French Polynesia 'autonomy' does not meet international standards

Statement to the United Nations 

Special Committee on Decolonisation

Dr. Carlyle G. Corbin

Senior Fellow

Dependency Studies Project

cgcorbinmon@yahoo.com

  

24th  June 2016

(CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY)

Mr. Chairman, distinguished members of the Special Committee,

I wish to thank you for the opportunity to address the Committee on the agenda item of the “Question of French Polynesia,” the most recent territory added to the United Nations list of non self-governing territories.

In establishing the substantive basis for the re-inscription, a Self- Governance Assessment of French Polynesia was undertaken to ascertain the level of self-government according to recognised international standards. In this regard, the diagnostic tool of Self-Governance Indicators (SGIs) was utilised to determine the nature of the political status relationship between the territory and the administering Power.

The SGIs are derived from the minimum standards of self-government as contained in international instruments including the U.N. Charter, General Assembly and ECOSOC resolutions, and human rights conventions including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR); the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR); the Convention on the Elimination of All forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD) among other relevant conventions. This is consistent with General Assembly resolutions which recognise self-determination as an inalienable human right. Relevant opinions of the International Court of Justice and the U.N. Legal Office are among the definitive sources utilised.

The SGIs were formulated with specific reference to small island non-independent countries and territories, and are used to identify the nature of the political relationship between a cosmopole and a non-independent country. The SGIs are specifically tailored for three sub-categories of: 

1) Non-self-governing territories, 

2) Those territories which are characterised - or mis-characterised - as autonomous forms of governance (as was the case with French Polynesia prior to its re-inscription in 2013)

3) The third category contains the territories which have been integrated with full political rights in the cosmopole, and sometimes with only partial political rights in the cosmopole. 

Examples of these three categories can be found in the Pacific and Caribbean regions. Self-governance Assessments have proven useful to the territories themselves in the absence of the “periodic analyses...of the implementation of the (Decolonisation) Declaration" that were to have been completed for each territory as a mandate of the General Assembly in the plans of action of the International Decades for the Eradication of Colonialism. such analyses have never been undertaken even as they were to have been important substantive outputs of the first, second and current third IDECs.

With specific reference to the Assessment of Self-Governance Sufficiency of French Polynesia, three dimensions were analysed:

In the constitutional and political dimension,

* The right to self-determination

* Unilateral applicability of constitutional provisions and laws of the administering power

* The freedom to draft or modify an internal constitution control of the electoral system

* Judicial procedures were all explored.

In the economic and social dimension,

* The nature and extent of the economic relationship between the territory and the administering power

* The level of authority of the territory to autonomously engage in regional economic affairs 

* The highly important ownership, control and permanent sovereignty of the natural resources by the people of the territory

* Jurisdiction over cultural preservation matters including the use of indigenous languages 

In the military and strategic dimension, 

* the utilisation of the territory for military activities with specific reference to longstanding General Assembly resolutions which addressed the question of whether the establishment of such installations might impede the implementation of the Decolonisation Declaration

In essence, the SGIs measure the power relationship - the power or imbalance of power that an administering power maintains over the territory, its people and its resources. In this connection, the SGIs assess the level of unilateral authority of an administering power to legislate for the territory, without their consent and against their will." 

_____________________________

The Assessment of French Polynesia concluded the following:

- The term autonomy is mis-applied to the current French Polynesia dependency model which is indicative of a dependency governance arrangement which had been modernised over time, in form and nomenclature, but not in substance. 

- The Assessment found that there remained a significance political

imbalance and high degree of unilateral authority exercised by the

administering Power in the political, socio-economic and the strategic dimensions, among other areas. 

- The Assessment identified significant democratic deficiencies in this particular dependency governance model.

- The Assessment ultimately determined that French Polynesia “did

not meet the recognised international standards for the full measure of self-government through autonomous governance.” 

*****

Accordingly, the Self-Governance Assessment for French Polynesia provided the substantive analytical basis for the adoption by the General Assembly of Resolution 67/265 re-inscribing the territory on the U.N. list of non self-governing territories, and further confirms the applicability of international law to French Polynesia's decolonisation pursuant to General Assembly Resolutions 68/93, 69/103, and 70/100.

It is reported publicly that a new proposal, in the form of an "accord," is being formulated by the administering Power for application to the territory. The Special Committee should examine closely whether such an "accord" corrects the imbalance of power in the present political relationship, or whether it is a form of colonial modernisation, rather than genuine decolonisation, with little or no effect on the non self-governing nature of the political status of French Polynesia.

For our part, the Dependency Studies Project is prepared to conduct the standard Assessment on this "accord" when it is publically revealed to ascertain self-governance sufficiency through the use of the Self-Governance Indicators, and would be pleased to share the findings with member States of this Committee through the proper modality.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Anguilla's Chief Minister statement on the impact of BREXIT

ANGUILLA NEWS

STATEMENT OF VICTOR FRANKLIN BANKS

CHIEF MINISTER

ANGUILLA

My People, 

 Many of you like me stayed up last night into the wee hours of the morning to hear the outcome of the UK referendum on whether or not to stay in the European Union. It was a “hot button” issue and became increasingly hotter as the date approached. One of the unfortunate casualties of the campaign process was the senseless assassination of a British Member of Parliament, the late Hon. Jo Cox. 

I take this opportunity, as I did not do it before, to extend my sympathies to her family, friends, associates and a country who now mourn her loss. I strongly decry this violent perversion of democracy that usually comes from the rhetoric that attends callous political campaigning. Let us continue to be tolerant of the views of others without boisterousness and rancor. 

