00:00:30.085
international actors like states

12
00:00:30.085 --> 00:00:32.005
or international organizations,

13
00:00:32.275 --> 00:00:35.325
have some difficulty in including indigenous peoples as

14
00:00:35.925 --> 00:00:38.325
subjects rather than just objects of the system.

15
00:00:38.785 --> 00:00:41.605
So the chapter maps out the current state of,

16
00:00:41.625 --> 00:00:43.045
of international law,

17
00:00:43.045 --> 00:00:45.725
the framework protecting indigenous heritage,

18
00:00:46.245 --> 00:00:47.645
focusing on three regimes.

19
00:00:47.905 --> 00:00:50.285
So I'm looking at international culture, heritage law,

20
00:00:50.475 --> 00:00:52.365
international intellectual property law,

21
00:00:52.365 --> 00:00:53.725
and international human rights law,

22
00:00:54.145 --> 00:00:57.325
and also exploring a bit, some of the work

23
00:00:57.325 --> 00:00:58.805
that's going on at the World

24
00:00:58.805 --> 00:01:00.285
Intellectual Property Organization.

25
00:01:00.595 --> 00:01:04.085
Wipo as states have been negotiating new treaties,

26
00:01:04.085 --> 00:01:06.245
dealing specifically with the digital heritage there,

27
00:01:06.305 --> 00:01:07.725
but it's been going on for 20 years.

28
00:01:08.025 --> 00:01:10.765
So I look at how, how we could overcome some

29
00:01:10.765 --> 00:01:13.325
of the obstacles and impasse at Wipo too.

30
00:01:14.065 --> 00:01:17.045
And I look at these three regimes in the work at Wipo,

31
00:01:17.525 --> 00:01:18.765
considering six themes,

32
00:01:19.155 --> 00:01:21.445
assessing the regimes against six themes.

33
00:01:21.545 --> 00:01:26.165
And these themes, I identify them, as key topics,

34
00:01:26.865 --> 00:01:29.165
key points in indigenous people's international

35
00:01:29.165 --> 00:01:30.925
mobilization for heritage rights.

36
00:01:31.065 --> 00:01:33.405
So I, I assess the regimes,

37
00:01:33.865 --> 00:01:37.125
but trying to take an indigenous oriented focus

38
00:01:38.065 --> 00:01:40.645
in assessing strengths and weaknesses,

39
00:01:40.865 --> 00:01:42.365
and also ways forward.

40
00:01:42.665 --> 00:01:46.325
So the analysis gives us, a good understanding of the,

41
00:01:46.425 --> 00:01:49.205
the existing framework, what has been working,

42
00:01:49.315 --> 00:01:52.765
what hasn't, and also what could be improved in relation

43
00:01:52.765 --> 00:01:54.085
to the international framework,

44
00:01:54.365 --> 00:01:56.885
safeguarding indigenous heritage, I think we really need

45
00:01:56.885 --> 00:02:00.325
to acknowledge the particular importance of heritage

46
00:02:00.385 --> 00:02:01.445
for indigenous peoples.

47
00:02:01.875 --> 00:02:04.805
It's pervasive. It reflects, their identity,

48
00:02:04.895 --> 00:02:08.125
their stories, their ancestors, their spirituality,

49
00:02:08.565 --> 00:02:11.725
religion, their connection to land, to natural resources.

50
00:02:11.945 --> 00:02:14.005
So it's connected to many other aspects

51
00:02:14.005 --> 00:02:15.125
of indigenous people's lives.

52
00:02:15.505 --> 00:02:19.285
So when international law fails to protect heritage

53
00:02:19.425 --> 00:02:22.765
or fails to provide a response to a threat to heritage,

54
00:02:23.035 --> 00:02:24.925
then all these elements can be affected

55
00:02:25.185 --> 00:02:27.125
so quickly think of an example.

56
00:02:27.505 --> 00:02:30.125
Uh, we can think of a community that

57
00:02:31.145 --> 00:02:35.165
has a traditional ancestral practice of weaving rugs,

58
00:02:35.505 --> 00:02:39.245
for example, and that practice itself might be part

59
00:02:39.245 --> 00:02:42.805
of their heritage, but we can think of designs in these rugs

60
00:02:42.905 --> 00:02:46.205
as reflecting spiritual elements, sacred elements,

61
00:02:46.385 --> 00:02:48.485
or even the community's identity.

