Showing posts with label international law. Show all posts
Showing posts with label international law. Show all posts

12 August 2019

U.N. IMPLEMENTATION OF DECOLONIZATION MANDATE KEY TO GENUINE SELF-DETERMINATION FOR MA'OHI NUI / FRENCH POLYNESIA

Statement to Special Committee on Decolonization (C24) 


Ms. Tiare-Maohi TAIRUA
President of the Association Union Chrétienne des Jeunes Gens 
United Nations, New York, N.Y. 
27th June 2019 


Madam Chair, 

Distinguished Members of the Special Committee, 

Independent expert analyses as the Blue Ocean Report on the French control of natural resources of French Polynesia as a violation of international law, the 2014 Independent Report on "The French Nuclear Testing in Ma’ohi-Nui/French Polynesia," the 2013 independent "Self-Governance Assessment on Ma’ohi-Nui/French Polynesia (already acknowledged by the General Assembly), and others could prove highly useful in informing the C24 and other relevant U.N. bodies of the challenges faced by the territories amid the insufficient implementation of the decolonization mandate in relation to French Polynesia and other territories similarly situated. 

Such independent analysis separates the facts from the political "spin" designed to lend an unwarranted legitimacy to contemporary dependency governance models such as the illusory autonomy administratively exercised by Ma’ohi-Nui/French Polynesia proxies. 

The overall lack of implementation of actions contained in decolonization resolutions since the beginning of the first International Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism in 1990 is disturbing, and brings into serious question the extent of political will for the U.N. to carry out its mandate to bring an end to contemporary colonialism. 

It is, therefore, not surprising that there has been limited progress in achieving the goals of genuine decolonization, as opposed to mere colonial reform and modernization through attempts to justify contemporary colonialism. As one global decolonization expert observed before this committee in 2018: 

"This lack of implementation of actions mandated by the General Assembly can have the effect of relegating the debate to an exchange of differing opinions between those who recognize the true nature of contemporary colonialism, and those who have made an accommodation with it, irrespective of its democratic deficiencies. But this is not supposed to be about opinion. Rather, it is about providing member States with the opportunity for in-depth examination of the extent of genuine self-government in these territories on the basis of the requisite criteria of full political equality." 

Implementation of the mandate is the fundamental challenge, and continues to be the major stumbling block as we reach the end of the third International Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism. The re-inscription of Ma’ohi-Nui/French Polynesia on the U.N. list of non self-governing territories in 2013 was a historic moment, achieved with great expectations that the U.N. would live up to its promise. 

We remain optimistic that a genuine process of implementation of these mandates will be enacted with the renewed energy and political will to advance our territory to the full measure of self-government with equal rights and justice. 

Thank You, Madam Chair.

FRANCE VIOLATES INTERNATIONAL LAW BY USURPING NATURAL RESOURCES OF MA'OHI NUI / FRENCH POLYNESIA



Statement to Special Committee on Decolonization 
Reverend François Pihaatae 

Coordinator of Moruroa E Tatou Association



United Nations, New York, N.Y.
28th June 2019



Madam Chair,

Distinguished Members of the Special Committee,

We acknowledge with appreciation the progressive recognition by the General Assembly of the "inalienable right of the people of French Polynesia to the ownership, control and disposal of their natural resources, including marine resources and undersea minerals" beginning with Resolution 71/120 of 6 December 2016, and most recently by Resolution
(73/112) of 7 December 2018 which "urges the administering Power to ensure this permanent sovereignty pursuant to relevant resolutions of the General Assembly.

In this connection, it is to be noted that the annual resolution on the Implementation of the Decolonization Declaration applicable to all territories including Ma’ohi-Nui/French Polynesia consistently "urges the administering Powers to take effective measures to safeguard and guarantee the inalienable rights of the peoples of the Non Self-Governing Territories to their natural resources, and to establish and maintain control over the future development of those resources...".

The willful absence of the administering Power in participating in the work of this committee on the "Question of Ma’ohi-Nui/French Polynesia," in violation of the U.N. Charter, precludes the opportunity to assess their level of compliance with international law - or lack thereof - that clearly confirms that the ownership of these resources lies with the people of the territories.

Despite this clear "rule of law on natural resources," we continue to advise that the administering Power has kept full control and sovereignty over our natural resources in violation of international law.

