Consultation doesn't always equal consent
Tribal leaders play an important role locally, statewide and nationally. This could extend globally. 'It's important for tribal leaders to be here because you have a seat at the table,' said Joe Deere, co-chair of NCAI's international committee. 'Your voice is going to get heard. You're going to be able to communicate with other people across the United States, and now even other countries.'Over the last few years, the two national Indigenous organizations have ramped up their work internationally to advocate for the implementation of free, prior and informed consent in the United States, knowing it could take many years to actualize. 'We need to be ready to run a marathon to make that happen,' said Aaron Jones, co-chair of the international committee for the National Congress of American Indians. 'We're talking about implementing this and I know we're really in the early stages.'
HistoryIn 2007, an overwhelming majority of the countries that make up the UN General Assembly voted in favor of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. It's not shocking that the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand initially voted against the legal, nonbinding declaration. (Eventually the four countries changed their position on a document that in essence states that Indigenous peoples are human beings with the right to exist in perpetuity.) The most well-known and heralded right listed in the 46 articles is free, prior and informed consent. This principle doesn't just apply to land rights, which it's often conflated with. It also applies to culture, language, food systems, intellectual property, governmental laws and landback. The phrasing is intentional with every word having a principle behind it. Free meaning that consent is given without coercion, threats, violence, manipulation or bribery. Consent is given voluntarily.There are many examples of consent given under threat, violence or coercion in the United States.
Navajo leaders signed the Treaty of 1868 with the federal government after the tribe was death marched over 400 miles from their homelands that span New Mexico, Arizona, and Utah to Bosque Redondo in eastcentral New Mexico where they were placed in a concentration camp. More than 8,000 Navajo people were forcibly kept at Bosque Redondo for three years. During that time, illness, starvation, or exposure took the lives of over 2,000 Navajo people. During the termination era, the federal government passed the Indian Relocation Act of 1956. It would coerce thousands of Indigenous people to leave their homelands with the promise of job opportunities, more pay, and housing. Instead, many were left without work, training or housing. Prior means that Indigenous communities and nations have adequate time to go through the decision-making process well-before governments, companies or other third parties have made a decision. The third word of the phrase, informed, means that Indigenous nations must be completely and fully informed about the environmental, health and social impacts of a planned project.
'For example, in the Philippines, when there was a mining project in one area, and the community said, 'We want to know the details of the project. So if you don't share to us the full information of the project, we cannot come out with an informed decision. We need to know everything,'' said Joan Carling, a renowned Indigenous rights activist and environmentalist. The documentation has to include all the information about the proposed project including size, purpose, scope and time length. Most importantly, the information must be shared in a language the community is most comfortable with, and in a format that aligns with the community's needs. 'What can be the positive and negative impacts of the project? So, it should be complete and accurate information,' said Carling, Kankanaey tribe in the Philippines.The Philippines codified free, prior and informed consent in the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act passed in 1997. A year later, Ecuador passed a new constitution that recognized Indigenous peoples right to free, prior and informed consent. In 2011, Colombia's Constitutional Court, which acts much like the Supreme Court, made a historic ruling that recognized the decision-making framework as a human right for Indigenous peoples. However, its full and fair implementation hasn't come without controversy.ConsentThere is a big difference between consultation and consent. Consultation in the United States doesn't have to include consent but tribal nations have made great strides in this area. Although not required, it's often a goal for the federal government to reach a consensus or agreement with a tribal nation. Historically, this hasn't always been the case. In 1948, the federal government approved the Garrison Dam that flooded 152,000 acres of Mandan Hidatsa and Arikara land in North Dakota, despite objections from the tribe. It forced the relocation of 325 families from the tribe. Last year, a judge ruled against Arizona-based tribes, Tohono O'odham Nation and San Carlos Apache Tribe, in a suit that was challenging the construction of the SunZia transmission line in southern Arizona's San Pedro Valley. The line passes through an area that holds historic, cultural and spiritual significance for the nations. The two tribes have been fighting its construction for years, advocating that it be built alongside land that has already been developed. It crosses 'one of the most intact cultural landscapes in the Southwest,' a 2024 lawsuit by the Tohono O'odham Nation stated. The project was a cornerstone of former President Joe Biden's green energy agenda. 'The SunZia Transmission Project will accelerate our nation's transition to a clean energy economy by unlocking renewable resources, creating jobs, lowering costs, and boosting local economies,' Deb Haaland, former Interior Secretary, said in a 2023 press release. 'Through historic investments from President Biden's Investing in America agenda, the Interior Department is helping build modern, resilient climate infrastructure that protects our communities from the worsening impacts of climate change.'The case was appealed to the Court of the Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The panel of judges heard oral arguments on March 26. An opinion has yet to be released. Adopting the principles of free, prior and informed consent could help to alleviate legal issues like this. The federal government and companies could avoid lengthy and costly legal battles by engaging in this process. 'One thing we see over and over again, and I'm sure everyone in this room is aware that projects will come in, including now renewable energy projects, there will be human rights violations, violations of the right to (free, prior and informed consent), land rights. People will exercise their right to protest and raise concerns about those harms,' said Christine Dodsen, co-lead of the Civic Freedoms & Human Rights Defenders Programme. 'Then there will be a crackdown against human rights defenders, either directly by the company, by governments, and that will then lead... to financial risks, legal risks for the company. For business actors, this model could lead to reduced risks, and a competitive advantage.'The United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues will release a report with recommendations, to the United Nations and member states, based on interventions given during the two-week event. It will be released sometime this year. The forum concluded May 2.