62
00:02:49.225 --> 00:02:52.125
Um, it could be even a part of their normative system.

63
00:02:52.265 --> 00:02:54.085
So the design in the rugs

64
00:02:54.085 --> 00:02:55.245
can also be part of their heritage.

65
00:02:55.905 --> 00:02:58.885
So what happens when international law fails to offer

66
00:02:59.215 --> 00:03:01.125
Tools to protect this heritage?

67
00:03:01.585 --> 00:03:03.565
Um, the community might end up not

68
00:03:03.565 --> 00:03:04.925
finding any sort of protection.

69
00:03:05.385 --> 00:03:08.485
So we can think, of that rug as also a big part

70
00:03:08.485 --> 00:03:10.605
of the community's economic development.

71
00:03:10.695 --> 00:03:14.725
Let's say they might sell these rugs to tourists, outsiders,

72
00:03:15.045 --> 00:03:18.685
visitors, and then if this rug is unprotected, let's say,

73
00:03:18.785 --> 00:03:21.845
the designs maybe could have been protected in copyright

74
00:03:21.875 --> 00:03:23.445
through intellectual property law,

75
00:03:23.545 --> 00:03:26.205
but if there's no protection, we could get,

76
00:03:26.305 --> 00:03:29.005
an outsider, a visitor going to the community,

77
00:03:29.005 --> 00:03:32.245
purchasing a rug, maybe taking photos of, of some

78
00:03:32.245 --> 00:03:35.205
of the designs, and then without the C'S consent,

79
00:03:35.585 --> 00:03:38.405
taking those designs, to outside the community

80
00:03:38.465 --> 00:03:39.965
and using them for their own benefit.

81
00:03:40.385 --> 00:03:42.925
So we can, we can see that as cultural appropriation,

82
00:03:42.925 --> 00:03:44.045
which is one of the big threats

83
00:03:44.605 --> 00:03:45.765
nowadays in relation to heritage.

84
00:03:45.915 --> 00:03:47.885
There's no response in international law

85
00:03:48.445 --> 00:03:49.885
directly focusing on appropriation.

86
00:03:50.145 --> 00:03:52.005
So in that situation, the person that

87
00:03:52.805 --> 00:03:55.405
appropriated the designs might get away with it,

88
00:03:55.405 --> 00:03:57.845
because there's nothing, stopping them from doing that.

89
00:03:58.785 --> 00:04:01.485
And by, by doing this, what happens is

90
00:04:01.485 --> 00:04:03.565
that the community might lose a big source

91
00:04:03.565 --> 00:04:04.765
of their economic development,

92
00:04:04.945 --> 00:04:06.565
but their identity might also be affected

93
00:04:06.565 --> 00:04:08.165
because we'll have other,

94
00:04:09.255 --> 00:04:11.325
other persons selling the rugs.

95
00:04:11.325 --> 00:04:12.405
And the, the, the connection

96
00:04:12.405 --> 00:04:15.165
to the community's identity will be, affected,

97
00:04:15.585 --> 00:04:18.605
but also their, the culture itself will be affected,

98
00:04:18.865 --> 00:04:21.365
if there's something sacred in one of the designs

99
00:04:21.365 --> 00:04:23.325
that was taken that will be affected as well.

100
00:04:23.425 --> 00:04:25.285
So when there is a gap or,

101
00:04:25.665 --> 00:04:28.245
or there are weaknesses in the existing protection

102
00:04:28.245 --> 00:04:30.645
of international law, all these elements will be affected.

103
00:04:30.665 --> 00:04:34.005
So it, it really is a, a, a, a significant part

104
00:04:34.005 --> 00:04:36.085
of indigenous lives that, if not protected,

105
00:04:36.275 --> 00:04:38.565
will affect their lives pretty heavily as well.

106
00:04:38.745 --> 00:04:40.085
We really have to go back and, and,

107
00:04:40.085 --> 00:04:42.005
and think about the origins of that relationship

108
00:04:42.005 --> 00:04:43.845
between indigenous peoples and international law,

109
00:04:43.985 --> 00:04:46.125
and the, the traces of colonialism

110
00:04:46.125 --> 00:04:47.725
and colonialization that we had today.

