Minority Rights Group International (MRG) Deputy Director, Claire Thomas, writes this opinion piece for the Thomson Reuters News Foundation.+ LEARN MORE
There is no international or regional human rights instrument which specifically deals with the right of indigenous peoples to their ancestral lands. Instead, the relevant provisions on this issue are scattered in various documents. ILO Convention no. 169 concerning indigenous and tribal peoples in independent countries dedicates one specific section on land which includes the government’s obligation to respect the indigenous peoples’ special relationship with their lands as well as to recognise their rights of ownership and possession over the traditional lands. The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People obliges the government to ensure that there is no action taken over the traditional land of the indigenous people without their free, prior and informed consent. ‘Free’ means the consent should be given by the community without any force, intimidation, manipulation, coercion or pressure by any government or company; ‘prior’ means the indigenous peoples’ consent should be asked prior to government allocating land for particular land uses and prior to giving approval for specific projects. It is also important that the indigenous community is well informed, that is, given all the relevant information in a language they understand and having access to independent information.
In addition to provisions which are directly related to indigenous peoples’ right to land, there are some other indirect but relevant provisions in regional and international instruments. The most common provision to use is concerning the right to property.
The Inter-American Court of Human Rights (the IACtHR) was the first human rights body which interpreted the right to property to be understood as to include the right of indigenous people to communal property and not merely the right to private property.
A year after the IACtHR’s judgment, the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (the ACHPR) found that Nigeria had violated the right to property of the Ogoni people due to its condoning and facilitating violent attacks on and destruction of Ogoni villages by oil corporations in Ogoniland. In its 2010 landmark decision on the Endorois case, the ACHPR also found that the Kenyan government’s dispossession of the Endorois people’s ancestral land amounted to a violation of the right to property as enshrined in Article 14 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.
Indigenous peoples have such a strong relationship with their land that the possession and access to the land is a precondition for them to survive and enjoy their fundamental rights. When indigenous peoples are denied access to their land, therefore, it is not only their right to land or right to property that is violated but often also other rights. In addition to a violation of the right to property, the ACHPR found in the Endorois case that the government of Kenya had violated the Endorois people’s right to practice their religion as the contested territory in this case was ‘of fundamental religious significance to all Endorois.' It also ruled that a violation of the right to culture had occurred, since eviction from Endorois’ sacred lands prevented them from maintaining cultural practices, holding that ‘the restriction of cultural rights could not be justified, especially as no suitable alternative was given to the community.' The decision also found violations of the right to natural resources and the right to development in relation to the Kenyan government’s subsequent use of the contested land, without seeking the Endorois’ consent.
The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (the CESCR) has highlighted in its General Comment on the right to health that displacement of indigenous people against their will from their traditional territories ‘has a deleterious effect on their health.' In the Inter-American system, the IACtHR has established the jurisprudence that the denial of indigenous peoples’ right to their traditional land is a violation of the right to life as guaranteed in Article 4 (1) of the American Convention on Human Rights.
The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and UN Human Settlements Programme has also published a joint report which, inter alia, draws the links between indigenous peoples’ access to their land, the right to self-determination and the right to housing. According to the report,
‘[t]he dispossession of indigenous peoples’ from their lands has robbed them of the ability and opportunity to use their own resources to control and determine their economic, social and cultural development. If they had access to their own land and control over their own and public resources, they would be in a better position to solve their housing problems themselves.'
A community does not have to be indigenous to the territory they inhabit in order to have the right over the land. In Moiwana Community v Suriname, the IACtHR upheld that Moiwana Community was entitled to the land they inhabited even though it was undisputed that they were not indigenous to the region. This interpretation was reaffirmed in the case of Saramaka People v Suriname few years later.
Instruments protecting land rights
- Article 17, Universal Declaration of Human Rights
- Articles 12 and 27, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
- Article 1, International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
- General Comment 4 on the Right to Adequate Housing, Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
- Article 5 (d) (v), Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
- Paragraphs 30 to 32, General Recommendation No. 27 on Roma, Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
- Paragraph 5, General Recommendation No. 23 on Indigenous People, Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
- Article 14, Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women
- Article 8 (2) (b), Article 10, Article 18, Article 19, Article 26, Article 29, and Article 30, United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
- Articles 4, 6, 7, 13 to 19, ILO Convention Concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries No. 169
- Article 1(3), ILO Convention Concerning Discrimination (Employment and Occupation), No, 111
- Articles 11 to 14, ILO Convention on the Protection and Integration of Indigenous and Other Tribal and Semi-Tribal Populations in Independent Countries, No. 107
- Articles 19 to 24, African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights
- Article XXIII, American Declaration on the Rights and Duties of Man
- Article 21, American Convention on Human Rights (Pact of San Jose)
- Article 8 and Protocol 1 Article 1, European Convention on Human Rights
- Dogan and others v Turkey, European Court of Human Rights, 2016
- Kichwa Indigenous People of Sarayaku v. Ecuador, Inter-American Court of Human Rights, 2012
- Centre for Minority Rights Development (Kenya) and Minority Rights Group International on behalf of Endorois Welfare Council v Kenya, African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, 2010
- Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions (COHRE) v. Sudan, African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, 2010
- Xakmok Kasek Indigenous Community v Paraguay, Inter-American Court of Human Rights, 2010
- Advisory Opinion of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, 2007
- Saramaka People v Suriname, Inter-American Court of Human Rights, 2007
- Sawhoyamaxa Indigenous Community v Paraguay, Inter-American Court of Human Rights, 2006
- European Roma Rights Centre v. Greece, European Committee of Social Rights, 2006
- Moiwana Community v Suriname, Inter-American Court of Human Rights, 2005
- Yakye Axa Indigenous Community v Paraguay, Inter-American Court of Human Rights, 2005
- European Roma Rights Centre v. Italy, European Committee of Social Rights, 2005
- Connors v. United Kingdom, European Court of Human Rights, 2004
- Case of the Maya Indigenous Community of the Toledo District against Belize, Inter-American Commission of Human Rights, 2004
- SERAC v Nigeria, African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, 2002
- Mayagna (Sumo) Awas Tingni Community v Nicaragua, Inter-American Court of Human Rights, 2001
- Coster v United Kingdom, European Court of Human Rights, 2001
- Brazil, Comunidad Yanomami, Case No.7615, Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, 1985
- Mosetlhanyane and others v. Attorney General of Botswana, Court of Appeal of Botswana, 2011
For an annotated compilation of case law from international human rights instruments and national courts as well as regional human rights mechanisms see the 2015 report of the United Nations OHCHR.