British citizens living in the United Kingdom for the most part have decided that their longstanding and leadership participation in the European Community/Union should now come to an end. The consequential outcome of this must be how they now intend to move forward outside of that arrangement. 

Obviously, there is no shortage of views on this issue --- but already the financial response to this decision has manifested itself in the reports that the value of the pound is at its lowest levels since 1985 as well as an estimation of losses of up to 200 billion pounds in the stock market. This may be a temporary situation but it is cause for concern. 

At the Joint Ministerial Council Meeting at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office last December, I made the intervention that I was concerned that as Overseas Territories we have been hearing about the proposed referendum but that there was no discussion or consultation as to how this might affect us. I was highlighting the fact that even though we would not be participating in the referendum we would be affected by it and should in some way be in the conversation. 

What was also ironic was that we had come to understand that the Minister responsible for the Overseas Territories was a proponent of leaving the European Union (EU). It was therefore not surprising that a few short days before the referendum he commented that were the UK to leave the EU the Overseas Territories could be in a good position. Obviously, in the present circumstances many of us would hope that to be the case. 

While I am not prepared to express my personal views on the issue in these early stages I would like to respond with some general comments to some of the questions that have been raised to me by a number of our citizens. 

Firstly, at this juncture the reality is that the UK Government has been advised through a referendum that the majority of its citizens do not wish to continue into the future as part of the European Union. Because this was the process that the UK Government chose to make that determination, the Prime Minister by virtue of the agreement must now officially convey that decision to the European Commission. 

In other words, leaving the EU will not happen today or even within the next few months. It is estimated that these negotiations could take up to two years to be negotiated and consummated. The UK Prime Minister has also indicated that since he was a proponent of remaining he will step down in October to allow another Prime Minister to negotiate the exit arrangements. 

Secondly, Anguilla and the other Overseas Territories must now begin to talk about how this future arrangement will impact us. Now that the decision is clear we will need to know where we stand. The fact is that even though we are all Overseas Territories and face similar challenges there are a number of situations that may be unique to Anguilla. 

“Off the bat”, I can think of one important situation close to home, which is, how will this affect our relationship with St. Maarten-St. Martin. Obviously, there are many such issues that we and the other OT’s will include in our list of concerns for discussion. 

Thirdly, it is inevitable that at some point after the negotiations we will not have an EU passport --- but I expect that we will continue to have a UK passport that will probably afford us the same travel privileges. A number of persons have asked me whether we will still be able to travel to the United States without a visa. While that is completely a matter for the US immigration authorities I would expect that, Britain being one of the closest allies of the United States --- its citizens would continue to enjoy the same privileges extended to citizens of the EU. In this sense --- the status quo should not change. 

Fourthly, the EU represents the largest and perhaps only significant source of grant funding under the EDF for Anguilla and the other OT’s. A reasonable concern would be what will happen to our participation in that program once the UK exits the European Union. Obviously, the answer to such questions will be derived from our consultations with the UK Government. However, we can also reasonably expect that the British Government may fill this gap. And an optimistic view could be that such funding is likely increase bearing in mind it will now be coming directly from our administering power rather than through the European Commission. 

Fifthly, a number of the international obligations that Britain extends to the OT’s given it membership in the EU may no longer be managed in the same way. I suggest that the views of the OT’s in such instances are more likely to be taken on board in a favourable manner given the UK’s very intimate understanding of our peculiar circumstances. 

Finally, we note that Scotland voted overwhelmingly to remain in the EU. And it is now being hinted that the Scottish people may now wish to conduct another referendum on the question of Independence. In some sense Scotland can also be regarded as a colony of the UK. Does this in some way suggest that the Overseas Territories may also wish to include a similar option, namely, Independence, in their consultations with the UK Government? The outcome of our deliberations with the administering power therefore promises to be very interesting. 

Let me take this opportunity to wish the people of the United Kingdom all the best in the days ahead. This has been described as a historic decision given Britain’s role in the European Community for over forty years. Inevitably, the fact that we were powerless to influence the decision one way or the other --- there will be even more uncertainty and helplessness for the Overseas Territories in the days, weeks, months and years ahead. 

May God bless us all.
And may God bless Anguilla.

St. Croix Attorney to deliver Sint Maarten Emancipation Day lecture

"Women Political Leaders in Non-Independent Territories"

French maneuvers persist over French Polynesia's natural resources

"We have continually emphasized the critical nature of the (natural) resource question as a core issue for our future development. Whether or not these resources are considered in Paris to be "strategic" is irrelevant to the applicability of international legal decisions which place the ownership of natural resources with the people of  Ma'ohi Nui."

Statement of Richard Ariihau TUHEIAVA

Member of the House of Assembly of French Polynesia

to the 

Statement to Special Committee on Decolonization

24 June 2016

Mr. Chairman, members of the Special Committee,

In my capacity as elected member of the House of Assembly of French Polynesia from the Group “Union Pour La Démocratie” (U.P.L.D), I wish to extend warmest regards from the people of Ma’ohi Nui/French Polynesia, and from our esteemed political leader Oscar Temaru. We reiterate our congratulations to you on your election to chair the Special Committee. We wish to also express our deep appreciation to the Government of Nicaragua for hosting an outstanding 2016 Pacific regional seminar where new ideas were considered to give substance to the decolonization process, on the ground in the territories themselves. We also congratulate Ambassador Peter Thomson of Fiji on his recent election to the Presidency of the General Assembly. 

Mr. Chairman,

It has been three years since Ma'ohi Nui/French Polynesia has been re-inscribed on the United Nations list of Non Self-Governing Territories by way of General Assembly Resolution 67/265 following the unilateral decision of the administering Power in 1947 to cease their Article 73(e) obligations to transmit information to the U.N. on our territory. Even as the General Assembly has formally confirmed the applicability of Article 73 of the Charter to our territory, the administering Power still refuses to transmit information in clear violation of the Charter - the highest form of international law. 