111
00:04:47.865 --> 00:04:49.405
So one of the things, is

112
00:04:49.405 --> 00:04:51.405
that international law was not created

113
00:04:51.625 --> 00:04:54.845
or developed, taking indigenous people's concerns, needs,

114
00:04:55.165 --> 00:04:57.245
interests into account, in

115
00:04:57.245 --> 00:04:58.485
that progression of their regime.

116
00:04:58.745 --> 00:05:02.045
So a few indications of this, disregard

117
00:05:02.105 --> 00:05:03.925
for indigenous interests is

118
00:05:03.955 --> 00:05:07.045
that very often indigenous peoples do not have a seat at the

119
00:05:07.045 --> 00:05:11.565
table in processes affecting them directly.

120
00:05:11.785 --> 00:05:13.245
So of course, that's, that's problematic.

121
00:05:13.305 --> 00:05:16.125
If we think about, that committee at Wipo

122
00:05:16.125 --> 00:05:18.125
that has been negotiating treaties,

123
00:05:18.915 --> 00:05:20.845
regarding indigenous heritage,

124
00:05:20.845 --> 00:05:23.005
indigenous representatives only have an observer

125
00:05:23.065 --> 00:05:24.365
status in that committee.

126
00:05:24.365 --> 00:05:26.845
So they can speak, but they don't have any decision making

127
00:05:26.845 --> 00:05:28.965
power, which it's definitely not ideal.

128
00:05:29.715 --> 00:05:32.445
Another negative aspect of international law, how it fails

129
00:05:32.745 --> 00:05:35.885
to respond to some of the threats, relates to the fact

130
00:05:35.885 --> 00:05:39.245
that international law is very fragmented, which means that,

131
00:05:39.345 --> 00:05:40.605
in protecting culture

132
00:05:40.705 --> 00:05:43.125
or heritage, international regimes will

133
00:05:43.445 --> 00:05:44.725
separate elements of culture.

134
00:05:44.945 --> 00:05:47.165
So we have, for example, cultural heritage law,

135
00:05:47.165 --> 00:05:49.765
which will perceive culture as an end in itself,

136
00:05:49.825 --> 00:05:51.965
or heritage as an end in itself,

137
00:05:51.985 --> 00:05:55.165
and protect the, the object, the tangible object.

138
00:05:55.625 --> 00:05:58.165
Um, on the other side, we have have a separate protection

139
00:05:58.165 --> 00:06:02.325
for intangible heritage, with intellectual property law,

140
00:06:02.825 --> 00:06:04.525
but indigenous communities tend

141
00:06:04.525 --> 00:06:06.365
to perceive the heritage holistically.

142
00:06:06.585 --> 00:06:09.005
So all the elements are interconnected, they're integrated.

143
00:06:09.265 --> 00:06:11.765
So there's this significant mismatch in relation to

144
00:06:11.765 --> 00:06:14.125
what the kind of protection international law offers

145
00:06:14.505 --> 00:06:17.085
and what indigenous peoples need and,

146
00:06:17.085 --> 00:06:18.605
and require in terms of protection.

147
00:06:18.985 --> 00:06:21.165
Um, another issue in international law is

148
00:06:21.165 --> 00:06:23.685
that it's a very state centric framework.

149
00:06:23.985 --> 00:06:26.245
So it's either focusing on states

150
00:06:26.825 --> 00:06:28.605
or, for example, with human rights law,

151
00:06:28.605 --> 00:06:29.925
it focuses on individuals,

152
00:06:30.265 --> 00:06:32.685
but then where is, what, where does,

153
00:06:32.735 --> 00:06:35.525
where do communities sit in that situation?

154
00:06:35.525 --> 00:06:38.325
So there is, this big significant problem still in

155
00:06:38.325 --> 00:06:41.925
international law in terms of addressing community rights.

156
00:06:42.345 --> 00:06:43.645
And when you're thinking about heritage

157
00:06:43.705 --> 00:06:46.245
for indigenous peoples, they tend to perceive it

158
00:06:46.265 --> 00:06:48.805
as a communal, custodianship.

159
00:06:48.945 --> 00:06:52.845
So there's no one individual owner of the rug, for example.

160
00:06:53.225 --> 00:06:55.765
Uh, it will be perceived as the community's heritage.

161
00:06:56.065 --> 00:06:59.645
So as international law doesn't offer an avenue for redress

162
00:06:59.645 --> 00:07:01.645
or remedies for collective rights,

163
00:07:01.695 --> 00:07:03.365
there will be, again, a gap there.