These violations of the administering Power were examined in depth in the 2019 report “Enduring Colonization: How France’s Continuing Control of French Polynesian ResourcesViolates the International Law of Self-Determination,” published by Blue Ocean Law, the Pacific Network on Globalisation, and the International Justice and Human Rights Clinic at Allard Law School, University of British Columbia.

Some of the key findings of the analysis are particularly poignant:

● France’s continued control over and interference with the islands’ resources

works to disenfranchise the people of Ma’ohi-Nui/French Polynesia, violating their fundamental right to self-determination, particularly their right to freely determine their own economic, social, and cultural development.

● In its recent efforts to develop seabed mining programs in the region, France continually asserts sovereignty over Ma’ohi-Nui waters. At the same time, it has failed to consult
with – let alone obtain the consent of – indigenous, coastal, and local communities within Ma’ohi-Nui/French Polynesia, who are most likely to be affected by this new extractive activity.

● The failure to clean up or otherwise remedy damage done by France’s 30 year nuclear testing program in the islands constitutes another violation of Ma’ohi-Nui people’s right to benefit from their natural resources and to chart a course of economic development of their own design. Existing military installations and contaminated atolls continue to affect terrestrial and marine resources and contribute to ongoing food insecurity, in addition to debilitating health and environmental impacts.

● Self-determination standards oblige a much greater devolution of powers from France to Ma’ohi-Nui/French Polynesia and the strict non-alienation of Ma’ohi-Nui people
from their natural resources.

Thank You, Madam Chair.

08 July 2019

FRANCE HAS VIOLATED THE U.N. CHARTER FOR SIX YEARS SINCE THE RE-INSCRIPTION OF POLYNESIA ON THE U.N. COLONIES LIST


Statement to Special Committee on Decolonization (C-24)

Mr. Richard Ariihau TUHEIAVA
Elected Member of the Assembly of French Polynesia
United Nations, New York, N.Y.
27th June 2019


Madam Chair,

Distinguished Members of the Special Committee,

I have the honour to address you in my capacity as an elected member of the House of Assembly of Ma’ohi-Nui/French Polynesia from the Tavini Huiraatira party.

Since the adoption of Resolution 67/265 of 17 March 2013, the General Assembly has adopted seven resolutions on Ma’ohi-Nui/French Polynesia calling for specific actions to be undertaken in furtherance of our decolonization process. These resolutions have recognized the inalienable right of our people to self-determination and independence, and have reaffirmed that Ma’ohi-Nui/French Polynesia remains a non self-governing territory within the meaning of the United Nations Charter.

The General Assembly also adopts its annual resolution on the implementation of this Decolonization Declaration which is applicable to all territories, including Ma’ohi-Nui/French Polynesia, which have not achieved a full measure of self-government. The Assembly adopted these resolutions on the self-determination and independence of our territory on the basis of careful review and assessment of the actual dependency relationship which existed in 2012, and which informed its consensus adoption of its resolution 67/265 of 17 March 2013. 

The political status of Ma’ohi-Nui/French Polynesia has not changed since 2013 despite cosmetic adjustments to the so-called Autonomy Statute made unilaterally by France in 2019 as an attempt to avoid a true self-determination process.

Madam Chair,

Accordingly, the General Assembly is consistently clear that Ma’ohi-Nui/French Polynesia “remains a non self-governing territory within the meaning of the (U.N.) Charter” and this should remain our point of departure. What must follow now are the ways and means to implement this General Assembly decolonization mandate through the actions adopted in its resolutions.

Continued violation by the administering Power of Article 73 of the U.N. Charter in withholding its cooperation with the U.N. on our territory can no longer be used as an excuse or rationalization for not implementing this mandate. On this point, this Committee may wish to consider strengthening its repeated language in resolutions which only politely expresses "regret that the administering Power has not responded to the request to submit information on French Polynesia under Article 73(e) of the U.N. Charter."

In fact, it is not a mere request. It is an international legal obligation that is being violated. The resolution on the question of Ma’ohi Nui/French Polynesia should reflect this noncompliance for what it is - a violation of the Charter which should be condemned, as in the
same language of General Resolution 1699(XVI) of 19 December 1961 on similar violations.

