Individual and Collective Self-Identification as Indigenous in the European Arctic: International Legal Perspectives

dialnet-ar-18-ART0001331199

dialnet

dialnet-ar-18-ART00013311992019-07-18Individual and Collective Self-Identification as Indigenous in the European Arctic: International Legal PerspectivesKirchner, StefanWho is indigenous is a question which is often difficult to answer from the perspective of non-indigenous law. Lovelace v. Canada is one of the key cases of indigenous rights law. It forms an important precedent but it does not establish an unlimited subjective right to be indigenous within the framework of the ICCPR. The decision in Lovelace v. Canada cannot be construed as requiring states which are parties to the ICCPR to allow anybody to claim indigenous identity without the consent of the indigenous people in question. ILO 169 strengthens the position of indigenous peoples in this regard. Self-identification has multiple dimensions: collective self-identification as indigenous, individual self-identification as indigenous and collective identification of the self through the identification of an individual as indigenous. Only indigenous peoples can decide who is a member. This decision is a sovereign right of the collective.Quién es indígena es una cuestión que a menudo es difícil de contestar desde la perspectiva del derecho no indígena. Lovelace c. Canadá es uno de los casos claves de derechos indígenas. Es un precedente importante, pero no establece un derecho subjetivo ilimitado de ser indígena en el marco del PIDCP. La decisión de Lovelace v. Canadá no puede interpretarse como un precedente para que los Estados partes del Pacto puedan permitir que alguien reclame la identidad indígena, sin el consentimiento del pueblo indígena en cuestión. El Convenio 169 de la OIT refuerza la posición de los pueblos indígenas en este sentido. La autoidentificación tiene múltiples dimensiones: la colectiva, la individualy lacolectiva del yo a través de la identificación de un individuo como indígena. Sólo los pueblos indígenas pueden decidir quién es uno de sus miembros. Esta decisión es un derecho soberano del colectivo.2018text (article)application/pdfhttps://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/oaiart?codigo=6997372(Revista) ISSN 1794-600XMisión Jurídica: Revista de derecho y ciencias sociales, ISSN 1794-600X, Vol. 11, Nº. 15, 2018, pags. 27-42engLICENCIA DE USO: Los documentos a texto completo incluidos en Dialnet son de acceso libre y propiedad de sus autores y/o editores. Por tanto, cualquier acto de reproducción, distribución, comunicación pública y/o transformación total o parcial requiere el consentimiento expreso y escrito de aquéllos. Cualquier enlace al texto completo de estos documentos deberá hacerse a través de la URL oficial de éstos en Dialnet. Más información: https://dialnet.unirioja.es/info/derechosOAI | INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS STATEMENT: Full text documents hosted by Dialnet are protected by copyright and/or related rights. This digital object is accessible without charge, but its use is subject to the licensing conditions set by its authors or editors. Unless expressly stated otherwise in the licensing conditions, you are free to linking, browsing, printing and making a copy for your own personal purposes. All other acts of reproduction and communication to the public are subject to the licensing conditions expressed by editors and authors and require consent from them. Any link to this document should be made using its official URL in Dialnet. More info: https://dialnet.unirioja.es/info/derechosOAI

Dialnet

Dialnet AR

Misión Jurídica: Revista de derecho y ciencias sociales, ISSN 1794-600X, Vol. 11, Nº. 15, 2018, pags. 27-42

English

Who is indigenous is a question which is often difficult to answer from the perspective of non-indigenous law. Lovelace v. Canada is one of the key cases of indigenous rights law. It forms an important precedent but it does not establish an unlimited subjective right to be indigenous within the framework of the ICCPR. The decision in Lovelace v. Canada cannot be construed as requiring states which are parties to the ICCPR to allow anybody to claim indigenous identity without the consent of the indigenous people in question. ILO 169 strengthens the position of indigenous peoples in this regard. Self-identification has multiple dimensions: collective self-identification as indigenous, individual self-identification as indigenous and collective identification of the self through the identification of an individual as indigenous. Only indigenous peoples can decide who is a member. This decision is a sovereign right of the collective.

Article

Kirchner, Stefan

Kirchner, Stefan
Individual and Collective Self-Identification as Indigenous in the European Arctic: International Legal Perspectives

Kirchner, Stefan

Kirchner, Stefan

Individual and Collective Self-Identification as Indigenous in the European Arctic: International Legal Perspectives

Individual and Collective Self-Identification as Indigenous in the European Arctic: International Legal Perspectives

Individual and Collective Self-Identification as Indigenous in the European Arctic: International Legal Perspectives

Individual and Collective Self-Identification as Indigenous in the European Arctic: International Legal Perspectives

Individual and Collective Self-Identification as Indigenous in the European Arctic: International Legal Perspectives

individual and collective self-identification as indigenous in the european arctic: international legal perspectives

2018

https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/oaiart?codigo=6997372

1709750308111908864