Nevertheless, the denial of our re-listing does not negate the fact that the process of decolonization was made wholly applicable to Ma'ohi Nui/French Polynesia by Resolution 67/265, and the inalienable rights of the Ma'ohi people have been formally recognized. Of particular note is the inalienable right of the people to ownership, control and permanent sovereignty over their natural resources, including marine resources and undersea minerals, within our 5 million square kilometer exclusive economic zone. 

This inalienable right is in accordance with the relevant resolutions of the General Assembly, decisions of the International Court of Justice (ICOJ), and U.N. legal opinions. Accordingly, these resources belong to the Ma'ohi people, not to the administering Power even as it seeks to exercise a unilateral authority to claim particularly those resources which are considered "strategic" in nature through a Presidential decree in Paris with no consultation with the people of our territory or its elected government. 

A most recent disregard of these rights is the announced plans by the administering Power to claim through the U.N. Commission on the Continental Shelf an extended continental shelf in our waters. This comes just after the Commission decision to allow the claim of a half-million square kilometres in New Caledonia waters. Such decisions are inconsistent with the relevant decisions of the ICOJ, the General Assembly and the U.N. Legal Office earlier cited. We urge the Special Committee to engage the U.N. Commission on this inconsistency. 

In our statements to this Committee, and to the Fourth Committee, we have continually emphasized the critical nature of the resource question as a core issue for our future development. Whether or not these resources are considered in Paris to be "strategic" is irrelevant to the applicability of international legal decisions which place the ownership of natural resources with the people of the non self-governing territories. The hurried departure by the administering Power delegation from the meeting room whenever the words "French Polynesia" are uttered is clear indication that they do not wish to discuss such issues as their attempt at the "resource grab", lack of compensation for the effects of nuclear testing, among other actions which violate international norms. We once again urge the administering Power to come to the table and comply with the rule of law of the United Nations Charter. 

Mr. Chairman, 

The General Assembly has consistently affirmed that "in the process of decolonization, there is no alternative to the principle of self-determination, which is also a fundamental human right, as recognized under the relevant human rights conventions." 

In this connection, the Special Committee should remain vigilant as to the fundamental distinction between colonial reform and decolonization. Proposed measures to modernize the status quo dependency arrangements, with no intention to bring about genuine decolonization, must be carefully examined by this Committee to avoid the inadvertent legitimization of arrangements which remain colonial in nature, but which may be projected to you as self-government. These models only represent, however, the 'illusion' of self-government. 

In this connection, a colonial accord to modernize the existing political status of our territory is under consideration in Paris with an announcement to this effect expected before the end of the year. While it is being reported that this proposal would address some of the outstanding issues between our territory and the administering Power, it is not intended to alter the overall unilateral authority of the administering Power over the territory. We will provide this Committee with an independent assessment of this colonial accord in due course. But suffice to say that such a colonial accord, without even the concurrence of the people of the territory, does not replace a legitimate process of self-determination leading to genuine decolonization with absolute political equality - principles which the General Assembly has continuously reaffirmed. 

Rather, the colonial accord is designed to extend the French policy of 'assimilation' which would effectively bring our territory closer to a unilateral political integration without the concurrence of the people. Such unilateral annexation does not constitute decolonization, and we interpret these maneuvers as a counter strategy to the recognized process of self-determination. 

The intention of such schemes, in our view, is to avoid compliance with the obligations of the U.N. Charter by blocking or deviating the self-determination process. It is, therefore, especially important that the doctrine of 'transfer of powers' be operationalized so that a genuine decolonization process can be initiated pursuant to the resolutions of the General Assembly under U.N. auspices - if the process is to be free and fair, un-impeded by external interference, and therefore genuine. 

Accordingly, the resolutions on the U.N. role in the political education programme on the legitimate decolonization options of political equality must be implemented along with other actions mandated by decolonization resolutions.

In conclusion, we wish to reiterate our request that Resolution 70/100 adopted by the United Nations General Assembly last December be updated to include the important references to the action by the Assembly of French Polynesia on nuclear compensation, and to affirm the right of the Ma’ohi people to their natural resources, including marine resources and resources of the seabed.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

"Publish French nuclear testing report" - French Polynesia leader to United Nations

"I was born in 1969. For the four first years of my life, thirty one atomic bombs exploded in the sky, in my childhood backyard. Unlike radiation, I am not invisible - nor are all children born after 2nd July 1966, and their parents who worked at Moruroa or around. Today, tomorrow, our eyes will keep staring at the U.N, until justice is served." 

Statement of Moetai Brotherson

Third Deputy Mayor of Faa'a

French Polynesia/Ma'ohi Nui

to the 

United Nations Special Committee on Decolonization

24 June 2016

Mr. Chairman,

Distinguished members of the Special Committee on Decolonisation,

I extend my warm regards from the people of Ma'ohi Nui for this opportunity to address you on the Question of French Polynesia.

The effects of nuclear testing on a people can no longer be regarded as an issue solely between the administering power and its non-self-governing territory. Issues of reparations for the gross violation of the human rights through massive exposure to radioactivity for 30 years of atmospheric and underground testing by France can be easily pushed aside under the guise of national security, and information vital to address the damage rendered inaccessible.

It is critical that the impact on the people of Ma'ohi Nui be addressed by the United Nations (U.N.) and its affiliated institutions for the true nature of such exposure and ongoing effects to be properly understood without the filter of the perceived military strategic context of an administering Power. Only then shall the appropriate compensation to the victims and their families be accurately determined and subsequently addressed.