164
00:07:04.305 --> 00:07:06.725
So generally what happens is that international law will,

165
00:07:06.745 --> 00:07:09.085
either offer insufficient protection

166
00:07:09.105 --> 00:07:10.925
or fragmented protection,

167
00:07:11.525 --> 00:07:14.525
and ultimately doesn't, provide adequate,

168
00:07:14.965 --> 00:07:17.685
culturally adequate responses to those threats.

169
00:07:17.985 --> 00:07:19.165
Um, to indigenous heritage.

170
00:07:19.165 --> 00:07:21.245
Scholarship on this topic still tends

171
00:07:21.245 --> 00:07:23.685
to focus a lot on intellectual property law

172
00:07:23.785 --> 00:07:27.525
as the one possible avenue for solutions or for protection.

173
00:07:28.025 --> 00:07:29.565
But there is plenty of information

174
00:07:29.785 --> 00:07:33.085
and documents, from indigenous representatives saying

175
00:07:33.085 --> 00:07:35.645
that intellectual property law, it's just not sufficient.

176
00:07:35.795 --> 00:07:37.365
It's not sufficient, it's not adequate.

177
00:07:37.985 --> 00:07:42.805
So, even the scholarship that is critical

178
00:07:42.865 --> 00:07:46.765
of intellectual property law in its role in this field,

179
00:07:46.785 --> 00:07:48.565
it usually goes one or two ways.

180
00:07:48.665 --> 00:07:52.445
It either just restates the need for a sue generous regime

181
00:07:52.445 --> 00:07:55.485
where a regime that is tailored, to indigenous needs,

182
00:07:56.105 --> 00:07:58.205
but doesn't quite explain how

183
00:07:58.205 --> 00:08:01.445
that sue generous regime could be, articulated

184
00:08:01.505 --> 00:08:03.245
or materialized,

185
00:08:03.305 --> 00:08:05.245
or it just doesn't offer any alternatives.

186
00:08:05.345 --> 00:08:07.685
So acknowledges the problem, but without an alternative.

187
00:08:07.905 --> 00:08:09.805
And this is something that I, I seek to do

188
00:08:09.835 --> 00:08:13.125
with this chapter, with this work, which is, going

189
00:08:13.185 --> 00:08:15.085
beyond the intellectual property focus

190
00:08:15.305 --> 00:08:17.205
and assessing strengths

191
00:08:17.205 --> 00:08:19.725
and weaknesses across the three main regimes.

192
00:08:19.725 --> 00:08:22.605
And also, considering the dis ongoing discussions at

193
00:08:22.795 --> 00:08:27.045
Wipo, but also assessing how they relate to each other,

194
00:08:27.185 --> 00:08:29.405
how they can reinforce or compliment each other

195
00:08:29.945 --> 00:08:33.365
and where they conflict or where there's a contradiction.

196
00:08:33.685 --> 00:08:35.445
I do propose ways forward.

197
00:08:35.645 --> 00:08:40.005
I propose solutions, very clear, pathways to,

198
00:08:40.105 --> 00:08:41.845
to address the, the shortcomings.

199
00:08:41.985 --> 00:08:45.285
And I do that by taking this indigenous oriented approach.

200
00:08:45.995 --> 00:08:48.245
Also, not everywhere in the scholarship.

201
00:08:48.745 --> 00:08:52.325
On top of that, I, I try to give,

202
00:08:52.765 --> 00:08:54.645
a practical understanding of the analysis

203
00:08:54.785 --> 00:08:58.245
by assessing each one of these regimes, against,

204
00:08:58.625 --> 00:08:59.885
a real life scenario.

205
00:09:00.025 --> 00:09:03.165
So there is a, a case, a real case that I assess each

206
00:09:03.165 --> 00:09:04.885
of the regimes, against,

207
00:09:05.625 --> 00:09:09.925
and that gives a, a, a pretty tangible, understanding

208
00:09:09.925 --> 00:09:11.645
of the pros and cons of each regime

209
00:09:11.645 --> 00:09:13.845
and how they can be, improved.