Since the re-inscription in 2013, a work programme for Ma’ohi-Nui/French Polynesia has been requested repeatedly, and included in the resolution on such territory. I wish to state again that this is the recognized approach to initiate the self-determination process. The outline of a work programme for Ma’ohi-Nui/French Polynesia has been drafted to update the procedure adopted by the General Assembly in its Resolution 57/91 of 6 December 1999, and
can be provided at the appropriate time.

This updated outline is divided into five phases beginning with
1) an in-depth examination of the intricacies of the dependency relationship between the territory and the administering Power, proceeding with 2) an extensive public education programme in the
territory with 3) a subsequent C-24 visiting mission, followed by 4) an act of self-determination to select a choice from the legitimate political status options. The 5th step phase concludes with the
transition to the full measure of self-government. 

The entire process would involve the participation of the relevant U.N. institutions.

Madam Chair,

This committee in its 2018 resolution on Ma’ohi-Nui/French Polynesia inexplicably recommended to the Fourth Committee the deletion of the entire operative paragraph that would have requested the Secretary-General to “provide continuous updates to his report on the environmental, ecological, health and other impacts of the 30-year period of nuclear testing in French Polynesia”. Our pleas to the C-24 and Fourth Committee that the language be restored could not be honored in 2018, but promises were made that the issue would be addressed this year.

We are very pleased that these promises were honoured and the language has been restored in this year’s draft resolution. We strongly request that the Committee ensures that the “continuous updates” requested of the Secretary-General in the resolution are far more extensive than the two previous reports. 

In this connection, I would humbly urge the researchers for the Secretary-General’s report to avail themselves of a broader range of information available in the public domain to include such documents as the 2014 Independent Report on “The French Nuclear Testing in French Polynesia” prepared by renowned scientists, or the compliant of the Tavini Huiraatira Party that was submitted to the Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) last 2 October 2018. 

Thank You, Madam Chair.

BRITISH DEPENDENCIES RESIST U.K. POLICY OF UNILATERAL POWER




St. Kitts & Nevis Observer


Britain’s Overseas Territories say they will “stand together” to defend their right to self-government amid increasing concerns over “constitutional overreach” from the UK.

Any attempts to enforce legislation from Westminster on issues ranging from same-sex marriage to ‘belongership’ and financial services regulation will be strongly resisted, according to leaders of several territories, following talks in Grand Cayman this week.

Despite the disparate concerns of the various territories, leaders from the Falklands to Bermuda were united in their opposition to the UK dictating policy from thousands of miles away.

A UK law seeking to impose public registers of beneficial ownership on Britain’s territories – seen as a threat to the financial services industry – is a key concern for several islands.

“Modern-day colonialism is what is being attempted by those persons is Westminster, and I am certain that all Overseas Territories will resist it vociferously,” Bermuda Premier David Burt said at a press conference following the summit at the Kimpton Seafire Hotel on Wednesday.

Several other leaders expressed similar concerns, and insisted the pressure from the UK on various issues is helping them to forge closer bonds as they seek to resist what they see as constitutional overreach from the mother country.

“I see a beacon of hope with our team here, because we all realise that divided we fall, united we stand,” said Andrew Fahie, premier of the British Virgin Islands.

A recent report from a Foreign Affairs Select Committee, which included a number of suggestions including recommendations that the UK government force its territories to adopt same-sex marriage legislation and open discussions on allowing resident UK citizens to vote and stand for election, is also stoking controversy.

Though the current British government says it has no plans to follow through on the report’s recommendations, the uncertainty and instability in UK politics amid a Conservative party leadership battle, division over Brexit and the possibility of a general election, is fuelling concern.

Burt said it was possible that the report’s recommendations could gain traction in a new government, and highlighted the possibility that some of its authors could be part of a future government.

“It is sad to see persons who don’t have a familiarity [with the various islands] reverting to a position we thought was long gone, where Westminster feels able to dictate to the Overseas Territories,” he added.

Albert Isola, Gibraltar’s minister for commerce, said the specifics of the issues at stake were largely irrelevant. He said it was “anti-democratic” of the UK to attempt to make laws for its territories on issues that were the responsibility of the elected governments.

“There is no way today we can accept modern colonialism through the back door by allowing these things to happen. On that, as has been demonstrated today, we are all 100 percent on the same page,” he said.