Our stories are worth telling. Our stories are worth sharing. Our stories are worth your support. Contribute $5 or $10 today to help ICT carry out its critical mission. Sign up for ICT's free newsletter.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Hill
41 minutes ago
- The Hill
Abrego Garcia lawyers again ask for delay in release from jail, citing deportation threat
Mistakenly deported man Kilmar Abrego Garcia is asking a Tennessee-based federal judge to delay any ruling to release him by 30 days as his legal team seeks clarity of Trump administration plans to deport him. Attorneys for Abrego Garcia said the delay was needed 'given the uncertainty of the outcome of any removal proceedings.' DOJ has not objected to the request. Abrego Garcia spent weeks imprisoned in El Salvador after being deported due to an administrative error despite a 2019 order from an immigration judge barring him from being returned to his home country. Attorneys for the Justice Department said if Abrego Garcia is released, he would be picked up by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents. Though Abrego Garcia cannot be deported to El Savlador, he could be sent to another country that agrees to take him, and the Trump administration has sought such arrangements with countries such as South Sudan. Abrego Garcia is fighting in two courts to bar his deportation, including the Maryland federal court where his family first sought his return from a Salvadoran prison. It's unusual for those facing charges to fight their release from prison – a sign of the uncertainty facing Abrego Garcia as the Justice Department argues they have little control or insight into how immigration authorities would handle his case. Abrego Garcia was returned to the U.S. as the Trump administration announced they would bring human trafficking charges against the man stemming from a 2022 traffic stop in Tennessee where he was seen driving other men without luggage. A ruling is expected shortly in Maryland, where Judge Paula Xinis has been asked to bar the Trump administration from deporting Abrego Garcia. In an attempt to stave off Xinis from taking any action, government attorneys agreed to abide by certain procedures before deporting him to a third country. But Abrego Garcia's lawyers said those guarantees don't alleviate their concerns. 'It leaves open the critical question of whether my client will receive effective notice and an opportunity to be heard in a court before he is removed to an as-yet unidentified third country,' attorney Jonathan Cooper said at a hearing in Xinis's court room earlier this month.


Washington Post
an hour ago
- Washington Post
Ford Foundation's outgoing president joins the board of Obama Foundation
Darren Walker's post-Ford Foundation future is starting to take shape, as the outgoing president is now set to join The Obama Foundation's board of directors. The Obama Foundation, the Chicago-based nonprofit of former President Barack Obama and former First Lady Michelle Obama focused on encouraging active involvement in democracy through initiatives like the My Brother's Keeper Alliance and the Obama Youth Jobs Corps, announced Monday that Walker would join the board on Nov. 1.


CBS News
2 hours ago
- CBS News
Fewer judges serving backlogged Colorado immigration courts after firings and severance offers
Colorado has a backlog of more than 73,000 immigration cases pending before the courts, but now there are fewer judges to hear those cases. An immigration judge serving at the Aurora Immigration Court, housed at the Immigration and Customs Enforcement GEO Group detention facility, was fired this month by the Trump administration. The court's website now lists just one judge serving there, where 1,200 people are detained. Two other judges at the Immigration Court in downtown Denver took voluntary separation offers, sources tell CBS News. The Denver Immigration Court lists six judges still serving. The union representing the judges says these actions are harming judicial independence. Immigration judges are represented by the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers. Matt Biggs is the president of the IFPTE, and said, "the administration's intention is to actually enforce immigration laws very strictly. You do that by having a healthy supply of immigration judges, and this administration is going in the opposite direction; they're actually firing the very judges that need to hear these cases." The union says it takes at least a year to hire and onboard a new immigration judge. The Justice Department's Executive Office of Immigration Review, which oversees the nation's immigration courts, declined to comment.