210
00:09:14.265 --> 00:09:16.645
And finally, I conclude the chapter with,

211
00:09:16.805 --> 00:09:20.765
a very clear structured summary of the analysis of the, the,

212
00:09:20.765 --> 00:09:23.965
the key points, which I think could be useful as a,

213
00:09:23.965 --> 00:09:27.085
as a guideline, for these international efforts

214
00:09:27.145 --> 00:09:29.885
of discussions that this addressing the topic on how

215
00:09:29.945 --> 00:09:30.965
to improve

216
00:09:31.145 --> 00:09:35.365
or how to boost the already, strong points of each

217
00:09:35.365 --> 00:09:37.605
of the regimes, which is also something i I haven't

218
00:09:37.605 --> 00:09:38.645
seen in the scholarship yet.

219
00:09:38.705 --> 00:09:41.165
So an indigenous oriented approach is,

220
00:09:41.185 --> 00:09:43.485
as I mentioned earlier, looking at the themes

221
00:09:43.665 --> 00:09:45.325
of importance to indigenous peoples.

222
00:09:45.505 --> 00:09:48.685
So what are the themes is the accommodating indigenous

223
00:09:49.095 --> 00:09:50.245
worldviews and context.

224
00:09:51.005 --> 00:09:53.085
So an example is if we're thinking about intellectual

225
00:09:53.285 --> 00:09:57.285
property law, it tends to require novelty, originality,

226
00:09:57.425 --> 00:09:59.165
to, to offer the kind of protection.

227
00:09:59.265 --> 00:10:01.525
But very often when we're talking about indigenous heritage,

228
00:10:01.945 --> 00:10:04.945
it can be an ancestral song

229
00:10:05.245 --> 00:10:07.065
or a ritual ceremony.

230
00:10:07.605 --> 00:10:11.865
Um, it can be a design if that could be protected,

231
00:10:12.605 --> 00:10:14.065
via intellectual property law.

232
00:10:14.485 --> 00:10:16.505
It, it's just not gonna fit the requirements

233
00:10:16.505 --> 00:10:17.825
of novelty or in originality.

234
00:10:17.885 --> 00:10:21.465
So taking an indigenous oriented approach is thinking, okay,

235
00:10:21.485 --> 00:10:23.625
what are the key interests

236
00:10:23.625 --> 00:10:25.425
or concerns of indigenous communities?

237
00:10:25.565 --> 00:10:28.305
And also what kind of protection they need considering

238
00:10:28.305 --> 00:10:29.425
their cultural context.

239
00:10:29.965 --> 00:10:33.825
So that would be, an example thinking, again,

240
00:10:33.825 --> 00:10:36.105
intellectual property law, it tends to offer,

241
00:10:36.105 --> 00:10:37.385
protection limited in time.

242
00:10:37.445 --> 00:10:39.225
So it expires after a number of years,

243
00:10:39.685 --> 00:10:42.105
but very often indigenous communities will need protection

244
00:10:42.295 --> 00:10:44.905
perpetually, but it's something that the regime can't offer.

245
00:10:45.125 --> 00:10:48.465
So it's, it's about thinking of how to offer that kind

246
00:10:48.465 --> 00:10:51.225
of protection, which will require some adjustments in the

247
00:10:51.465 --> 00:10:53.425
existing law, rethinking indigenous participation.

248
00:10:53.885 --> 00:10:56.945
So if we are negotiating new treaties

249
00:10:57.295 --> 00:11:00.505
that are affecting indigenous peoples, first

250
00:11:00.525 --> 00:11:03.025
and foremost, because they will be the key stakeholders like

251
00:11:03.295 --> 00:11:05.665
Wipo is doing, it doesn't make much sense

252
00:11:05.765 --> 00:11:08.145
to have indigenous peoples only as observers.

253
00:11:08.145 --> 00:11:09.145
We need to hear from them,

254
00:11:09.145 --> 00:11:12.145
and we need to take their, perspectives and,

255
00:11:12.165 --> 00:11:14.425
and concerns into account,

256
00:11:14.445 --> 00:11:16.705
but also let them have decision making power.

257
00:11:16.785 --> 00:11:18.505
I think this is one of the key,

258
00:11:18.695 --> 00:11:21.305
reforms which will reflect on everything else.

259
00:11:21.645 --> 00:11:24.545
It, it will reflect on how indigenous peoples are perceived

260
00:11:24.685 --> 00:11:27.225
as, rights holders instead of,

261
00:11:27.445 --> 00:11:30.065
not specifically recognized as such in the instruments.

262
00:11:30.245 --> 00:11:32.065
And we're reflecting every other aspect

263
00:11:32.065 --> 00:11:34.745
because they will be, part of the decision making.