The report caused ripples as far away as the Falklands. Teslyn Barkman, a legislator from the islands, off the coast of Argentina, said it was omitted entirely from the report, but could be faced with the impact of its findings.

She said the recommendation that UK citizens be given the right to vote and run for office in the territories was the most controversial.

“You are talking about giving UK citizens the right to vote in a population of 3,000. You could very quickly have a population of UK citizens who don’t know the territory’s needs or priorities, or care about the long-term viability of the economy.”

Sharlene Cartwright-Robinson, of the Turks and Caicos, said she expected pressure from the UK, particularly over voting rights and same-sex marriage, would continue.

“It is a matter of constitutional overreach, and respecting territories rights to choose how they want to govern, how they want to grow their countries, who they want to run in their elections and certainly their culture and religious beliefs,” she said.

Montserrat Premier Donaldson Romeo said the UK clearly understood the democratic values at stake, because they were fighting for autonomy from the European Union on the basis of the same principles.

“We have just the same right as they have and we need to insist on our right to self determination, and our people need to support us in this regard.”

He urged the leaders around the table to remain united on issues, even when they only affected a handful of islands, and vowed to offer Montserrat’s support to others on issues, like financial services, which do not directly affect the island.

“We have a saying in Montserrat, ‘today for you, tomorrow for me’. I am counting on us to stand together,” he said.

20 June 2019

UNITED KINGDOM FLAUNTS INTERNATIONAL RULE OF LAW AFTER INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE DECISION ON CHAGOS



Elena Katselli, Senior Lecturer in Law
 Newcastle University


A nation’s military and geo-strategic interests cannot, under international law, prevail over the sovereign rights of other states. State sovereignty, self-determination and decolonisation are fundamental legal principles the UK should honour as it refuses, despite widespread international condemnation, to hand back control of the Chagos Islands in the Indian Ocean.
Indeed, Britain’s expressed policy that it will protect its interests at any cost, even at the expense of international law and fundamental human rights, has unwelcome echoes of colonialism and discrimination that should have no place in the 21st century.
On May 22, a UN General Assembly resolution calling for the complete decolonisation of Mauritius by ending the UK’s administration over the islands was voted for by 116 nations. Only six – the US, Hungary, Israel, Australia, the Maldives and the UK – voted against it, with 56 abstaining.

25 February 2019

THE THIRD INTERNATIONAL DECADE FOR THE ERADICATION OF COLONIALISM - THE PENULTIMATE YEAR




____________________________________________________________________________
SG/SM/19467-GA/COL/3329
21 FEBRUARY 2019
as Special Committee Begins Annual Session

ANTÓNIO GUTERRES
Following are UN Secretary-General António Guterres’ opening remarks at the organizational meeting of the 2019 session of the Special Committee on Decolonization, in New York (21st Feb. 2019):


Decolonization helped to transform the United Nations membership, propelling the Organization’s growth from 51 original members to 193 today.

Decolonization is one of the most significant chapters of the Organization’s history. But, this story is still being written, as 17 Non‑Self‑Governing Territories remain.

Each deserves attention. Each still waits to attain self-government, in accordance with Chapter [XI] of the United Nations Charter, the 1960 Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples and relevant United Nations resolutions.

In recent months, there has been notable movement on the question of New Caledonia. Last November, in a referendum, New Caledonians expressed their will on their future and on the status of the Territory. This was an important step forward in the decolonization process.

The cooperation of France, the administering Power, throughout the referendum process, in accordance with the 1998 Nouméa Accord, was commendable.

This Committee, for its part, assisted New Caledonia in the period leading up to the conduct of the referendum, dispatching two visiting missions to the Territory.

To achieve decolonization, the voices of the peoples of the Territories should be heard, as it was the case [in New Caledonia]. The cooperation of all concerned, including the administering Powers, is likewise vital.

It is also paramount that the peoples of the Non-Self-Governing Territories understand the options regarding their political status and the right to choose their future freely.

I applaud the Special Committee’s tireless efforts to uphold its mandate and to support the peoples of the Non-Self-Governing Territories to achieve self‑government.

I also commend the Special Committee for maintaining dialogue and productive cooperation with the administering Powers and all concerned.