As indicated in the relevant General Assembly resolutions on French Polynesia since 2013 - most recently in Resolution 70/100 of 9 December 2015, the aftermath of French nuclear testing continues to plague our people, victims of 193 atmospheric and underground nuclear tests from 1966 to 1997, equivalent to 720 Hiroshima bombs in our atmosphere, and 210 underground.

As former President of French Polynesia, Oscar Termaru has told Pacific leaders, "Our people are dying of several nuclear related illnesses that are bound to be passed to many generations to come." Since our re-inscription in 2013, these issues emanating from the relationship between the territory and the administering Power are properly subject to international scrutiny pursuant to the U.N. Charter. Noticeably, the request to the Secretary-General for a study to be conducted on the "environmental, ecological, health and other impacts as a consequence of the thirty year period of nuclear testing" in French Polynesia. We express our appreciation of the member States for their authorization of this study.

However, even though that report was released in July 2014, it was rather curiously circulated one month after the Special Committee on Decolonization completed its work for that year. Therefore, there was no opportunity to discuss the findings in the C-24 following the publication of the Secretary General's report.

Moreover the content of the report was far from comprehensive, comprising a mere compilation of replies from just two U.N. agencies out of some 22 requests for information. It barely addressed the issue, and failed to assess the impact experienced today by thousands of our people still awaiting justice for this blatant disregard of humanity. One of the references in the report was to an outdated 1996 International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) study which said at the time that the impact to the health of the Ma’ohi people as a result of the nuclear tests was negligible. 

That this finding has been proven to be grossly premature is an understatement. The IAEA could be particularly useful in assisting us in a more comprehensive approach to this issue, consistent with the mandate of the General Assembly for the U.N. specialized agencies to assist the non self-governing territories.

A subsequent document of the U.N. Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation - not referenced in the Secretary General's Report - quite properly found “that the testing of nuclear weapons in the atmosphere involved unrestrained releases of radioactive materials to the environment locally, regionally and globally (depending on the altitude of the explosion), causing the largest collective dose thus far from manmade sources of radiation."

A stakeholder statement presented to the 2013 Human Rights Council Universal Peer Review of France concluded that 17 years after the last French nuclear test was held in the Pacific, our people are still "living with the legacy of hundreds of nuclear tests."

Mr. Chairman,

We are fortunate to be able to draw on the 2014 Independent Report on "The French Nuclear Testing in French Polynesia" prepared by renowned scientists that provides a comprehensive analysis of the impacts of nuclear testing worthy of member State consideration. 

Consistent with established practice, such report can be issued as document of the General Assembly under the relevant agenda items - in this case, items on decolonization, human rights, and disarmament among others. We reiterate our request for the Committee to publish this independent report as a document of the General Assembly so that it becomes a part of the substantive documentation as we recognize that certain political pressures on the U.N. bureaucracy might not facilitate the comprehensive review for it might reveal inconvenient truths about the impact of the nuclear testing on our people.

We also reiterate our earlier request that this Committee call on the U.N. Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation to add the impact of the nuclear testing in French Polynesia to their substantive work program. We shall raise these issues at an upcoming session of the Human Rights Council.

Mr. Chairman,

We recall to the attention of this Committee the adoption by the Assembly of French Polynesia in November 2014 of a resolution calling upon France to acknowledge the colonial nature of its nuclear testing programme in Ma’ohi nui. The resolution created an expert committee to assess and evaluate the financial damages caused by the occupation.

This resolution was provided to the Committee of 24 in 2015 for the information of member States, and it was natural to expect that reference would have been made to this important development in the subsequent 2015 and 2016 Secretariat Working Papers on French Polynesia. We also assumed that a development of this magnitude - in this case, a proper decision of the elected Assembly of the territory - would have been included in the draft resolution on French Polynesia last year.

To our disappointment, the reference to the legally constituted decision of our elected Assembly was glaringly absent.

So we were quite surprised that there was no reference to the French Polynesia Assembly resolution on compensation for nuclear testing in either the Working Paper, the draft resolution, or any other relevant U.N. documentation on the territory.

Are we to assume that these developments were not worthy of U.N. consideration? Or was there undue pressure exerted by the administering Power behind the scenes, to censor such references? In any case, we will continue to watch the documentation closely going forward with eyes wide open.

Mr. Chairman, 

The effects of atomic radiation know no political boundaries. Yet, it is precisely because of our dependency status that the survivors have been denied justice and reparation. We take seriously the decision of the General Assembly to re-inscribe our territory which had been unilaterally removed from the U.N. list. We now fully expect that the mandates that you approve are effectively carried out to the fullest. We expended significant energy and resources to be re-inscribed so that our process of decolonization would be realized. We remain committed to this end, and intend to work closely with this committee in pursuit of that goal. 

Mr. Chairman, 

I was born in 1969. For the four first years of my life, thirty one atomic bombs exploded in the sky, in my childhood backyard. Unlike radiation, I am not invisible - nor are all children born after 2nd July 1966, and their parents who worked at Moruroa or around. Today, tomorrow, our eyes will keep staring at the U.N, until justice is served. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

"PALAU - TO INDEPENDENT NATION FROM THE COLONIAL OUTPOST"

NEW BOOK!!

Attorney J. Roman Bedor (l), author of "Palau - To Independent Nation from the Colonial Outpost" presents his book to Dr. Carlyle Corbin, International Advisor on Governance, during a book signing at the University of Guam following recent panel discussion on the free association political status option. Attorney Bedor is a member of Rubekul Belau, Palau Council of Chiefs; and advisor to the President of the Republic of Palau.