264
00:11:35.025 --> 00:11:37.705
I think the key takeaway is, is that if we are trying to

265
00:11:38.855 --> 00:11:41.585
improve, if we're serious about improving the, the level

266
00:11:41.845 --> 00:11:44.385
and, and the, the adequacy of the protection offered

267
00:11:44.385 --> 00:11:46.385
to indigenous heritage in international law,

268
00:11:46.405 --> 00:11:48.585
the first thing is that indigenous peoples need

269
00:11:48.585 --> 00:11:50.465
to be at the forefront of the discussion.

270
00:11:50.465 --> 00:11:52.345
So we need to, to change a little bit of

271
00:11:52.765 --> 00:11:54.125
The, the state centric

272
00:11:54.225 --> 00:11:57.165
or individual centric, rationale

273
00:11:57.165 --> 00:12:00.925
that pervades international law and try to be more, open

274
00:12:00.985 --> 00:12:04.005
and welcoming to communities and to collective rights.

275
00:12:04.225 --> 00:12:05.765
For example. Uh, I think there's a lot

276
00:12:05.765 --> 00:12:09.245
of potential in human rights law to address, some of the

277
00:12:09.925 --> 00:12:11.845
existing shortcomings, but there are some weaknesses

278
00:12:12.035 --> 00:12:13.245
that would need to be addressed.

279
00:12:13.915 --> 00:12:17.885
Generally. Uh, what I see is there can be a lot of

280
00:12:18.525 --> 00:12:21.525
resistance from states in relation to some of these reforms

281
00:12:21.525 --> 00:12:22.525
because they're pretty significant.

282
00:12:22.595 --> 00:12:25.845
They might, affect the idea of sovereignty.

283
00:12:25.915 --> 00:12:29.685
It's pretty, leading in international law.

284
00:12:30.145 --> 00:12:31.885
Uh, but there are some states

285
00:12:31.945 --> 00:12:35.365
and some regions that have been taking significant moves in

286
00:12:35.365 --> 00:12:37.645
the direction of incorporating more indigenous voices

287
00:12:38.265 --> 00:12:39.845
and also incorporating,

288
00:12:39.915 --> 00:12:42.285
instruments like the UN declaration on the rights

289
00:12:42.285 --> 00:12:43.845
of indigenous peoples, which is quite powerful,

290
00:12:43.845 --> 00:12:47.285
but non-binding and incorporating that into national law.

291
00:12:47.545 --> 00:12:50.125
So there is also appetite for change.

292
00:12:50.365 --> 00:12:53.365
I hope that chapters like this, that highlight,

293
00:12:53.505 --> 00:12:56.285
the protection of indigenous heritage in international law,

294
00:12:56.355 --> 00:12:57.925
looking at strengths,

295
00:12:57.925 --> 00:13:00.525
but also considering shortcomings in proposing solutions

296
00:13:00.745 --> 00:13:03.205
to these shortcomings can help advance the field,

297
00:13:03.625 --> 00:13:07.165
can help other countries, other international organizations

298
00:13:07.705 --> 00:13:09.845
to think of how things can be made better.

299
00:13:10.185 --> 00:13:12.205
So, advance better practices

300
00:13:12.745 --> 00:13:15.605
and just generally improve the situation, the framework

301
00:13:15.785 --> 00:13:18.125
for the protection of indigenous culture, heritage rights,

302
00:13:18.275 --> 00:13:19.925
both domestically and internationally.

Indigenous Heritage Rights and International Law

00:00:00 - Book explored many of the key aspects in that relationship, and my chapter focuses on the cultural heritage rights aspect of the relationship between indigenous peoples and international law. In the chapter, I focus on indigenous peoples rights in relation to their heritage, considering that relationship somewhat problematic historically because it originated in colonialism and still finding some traces of those issues today, especially in how international law, international actors like states or international organizations, have some difficulty in including indigenous peoples as

00:00:38 - So the chapter maps out the current state of, of international law, the framework protecting indigenous heritage, focusing on three regimes. So I'm looking at international culture, heritage law, international intellectual property law, and international human rights law, and also exploring a bit, some of the work that's going on at the World Intellectual Property Organization. Wipo as states have been negotiating new treaties, dealing specifically with the digital heritage there,