The United Nations decolonization successes across the decades can inspire us today. Let us uphold our duty to assist all the peoples of the Non‑Self‑Governing Territories in bringing their decolonization process to a successful conclusion, according to their choice.

The Special Committee has accompanied many Territories in their journey since the beginning of the 1960s. As you begin working in the 2019 session, I wish you every success. The Secretariat will do all we can to support your very important work.

17 December 2018

CARIBBEAN EXPERTS CALLS FOR REGIONAL ACTION IN SUPPORT OF SELF-DETERMINATION OF DUTCH-ADMINISTERED CARIBBEAN


 3rd CONFERENCE ON THE POLITICAL FUTURE
OF THE DUTCH-ADMINISTERED CARIBBEAN
RE-UNITING THE ANTILLES AND CARIBBEAN IN SOLIDARITY

FINAL COMMUNIQUÉ

Kralendijk, Bonaire, December 15, 2018

The  Third Conference on the Political Future of the Caribbean,

Having met at Bonaire, West Indies on 7th and 8th December 2018,

Aware that the political status of Bonaire, Sint Eustatius (Statia) and Saba was transformed in 2010 from being a part of the autonomous country of the (former) Netherlands Antilles to a new political arrangement unilaterally advanced by the Kingdom of the Netherlands akin to that of 'partial integration', and characterized by serious political and economic inequality, rather than the promised political and economic equality originally envisaged.

Also aware that this new status is tantamount to unilateral annexation, and is wholly inconsistent with the minimum standards of full self-government and equality required on the basis of international principles of democratic governance,

Noting that in 2010, Curaçao and Sint Maarten joined Aruba as the second and third semi-autonomous countries in the Kingdom without the full measure of self-government required under United Nations (U.N.) Resolution 1541 (XV), and subject to the applicability of Article 51 of the Kingdom Charter which provides for unilateral intervention in the affairs of the autonomous countries,

Also taking note of the “Assessment of self-governance sufficiency in conformity with internationally-recognized standards – Country Curacao” undertaken in 2012 by the global Dependency Studies Project which found that the present governance model in place in Curaçao emerging from the 2010 dismantlement process of the Netherlands Antilles further reduced the level of self-government to a diminished autonomous model and is not in compliance with contemporary international standards of the full measure self-government.

Further taking note, that the Dutch government through strategic political organs named the Committee for Financial Supervision (CFT), the Special Police Task Force (RST) and the General Prosecutor through consensus laws is overruling the democratic parliament of Curacao and in so doing controlling the political, social, cultural and economic development of Curacao.

Conscious that in addition to the Dutch-administered partially-integrated dependencies, and the autonomous countries in the region, are other non-independent countries (NICCs) including the six British-administered non self-governing territories of Bermuda, Turks & Caicos Islands, Cayman Islands, Montserrat, British Virgin Islands and Anguilla; the U.S. administered dependencies of Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands; the integrated departments of Guadeloupe, Martinique and French Guiana, and the Archipelago of San Andres, Providence and Santa Catalina, and the French-administered collectivities of Saint Martin and Barts,

Bearing in mind that the 'public entity' status does not reflect the wishes of the people of Bonaire who had previously selected a political status of "direct ties to the Kingdom" in the 2004 referendum held in Bonaire rather than the political status of "public entity" which has been unilaterally and systematically imposed by the Government of the Netherlands,  since the 2010 dismantling of the Netherlands Antilles and the subsequent transition, without these having been defined in the context of Chapter XI, Article. 73 and 74 of the U.N. Charter.

Also bearing in mind that the 'public entity' political status was formally rejected by the people of Bonaire in a 2015 referendum by a decisive 'No' vote of over 65 per cent and the results were formally certified and endorsed by motion of the Island Council on 8th March 2016 as a clear mandate of the people, but the Government of the Netherlands decided to unilaterally embed the “public entities of Bonaire”, Sint Eustatius and Saba in the Constitution of the Netherlands,

Recognizing that any subsequent referendum on the preferred political status that would be selected from a group of political options of democratic governance and political equality should be conducted under the direct supervision of the U.N.,

Taking into account that the people of Sint Eustatius voted in its 2005 referendum to remain within a restructured autonomous country of the Netherlands Antilles, but as the 2005 referendum outcome resulted in the dismantlement of that autonomous country, the Island Council of Sint Eustatius subsequently approved a motion to accept the ‘direct ties’ arrangement offered to Bonaire and Saba, even as the people had not voted in favor of the status, and even as the nature of its political and economic inequality had not yet been revealed,