 ILO Convention No. 169 concerning indigenous and tribal peoples in independent countries, opened for signature June 26, 1989, part. III.
 Case of the Mayagna (Sumo) Awas Tingni Community v Nicaragua, para. 148, Merits, reparations and costs, Series C No. 79, August 31 2001.
 SERAC v Nigeria, Comm. No. 155/96, p. 15, May 27, 2002.
 Centre for Minority Rights Development (Kenya) and Minority Rights Group International on behalf of Endorois Welfare Council v Kenya, Comm. No. 276/2003, para. 79, 2010.
 Id., para. 249.
 African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights
 General Comment No. 14 on the right to health, para. 27, Committee on the Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, UN Doc. E/C.12/2000/4.
 See, for instance, Case of the Yakye Axa Indigenous Community v Paraguay, para. 160 – 178, Merits, reparations and costs, Series C No. 125, June 17 2005.
 Indigenous peoples’ right to adequate housing: a global overview, p. 10, UN-HABITAT and OHCHR, 2005.
Photo: A board member of the Endorois Welfare Council stands in front of his house with his children.
Credit: Chris Chapman/Minority Rights Group.
Share this content
- Defending our Future: Overcoming the Challenges of Returning the Ogiek Home
- Indigenous Guardianship is Imperative to Protecting Earth’s Biodiversity
- The Inter-American Court of Human Rights Issues Landmark Judgment in Indigenous Rights Case
- Working together to eradicate statelessness in the Dominican Republic
- A Peer’s Struggle for Justice
- A closer focus on Endorois women reveals strength and resilience in the face of hardship
- “Land grabbing” in Africa: An emerging legal framework highlights a lack of accountability for the UK’s role in the violation of land rights
- Armed only with their Dignity
- Social media: the new frontline in the fight against hate speech
- European Court of Human Rights upholds the ban on Hungarian Guard
- MRG dismayed by recent court decisions concerning slavery in Mauritania
- Kenyan government Task Force to implement African Court’s Ogiek judgment deeply flawed, MRG and OPDP say
- Minority Rights Group International Legal Director highly commended in prestigious law awards
- Compulsory purchase of Seven Sisters market vital to culture of London’s Latin American community, should not go ahead, says MRG
- African Court releases unanimous decision of judges on Ogiek land case – full judgment coming soon
- Huge victory for Kenya’s Ogiek as African Court sets major precedent for indigenous peoples’ land rights
- African Court to deliver landmark judgment on Ogiek community land rights case against Kenyan government
- Mauritanie: La décision de l’organe Africain sur les Droits de l’Enfant de statuer sur une affaire d’esclavage représente une « lueur d’espoir », disent les organisations de lutte contre l’esclavage
- Međunarodna grupa za prava manjina (MRG) ukazuje na nepostupanje Bosne i Hercegovine po presudi protiv diskriminacije donešene od strane najvišeg Evropskog suda za ljudska prava
- MRG calls out Bosnia for failing to comply with discrimination ruling from Europe’s highest court
- HRC45 – MRG welcomes the new Special Rapporteur on indigenous peoples and highlights the growing problem of “fortress conservation” projects violating indigenous peoples’ rights
- Declaration of Solidarity with Indigenous Batwa Prisoners in the Democratic Republic of the Congo
- EPU – La RDC doit passer des engagements aux actes pour garantir les droits traditionnels des peuples autochtones
- Joint Statement on the Right to Land- 58th Session of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
- Belize: Advocating Maya people’s rights to land
- Bosnia and Herzegovina: Bosniak barred from running for Presidency
- Bosnia and Herzegovina: Ensuring the political participation of minorities
- Botswana: Tribal recognition and equality for the Wayeyi
- Burundi: Protecting Batwa land rights
- Chagos Islands: The Right of Return for the Chagossians
- Chile: Mapuche and the right to non-discrimination and equality
- Democratic Republic of Congo: Protecting Batwa land rights
- Kenya: Guaranteeing Ogiek rights
- Mauritania: Challenging slavery of Haratine Women and Children
- In the name of security – Human rights violations under Iran’s national security laws
- Guidance: Exhausting domestic remedies under the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights
- Pocket book for Russian non-governmental organizations and grassroots minority organisations
- Collateral Damage of the Dayton Peace Agreement: Discrimination Against Minorities in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Twenty Years On
- Moving towards a Right to Land: The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights’ Treatment of Land Rights as Human Rights
- State of the World’s Minorities and Indigenous Peoples 2012
- Trouble in paradise – tourism and indigenous land rights: Together towards ethical solutions
- Batwa Land Rights in Rwanda (February 2003)