00:01:08 - So I look at how, how we could overcome some of the obstacles and impasse at Wipo too. And I look at these three regimes in the work at Wipo, considering six themes, assessing the regimes against six themes. And these themes, I identify them, as key topics, key points in indigenous people's international mobilization for heritage rights. So I, I assess the regimes, but trying to take an indigenous oriented focus

Safeguarding Indigenous Heritage: Challenges and Solutions

00:01:40 - and also ways forward. So the analysis gives us, a good understanding of the, the existing framework, what has been working, what hasn't, and also what could be improved in relation to the international framework, safeguarding indigenous heritage, I think we really need to acknowledge the particular importance of heritage for indigenous peoples. It's pervasive. It reflects, their identity, their stories, their ancestors, their spirituality,

00:02:11 - So it's connected to many other aspects of indigenous people's lives. So when international law fails to protect heritage or fails to provide a response to a threat to heritage, then all these elements can be affected so quickly think of an example. we can think of a community that has a traditional ancestral practice of weaving rugs, for example, and that practice itself might be part

00:02:42 - as reflecting spiritual elements, sacred elements, or even the community's identity. it could be even a part of their normative system. So the design in the rugs can also be part of their heritage. So what happens when international law fails to offer Tools to protect this heritage? the community might end up not finding any sort of protection. So we can think, of that rug as also a big part of the community's economic development.

Cultural Appropriation and the Gaps in International Law

00:03:15 - visitors, and then if this rug is unprotected, let's say, the designs maybe could have been protected in copyright through intellectual property law, but if there's no protection, we could get, an outsider, a visitor going to the community, purchasing a rug, maybe taking photos of, of some of the designs, and then without the C'S consent, taking those designs, to outside the community and using them for their own benefit. So we can, we can see that as cultural appropriation,

00:03:44 - nowadays in relation to heritage. There's no response in international law directly focusing on appropriation. So in that situation, the person that appropriated the designs might get away with it, because there's nothing, stopping them from doing that. And by, by doing this, what happens is that the community might lose a big source of their economic development, but their identity might also be affected because we'll have other, other persons selling the rugs. And the, the, the connection to the community's identity will be, affected,

00:04:18 - if there's something sacred in one of the designs that was taken that will be affected as well. So when there is a gap or, or there are weaknesses in the existing protection of international law, all these elements will be affected. So it, it really is a, a, a, a significant part of indigenous lives that, if not protected, will affect their lives pretty heavily as well. We really have to go back and, and, and think about the origins of that relationship between indigenous peoples and international law, and the, the traces of colonialism

Addressing the Disconnect: Indigenous Rights and International Law

00:04:47 - So one of the things, is that international law was not created or developed, taking indigenous people's concerns, needs, interests into account, in that progression of their regime. So a few indications of this, disregard for indigenous interests is that very often indigenous peoples do not have a seat at the table in processes affecting them directly. So of course, that's, that's problematic. If we think about, that committee at Wipo

00:05:18 - regarding indigenous heritage, indigenous representatives only have an observer status in that committee. So they can speak, but they don't have any decision making power, which it's definitely not ideal. Another negative aspect of international law, how it fails to respond to some of the threats, relates to the fact that international law is very fragmented, which means that, in protecting culture or heritage, international regimes will separate elements of culture. So we have, for example, cultural heritage law,

00:05:49 - or heritage as an end in itself, and protect the, the object, the tangible object. on the other side, we have have a separate protection for intangible heritage, with intellectual property law, but indigenous communities tend to perceive the heritage holistically. So all the elements are interconnected, they're integrated. So there's this significant mismatch in relation to what the kind of protection international law offers and what indigenous peoples need and, and require in terms of protection.

Addressing Gaps in International Law for Indigenous Community Rights

00:06:21 - that it's a very state centric framework. So it's either focusing on states or, for example, with human rights law, it focuses on individuals, but then where is, what, where does, where do communities sit in that situation? So there is, this big significant problem still in international law in terms of addressing community rights. And when you're thinking about heritage for indigenous peoples, they tend to perceive it as a communal, custodianship. So there's no one individual owner of the rug, for example.