Colombia’s San Andres Island, a Jewel in the Caribbean

Latin American Herald Tribune

SAN ANDRES, Colombia – San Andres Island has become a jewel for Colombia’s tourism industry, giving visitors a taste of a vibrant urban lifestyle and the beauty of the sea.

San Andres, located in the Caribbean Sea off the coast of Nicaragua, is a UNESCO biosphere reserve and its waters harbor the third-largest barrier reef in the world, a natural feature that is only smaller than those in Australia and Belize.

San Andres, just a two-hour flight from Colombia’s capital, Bogota, is the largest island in an archipelago that also includes Providencia and Santa Catalina islands, as well as 18 keys.

San Andres is also the largest island in the group, with an area of 26 sq. kilometers (10 sq. miles) and about 70,000 year-round residents.

The government has banned new construction on the island unless developers undergo a rigorous process, investing a large sum and demonstrating that the project will benefit San Andres and its residents.

Most of the lodging is British-style bed and breakfast offerings, providing visitors with an affordable stay that brings them into contact with locals.

The archipelago’s big draw, however, is nature, with an estimated 10 percent of the world’s marine plants and animals living in its waters.

One surprise for many visitors is the large military presence in the islands, with the Colombian armed forces deployed in the area to fight drug trafficking and provide a show of force in the face of Nicaragua’s claims to the archipelago.

Should settler privilege be permitted to supercede the genuine right of self-determination of the peoples of Guam?

Plan of Action for full Implementation of the Decolonization Declaration 

United Nations General Assembly Resolution 35/118

 11 December 1980

******

"Member States shall adopt the necessary measures to discourage or prevent the systematic influx of outside immigrants and settlers into Territories under colonial administration which disrupts the demographic composition of those Territories and may constitute a major obstacle to the genuine exercise of the right to self-determination and independence by the people of those Territories." 

********

Tales of Decolonization #13: In the Shadow of Davis

I wrote yesterday about the case Tuaua v. the United States, which deals with the issue of birthright citizenship, American Samoans and whether the US Constitution automatically follows wherever the American flag is flown. This case, which was recently declined by the US Supreme Court and won't be heard this year, has been casting an anxious shadow over Guam, as it could have serious ramifications for how the Government of Guam decides to forge ahead with its plans for decolonization. 

I mentioned briefly another case that has cast an even larger shadow over the decolonization movement in Guam for the past few years and that is Davis v. The Government of Guam, which was filed by Dave Davis, who argues that the planned decolonization plebiscite and the Chamorro registry that will determine who can vote in it, violates his constitutional rights as a US citizen. The case has been going around in circles and so many have come to believe it is already over. It was initially dismissed in the local district court for not being ripe, but after appealing to the 9th Circuit Court it was reinstated and scheduled to resume sometime next month.

The case has had a paralyzing effect on the local decolonization movement, which due to lack of interest and support from political leaders, was already moving quite slowly. But political leaders have been even more unwilling to take seriously this issue, knowing that the possibility of a decision of "unconstitutionality" could be handed down soon.

Last year, while attending the UN Committee of 24 Regional Seminar in Nicaragua, I spoke about this problem:

In 2011, an ethnically white long-time resident of Guam, Arnold “Dave” Davis, filed a lawsuit claiming that the proposed decolonization plebiscite would violate his U.S. constitutional rights as he is not allowed to register for it. His lawsuit was dismissed in the courts of Guam on the basis that it was not “ripe,” as no plebiscite has been scheduled, although a Decolonization Commission is in place and is tasked with educating the island community and helping guide the plebiscite process. He appealed the decision in the Ninth Circuit District Court, a higher U.S. federal court.

Just last week, the Ninth Circuit Court announced their ruling that Davis’ case was indeed ripe and could be heard. The case so far has been, in my eyes, a twisted deformation of the arc of justice. In order to make his argument, Davis’ attorneys used the history of segregation and discrimination in the United States against the rights of the Chamorro people. They argued that Chamorros, in seeking to protect their right to self-determination, were akin to hate groups such as the Ku Klux Klan, which had historically denied certain groups the right to vote through legal or illegal means. This case has become another means of hiding the contemporary realities of U.S. colonization.

The position of Davis is something that has also been mirrored by U.S. representatives, who have also argued that a self-determination vote must follow U.S. rules. This insistence is not genuine, however. Regardless of how the decolonization vote is set, the Administering Power has long refused to recognize that this vote is binding or that the U.S. has any obligation based upon its outcome. The sympathetic ruling of the Ninth Circuit Court shows a continued commitment on behalf of the Administering Power to ignore international conventions and force this process to conform to the comforts of the colonizer’s legal mazes and fictions.

Davis will most likely resume his challenge against the self-determination plebiscite. His case continues to chill discussion, in anticipation of the time when the merits of his argument will be heard in court. In truth, the merits of Davis’ case shouldn’t matter whatsoever. A decolonization process bound to the rules of the colonizer is anathema to the hope of justice and restitution that decolonization is meant to represent. Self-determination is meant to be a sacred right that all peoples possess. Here, we see a dangerous path ahead, where it appears the U.S. is insisting that it be allowed to determine how a colonized people decolonize.

Expert Panel to discuss contemporary decolonisation process at UN

Panel Discussion held in the context of the International Week of Solidarity with Peoples of the Non Self-Governing Territories  

CONFERENCE ON DECOLONIZATION

This conference will be held in the framework of the International Week of Solidarity with the Peoples of Non-Self-Governing territories, with the presence and participation of a group of academics and diplomats; it is aimed at explaining the audience different opinions and views on the different aspects of the decolonization process.