Also taking into account that the people of Sint Eustatius in a 2014 referendum, under official observation of the U.N. Electoral Affairs Division of the Department of Political Affairs, formally rejected the imposed 'public entity' status by voting for a more autonomous status from a list of political status options, and recalling that the results of the 2014 referendum were formally certified and endorsed by motion of the Island Council on 25th May 2015 as a clear mandate of the people resulting in the subsequent drafting in 2016 of a White Paper and a draft constitution for an autonomous Sint Eustatius,

Alarmed that the Government of the Netherlands, in spite of the democratically expressed wishes of the people of Sint Eustatius and Bonaire in their rejection of the imposed political status of ‘public entity’ in 2014 and 2015, respectively, has proceeded through measures in the Kingdom Parliament to formally annex the two territories through a process of ‘embedding’ the two islands (along with the island of Saba), in the Dutch Constitution and further alarmed that this unilateral process of the Government of the Netherlands could result in a legitimization of the dependency status contrary to international norms of democratic governance and in opposition to the expressed will of the people of Bonaire and Sint Eustatius,

Recognizing the resumption of direct, albeit strained, contact between the Government of  the Netherlands with the democratically elected government of Sint Eustatius following the suspension of contacts in 2015, and again in 2016, and deeply concerned that the method of unilateral withdrawal of communication with the elected government of the territory continues to be an unacceptable practice,

Further expresses its deep concern for the imposition of unilateral financial supervision which requires Netherlands’ government approval for public expenditures by the Government of Sint Eustatius despite its compliance with the financial regulations of the Netherlands Committee for Financial Supervision (CFT).

Alarmed by the political decapitation of the legitimately elected government of Sint Eustatius by the Government of the Netherlands on February 7th 2018, and the appointment by the Netherlands’ government of an undemocratic administrating governor constituting further erosion of the democratic rights and processes to elect a next democratic government.

Aware that the legitimately elected government of Sint Eustatius filed a petition at the Court of First Instance to initiate main proceedings against the Government of the Netherlands,

Recalling the Motion adopted by the Island Council of Sint Eustatius on 28th May 2015 which confirmed, inter alia, that the population of Sint Eustatius had not yet exhausted all its options as far as exercising its right to self-determination in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, and  the Article 1, of both the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights respectively and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural rights which reminded the Netherlands of its continued obligations towards Sint Eustatius as part of the former Netherlands Antilles,

Also recalling the resolutions of the Permanent Conference of Political Parties of Latin America and Caribbean (COPPPAL), issued on December 1, 2016 on Bonaire and June 6, 2017 on Sint Maarten, respectively, rejecting any form of colonization in the Americas, with regards to the future political status of Puerto Rico and the future political status of the Caribbean territories administered by Holland,

Taking note of the interest expressed by the incoming government of the U.S. Virgin Islands to examine the political status evolution of the territory, and encourages the territory, in the context of it’s listing by the United Nations (U.N.) since 1946 as a non-self-governing territory, to re-engage with the U.N. decolonization process by resuming its participation in the proceedings of the Special Committee on Decolonization, and the Special Political and Decolonization Committee (Fourth Committee).

Also taking note of the proposed 'Raizal Statute' submitted to the government of Colombia by the Raizal Authority of the archipelago of San Andres, Providencia and Santa Catalina with the aim of modernizing the political, socio-economic and constitutional relationship between the people of the archipelago and the State of Columbia, and affirming the self-determination aspirations of the Raizal people,

Outraged that after 120 years of United States (U.S.) colonialism, and 37 U.N. resolutions asking it to immediately return Puerto Rico’s sovereignty to the Puerto Ricans, and distressed by the unilateral imposition of the colonial fiscal control board imposed upon the people of Puerto Rico by the U.S. Government,

 Appalled by the insulting U.S. response to the humanitarian crisis in Puerto Rico caused by the impact of Hurricane Maria precipitating an already alarming migration of Puerto Ricans from their homeland, and increasing their already superior recruitment rate into the US military, resulting in an alarming reduction in population and family displacement with the premeditated intention of changing the demographic composition of the territory,