00:06:56 - So as international law doesn't offer an avenue for redress or remedies for collective rights, there will be, again, a gap there. So generally what happens is that international law will, either offer insufficient protection or fragmented protection, and ultimately doesn't, provide adequate, culturally adequate responses to those threats. to indigenous heritage. Scholarship on this topic still tends to focus a lot on intellectual property law

00:07:28 - But there is plenty of information and documents, from indigenous representatives saying that intellectual property law, it's just not sufficient. It's not sufficient, it's not adequate. So, even the scholarship that is critical of intellectual property law in its role in this field, it usually goes one or two ways. It either just restates the need for a sue generous regime where a regime that is tailored, to indigenous needs,

Proposing Solutions for Indigenous Heritage Rights

00:07:58 - that sue generous regime could be, articulated or materialized, or it just doesn't offer any alternatives. So acknowledges the problem, but without an alternative. And this is something that I, I seek to do with this chapter, with this work, which is, going beyond the intellectual property focus and assessing strengths and weaknesses across the three main regimes. And also, considering the dis ongoing discussions at Wipo, but also assessing how they relate to each other,

00:08:29 - and where they conflict or where there's a contradiction. I do propose ways forward. I propose solutions, very clear, pathways to, to address the, the shortcomings. And I do that by taking this indigenous oriented approach. Also, not everywhere in the scholarship. On top of that, I, I try to give, a practical understanding of the analysis by assessing each one of these regimes, against,

00:09:00 - So there is a, a case, a real case that I assess each of the regimes, against, and that gives a, a, a pretty tangible, understanding of the pros and cons of each regime and how they can be, improved. And finally, I conclude the chapter with, a very clear structured summary of the analysis of the, the, the key points, which I think could be useful as a, as a guideline, for these international efforts of discussions that this addressing the topic on how

Enhancing Indigenous Perspectives in Intellectual Property Law

00:09:31 - or how to boost the already, strong points of each of the regimes, which is also something i I haven't seen in the scholarship yet. So an indigenous oriented approach is, as I mentioned earlier, looking at the themes of importance to indigenous peoples. So what are the themes is the accommodating indigenous worldviews and context. So an example is if we're thinking about intellectual property law, it tends to require novelty, originality, to, to offer the kind of protection. But very often when we're talking about indigenous heritage,

00:10:05 - or a ritual ceremony. it can be a design if that could be protected, via intellectual property law. It, it's just not gonna fit the requirements of novelty or in originality. So taking an indigenous oriented approach is thinking, okay, what are the key interests or concerns of indigenous communities? And also what kind of protection they need considering their cultural context. So that would be, an example thinking, again,

00:10:36 - protection limited in time. So it expires after a number of years, but very often indigenous communities will need protection perpetually, but it's something that the regime can't offer. So it's, it's about thinking of how to offer that kind of protection, which will require some adjustments in the existing law, rethinking indigenous participation. So if we are negotiating new treaties that are affecting indigenous peoples, first and foremost, because they will be the key stakeholders like Wipo is doing, it doesn't make much sense

Empowering Indigenous Voices in International Law

00:11:08 - We need to hear from them, and we need to take their, perspectives and, and concerns into account, but also let them have decision making power. I think this is one of the key, reforms which will reflect on everything else. It, it will reflect on how indigenous peoples are perceived as, rights holders instead of, not specifically recognized as such in the instruments. And we're reflecting every other aspect because they will be, part of the decision making. I think the key takeaway is, is that if we are trying to

00:11:41 - and, and the, the adequacy of the protection offered to indigenous heritage in international law, the first thing is that indigenous peoples need to be at the forefront of the discussion. So we need to, to change a little bit of The, the state centric or individual centric, rationale that pervades international law and try to be more, open and welcoming to communities and to collective rights. For example. I think there's a lot of potential in human rights law to address, some of the

00:12:12 - that would need to be addressed. Generally. what I see is there can be a lot of resistance from states in relation to some of these reforms because they're pretty significant. They might, affect the idea of sovereignty. It's pretty, leading in international law. but there are some states and some regions that have been taking significant moves in the direction of incorporating more indigenous voices and also incorporating, instruments like the UN declaration on the rights

Advancing Indigenous Heritage Protection in International Law

00:12:43 - but non-binding and incorporating that into national law. So there is also appetite for change. I hope that chapters like this, that highlight, the protection of indigenous heritage in international law, looking at strengths, but also considering shortcomings in proposing solutions to these shortcomings can help advance the field, can help other countries, other international organizations to think of how things can be made better. So, advance better practices

00:13:18 - for the protection of indigenous culture, heritage rights, both domestically and internationally.

Faculti AI can make mistakes

Research

Policy

Analysis