The general idea of the Conference is to provide a basis for discussion on decolonization, from a historical perspective with the liberation struggle fought by countries like Angola during the second half of the XX century, in order to show how emancipation processes during the XIX and XX centuries evolved to be inherited by the United Nations through the Special Committee on Decolonization, replacing the violent struggle with diplomatic efforts in the context of multilateralism.

The Conference will then present an overview of the decolonization process and the relevance of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples as an instrument of political authority to encourage the aspirations of the peoples that led to the creation of new nations in Africa, Asia, the Caribbean and the Pacific regions.

Furthermore, the Conference will focus on reviewing, from an academic perspective, different cases of the decolonization process such as the Question of Western Sahara and the Question of Puerto Rico, to raise awareness on fundamental aspects of those processes and their connection to the historical moment and evolution, as well as events, challenges, and related actors.

In the case of Western Sahara, the debate will be connected to the historical view and opinions on the developments of the controversy and roles of actors to the conflict, with a democratic and alternative approach.

With regards to Puerto Rico, the discussion will be mainly based on the current economic and political situation that determines points of agreement between the different forces and options around the political status of Puerto Rico, favoring the decolonization of the territory.

Speakers:

·       Ambassador Ismael Abraão Gaspar Martins, Permanent Representative of Angola

·       Dr. Carlyle Corbin, International Advisor on Governance & Multilateral Diplomacy

·       Dr. Stephen Zunes, Professor of Politics and International Studies, Coordinator of Middle Eastern Studies at the University of San Francisco.

·       Dr. José Luis Morín, Professor in the Latin American and Latino Studies, Department at John Jay College of Criminal Justice (CUNY).

Venue:

Conference Room 2, United Nations Headquarters

Date:

Wednesday 22 June 2016; from 3:00 pm to 6:00 pm

Language:

English

Conference format:

·       Speaker intervention: 15 minutes each

·       Questions and answers session

Disclaimer:

The purpose of the Conference is to inform the audience about the different aspects of decolonization, to provide academic points of view on the issue and to raise awareness and promote debate on decolonization; the Conference does not intend to establish the position of the Committee on Decolonization about the subjects that will be raised there, nor is the intention to present the academic opinions of the experts and the words of the diplomatic officer as the point of view of the Committee; the Committee would offer these views as food for thought but it will not be an endorsement of any kind to any point of view mentioned during the Conference.

Panelists at Pacific Festival of Arts discuss free association option

J. Roman Bedor (r), Member of the Palau Council of Chiefs and Advisor to the President of the Republic of Palau, presents case study of Palau as a freely associated state. Other panelists included Joe Garrido, Chair of the Free Association Task Force of the Guam Commission on Decolonization; Mark Short, Attorney from the Cook Islands; and Dr. Carlyle Corbin, International Advisor on Governance (Virgin Islands) who served as discussant.

(PHOTO BY GUAM DAILY POST)

U.N. calls for genuine self-determination process for Puerto Rico

Special Committee on Decolonization Approves Text 

Calling upon United States Government 

to Expedite Self-Determination Process for Puerto Rico

Special Committee on Decolonization

6th & 7th Meetings (AM & PM)

GENERAL ASSEMBLY MEETINGS COVERAGE

Members in Day-Long Hearing of Petitioners 

on Territory’s Political Status

The Special Committee on Decolonization today approved a draft resolution calling on the Government of the United States to assume its responsibility to expedite a process that would allow the people of Puerto Rico to exercise fully their right to self-determination and independence.

Approving the text without a vote, the Special Committee called on the United States to move forward with a process to allow the Puerto Rican people to take decisions in a sovereign manner, and to address their urgent economic and social needs, including unemployment, marginalization, insolvency and poverty.

Also by the text, the Special Committee urged the United States Government to complete the return of occupied land and installations on Vieques Island and in Ceiba to the Puerto Rican people, and to expedite and cover the costs of cleaning up and decontaminating areas previously used for military exercises, with a view to protecting the health of their inhabitants and the environment.

Further by the text, the Special Committee called upon the President of the United States to release, without delay, the Puerto Rican political prisoner Oscar López Rivera, who had served more than 35 years in a United States prison for reasons relating to the Puerto Rican quest for independence.  It expressed deep concern over actions carried out against Puerto Rican independence activists and encouraged investigations into those actions, in cooperation with relevant authorities.

By other terms, the Special Committee requested that the General Assembly consider comprehensively the question of Puerto Rico in all its aspects, and decide on that issue as soon as possible.

_____________________________________

Decision of the Special Committee 

of 22 June 2015 concerning Puerto Rico

The Special Committee on the Situation with regard to the Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples,

Bearing in mind the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, set out in resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960, and also the 34 resolutions and decisions of the Special Committee concerning Puerto Rico,

Considering that more than half of the period 2011-2020, proclaimed by the General Assembly in its resolution 65/119 of 10 December 2010 as the Third International Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism, has already elapsed,

Bearing in mind the 34 resolutions and decisions adopted by the Special Committee since 1972 on the question of Puerto Rico set out in the reports of the Special Committee to the General Assembly, in particular those adopted in recent years without a vote,

Recalling that 25 July 2016 marks the 118th anniversary of the intervention in Puerto Rico by the United States of America,

Noting with concern that, despite the various initiatives taken in recent years by the political representatives of Puerto Rico and the United States, the process of the decolonization of Puerto Rico, in compliance with General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV) and the resolutions and decisions of the Special Committee concerning Puerto Rico, has not yet been set in motion,

Bearing in mind that, on 6 November 2012, a majority of the people of Puerto Rico rejected its current status of political subordination and that, in the context of the significant upsurge of the economic and fiscal crisis in Puerto Rico, such status prevents it from taking sovereign decisions to address its serious economic and social problems, including unemployment, marginalization, insolvency and poverty,

Noting with concern the imminent imposition on Puerto Rico by the United States Congress of a fiscal control board, for which purpose it is invoking the plenary powers of the Congress under the territorial clause of its Constitution, and the statements made by the Attorney General to the Supreme Court of that country affirming that Puerto Rico continues to be a territory under the sovereignty of the United States and subject to the plenary powers of its Congress, 

Stressing again the urgent need for the United States to lay the groundwork for the full implementation of General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV) of the General Assembly and the resolutions and decisions of the Special Committee concerning Puerto Rico, 

Noting that the Inter-Agency Task Force on Puerto Rico’s Status designated by the President of the United States, which submitted its third report on 16 March 2011, reaffirmed that Puerto Rico is a territory subject to United States congressional authority and that to date the discussion of the issue of status is at a standstill, 

Taking note of the declarations adopted at the second, third and fourth summits of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, held in Havana, in Belén, Costa Rica, and in Quito, in 2014, 2015 and 2016, respectively, in which attention is drawn again to the Latin American and Caribbean character of Puerto Rico; note is taken of the resolutions on Puerto Rico adopted by the Special Committee, reiterating that it is a matter of interest for the Community; a commitment is made to continue working, within the framework of international law and, in particular, of General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV), to make the region of Latin America and the Caribbean an area free of colonialism and colonies; and the Quartet of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States is directed, with the participation of other Member States that wish to join this endeavour, to present proposals to move forward on this matter, 

Taking note also of the Special Declaration on Puerto Rico adopted by the Heads of State and Government of the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America, at its meeting in Caracas on 4 and 5 February 2012, in which they expressed their strong support for the inalienable right of the people of Puerto Rico to self-determination and full independence; recalled that Puerto Rico is a Latin American and Caribbean nation, with its own unmistakable identity and history, whose rights to sovereignty have been violated by the colonial rule imposed for more than a century; stressed that the cause of Puerto Rican independence concerns the region of Latin America and the Caribbean and their forums for dialogue and political cooperation, in particular the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States; and demanded the release of political prisoners who are convicted of fighting for the independence and self-determination of Puerto Rico, including comrade Oscar López Rivera, who has been imprisoned under inhumane conditions for 35 years,

Taking note further of the Panama Proclamation adopted by the Latin American and Caribbean Congress in support of Puerto Rico’s Independence, which was held in Panama City on 18 and 19 November 2006 and attended by representatives of 33 political parties from 22 countries of the region, the conclusions of which were reaffirmed in the declaration adopted by the Council of the Socialist International in Cascais, Portugal, on 5 February 2013, expressing support for the repeated and unanimous call of the Special Committee of the General Assembly to consider the colonial case of Puerto Rico, and for the release of Oscar López Rivera and other Puerto Rican patriots who are serving sentences in United States prisons, and voicing satisfaction and solidarity with the rejection by a majority of the people of Puerto Rico of the maintenance of the current colonial status of Puerto Rico,

Noting the debate in Puerto Rico on the search for a procedure that would make it possible to launch the process of decolonization of Puerto Rico, and aware of the ineffectiveness of consultations originating in the United States, of the principle that any initiative seeking a solution to the political status of Puerto Rico should originate from the people of Puerto Rico, and of the fact that, to date, several draft laws in favour of convening a constitutional assembly on status have been presented in Puerto Rico, 

Noting also the consensus among the people of Puerto Rico in favour of the release of the Puerto Rican political prisoner, Oscar López Rivera, who has been serving a sentence in a prison in the United States for more than 35 years for reasons related to the struggle for the independence of Puerto Rico, 

Noting further the concern of the people of Puerto Rico regarding violent actions, including repression, intimidation and the forced sampling of DNA, against Puerto Rican independence activists, including actions that have recently come to light through documents declassified by federal agencies of the United States, 

Aware that Vieques Island, Puerto Rico, was used for over 60 years by the United States Marine Corps to carry out military exercises, with negative consequences for the health of the population, the environment and the economic and social development of that Puerto Rican municipality, 

Noting the consensus existing among the people and the Government of Puerto Rico on the need to clean up, decontaminate and return to the people of Puerto Rico all the territory previously used for military exercises and installations, and to use them for the social and economic development of Puerto Rico, and also on the slowness of the process thus far, 

Noting also the constant complaints made by the inhabitants of Vieques Island regarding the continued bombing and the use of open burning as a clean-up method, thereby exacerbating the existing health problems and the pollution and endangering civilian lives, 

Noting further that, in the Final Document of the Sixteenth Summit Conference of Heads of State or Government of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries held in Tehran from 26 to 31 August 2012, and at other meetings of the Movement, the right of the people of Puerto Rico to self-determination and independence pursuant to General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV) is reaffirmed; the Government of the United States is urged to assume its responsibility to expedite a process that will allow the Puerto Rican people fully to exercise their inalienable right to self-determination and independence and to return the territory and occupied installations on Vieques Island and at the Roosevelt Roads Naval Station to the Puerto Rican people, who constitute a Latin American and Caribbean nation; and the General Assembly is urged actively to consider the question of Puerto Rico in all its aspects, 

Having heard statements and witness accounts representative of various viewpoints among the people of Puerto Rico and their social institutions, 

Having considered the report of the Rapporteur of the Special Committee on the implementation of the resolutions concerning Puerto Rico,

1. Reaffirms the inalienable right of the Puerto Rican people to self-determination and independence, in conformity with General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV) and the applicability of the fundamental principles of that resolution to the question of Puerto Rico; 

2. Reiterates that the Puerto Rican people constitutes a Latin American and Caribbean nation that has its own unequivocal national identity; 

3. Calls again upon the Government of the United States of America to assume its responsibility to expedite a process that will allow the Puerto Rican people fully to exercise their inalienable right to self-determination and independence, in accordance and in full compliance with General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV) and the resolutions and decisions of the Special Committee concerning Puerto Rico, and to take decisions, in a sovereign manner, to address their urgent economic and social needs, including unemployment, marginalization, insolvency and poverty; 

4. Notes the broad support of eminent persons, Governments and political forces in Latin America and the Caribbean for the independence of Puerto Rico; 

5. Also notes the debate in Puerto Rico on the implementation of a mechanism that would ensure the full participation of representatives of all sectors of Puerto Rican public opinion, including a constitutional assembly on status with a basis in the decolonization alternatives recognized in international law, and aware of the principle that any initiative for the solution of the political status of Puerto Rico should originate from the people of Puerto Rico; 

6. Expresses deep concern over the actions carried out against Puerto Rican independence activists, and encourages the investigation of those actions with the necessary rigour and with the cooperation of the relevant authorities; 

7. Requests the General Assembly to consider the question of Puerto Rico comprehensively in all its aspects, and to decide on that issue soon as possible; 8. Urges the Government of the United States, in line with the need to guarantee the heir legitimate right of the Puerto Rican people to self-determination and the protection of their human rights, to complete the return to the people of Puerto Rico of the occupied land and installations on Vieques Island and in Ceiba; to respect fundamental human rights, such as the right to health and economic development; and to expedite and cover the costs of the process of cleaning up and decontaminating the areas previously used in military exercises through means that do not continue to aggravate the serious consequences of its military activity, with a view to protecting the health of the inhabitants of Vieques Island and the environment; 

8. Urges the Government of the United States, in line with the need to guarantee the heir legitimate right of the Puerto Rican people to self-determination and the protection of their human rights, to complete the return to the people of Puerto Rico of the occupied land and installations on Vieques Island and in Ceiba; to respect fundamental human rights, such as the right to health and economic development; and to expedite and cover the costs of the process of cleaning up and decontaminating the areas previously used in military exercises through means that do not continue to aggravate the serious consequences of its military activity, with a view to protecting the health of the inhabitants of Vieques Island and the environment;

9. Calls again upon the President of the United States of America to release, without further delay, the Puerto Rican political prisoner Oscar López Rivera, who is 73 years old and has been serving his sentence in a United States prison for more than 35 years for reasons related to the struggle for the independence of Puerto Rico and whose case is humanitarian in nature, and welcomes the release of Norberto González Claudio; 

10. Takes note with satisfaction of the report prepared by the Rapporteur of the Special Committee, in compliance with its resolution of 22 June 2015; 

11. Requests the Rapporteur to report in 2016 on the implementation of the present resolution, including new developments relevant to a process of decolonization of Puerto Rico, in accordance with General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV); 

12. Decides to keep the question of Puerto Rico under continuous review.

__________________________________________

Iran’s representative, speaking for the Non-Aligned Movement, reaffirmed the right of the people of Puerto Rico to self-determination and independence on the basis of General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV).  He recalled that the Special Committee had approved 34 resolutions or decisions on the topic, adding that they were in full agreement with the Movement’s traditional position on the question of Puerto Rico.

Governor Alejandro García Padilla of Puerto Rico pointed out that the United Nations recognized the political sovereignty of Puerto Rico as an autonomous political entity, adding that the posture of the United States Government was incompatible with what was said within the General Assembly.  Puerto Rico’s current humanitarian crisis made it impossible to provide health, safety and education, creating a grave situation of life or death for the Territory’s people, he emphasized.

Throughout the day, the Special Committee heard from dozens of petitioners, many of whom stressed that the sovereign state of Borinken did not recognize the legitimacy of the United States Government over the Territory’s people, describing all actions taken by the imperial Power there as illegal.  One petitioner underlined that the state of Borinken should not have to wait another 30 or 40 years to have its due freedom, adding that action by the Special Committee could be a significant step forward that could lead to the end of Puerto Rico’s colonial status.

Another petitioner voiced support for Puerto Rico becoming the fifty-first state of the United States, saying its people rejected being governed as a colonial territory.  The Special Committee could no longer ignore the fact that Puerto Rico was a colony, he continued, emphasizing that it should be placed on the General Assembly’s list of Non-Self-Governing Territories.

Other petitioners expressed serious concern over the imposition of capital punishment in Puerto Rico, saying the death penalty was a demonstration of subjugation, contrary to the United Nations Charter and a denial of the fundamental human right.  One petitioner pointed out that death-penalty cases in Puerto Rico were tried in English, although Puerto Ricans predominantly spoke Spanish.

Several petitioners highlighted the large number of Puerto Ricans suffering mental illness as another area of serious concern, with one noting that colonization had resulted in great damage to the self-esteem, self-identity and self-worth of the Puerto Rican people.  Studies indicated about half of the population suffered from mental illness.

Furthermore, many speakers called for the release of Mr. López, who sent his greetings to the meeting via telephone.

Opening Remarks

HOSSEIN MALEKI (Iran), speaking on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, reaffirmed the right of the people of Puerto Rico to self-determination and independence on the basis of General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV), urging the Assembly to consider the question in all its aspects.  The Special Committee had approved 34 resolutions or decisions on the topic, he noted, adding that they were in full agreement with the Movement’s traditional position on the question of Puerto Rico.  He called on the United States to expedite a process that would allow Puerto Ricans to fully exercise their inalienable right to self-determination and independence, and to return the occupied land and installations of Vieques Island and the Roosevelt Road Naval Station.  He also called for the release of political prisoner Oscar López Rivera, who had served more than 35 years in United States prisons.

READ THE FULL REPORT HERE.