1. Affirms that the referendum results of 2014 in Sint Eustatius, and of 2015 in Bonaire, constituted a formal, genuine and legitimate refutation of the 'public entity' status as expressed by the people, and alarmed that the 'public entity' status imposed on the people of Sint Eustatius and Bonaire had been misrepresented as a genuine status of political equality by the Government of the Netherlands in 2010 at the dissolution of the Netherlands Antilles,

2. Deeply concerned that the people of Bonaire and Sint Eustatius are presently being governed, contrary to democratic norms, under a political status of political and economic inequality not of their choosing,

3. Reaffirms the continued applicability to Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba of relevant international law doctrine on self-determination and decolonization, including the provisions of Chapter XI on the "Declaration Regarding Non Self-Governing Territories,"

4. Also reaffirms the continued applicability of Article 73 (b) of the United Nations (U.N.) Charter which mandates that "Members of the United Nations which have or assume responsibilities for the administration of territories whose peoples have not yet attained a full measure of self-government recognize the principle that the interests of the inhabitants of these territories are paramount, and accept as a sacred trust the obligation to promote to the utmost, within the system of international peace and security established by the present Charter, the well-being of the inhabitants of these territories, and, to this end to develop self-government, to take due account of the political aspirations of the peoples, and to assist them in the progressive development of their free political institutions, according to the particular circumstances of each territory and its peoples and their varying stages of advancement,"

5. Emphasizes the continued applicability to Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba of the U.N. Decolonization Declaration [Resolution 1514 (XV)], its companion Resolution 1541 (XV), and all other relevant U.N. resolutions, as well as the present Third International Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism and its plan of action,

6. Also emphasizes the applicability of relevant General Assembly resolutions which recognize that "the existence of colonialism in any form or manifestation," as "incompatible with the Charter of the United Nations, the (Decolonization) Declaration and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights' and further emphasizes the applicability of the relevant resolutions of the General Assembly which confirm that self-determination is a fundamental human right protected under the core human rights conventions including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), and the Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD), et al,

7. Takes note with interest that the U.N. General Assembly Resolution 945 (X) of 15 December 1955 removing the former Netherlands Antilles from the U.N. list of Non Self-Governing Territories did not affirm that the former Netherlands Antilles had achieved a full measure of self-government, as stated by the government of the Netherlands in the Dutch Parliament on December 22, 1955,  with the statement... “' The emancipation process has been completed” thus leaving open the possibility for the U.N. to resume formal review of the self-governance sufficiency of the former territory and any of its former constituent parts, in particular Bonaire and Sint Eustatius, as well as Curaçao and the other semi-autonomous countries within the Kingdom with the aim of fostering a genuine process of self-determination,

8.        Calls on the Government of the Netherlands, as a matter of urgency, to lift the financial supervision imposed on the Dutch administered Caribbean, and further calls on the Government of the Netherlands to exercise respect in their communication and dealings with the territories and semi autonomous countries,

9.         Condemns the  Government of the Netherlands for its actions in unilaterally embedding the so-called 'public entities’ of Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba in the Constitution of the Netherlands, and calls on the international community to review whether these actions are a violation of the inalienable right to self-determination of the people of the so-called “public entities”,

10.       Calls for the Government of the Netherlands and/or other relevant U.N. member States to initiate the necessary procedures for the re-inscription of the former Netherlands Antilles islands of Bonaire and Sint Eustatius, and Curaçao and the other semi autonomous countries within the Kingdom, on the United Nations list of Non Self-Governing Territories to provide the international community with the required platform to review, in depth where democratic deficiencies in the dependency governance arrangements may exist,

11.       Calls on the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) to consider that the Caribbean is not in a post-colonial condition,  and to give due recognition to the issue of the self-determination of the remaining non-independent Caribbean countries in the region as unfinished business; and requests that self-determination and decolonization be placed on the permanent agenda of the CARICOM Heads of Government,

12.      Endorses the commissioning of an independent Self Governance Assessment of the political status and constitutional arrangements of Bonaire and Sint Eustatius, through the use of the "Corbin Self-Governance Indicators," to determine the nature and scope of the public entity status according to international standards, and requests that the necessary resources be identified for the Assessment to be carried out as a key substantive document to inform the U.N. in its consideration of the re-inscription process of Bonaire and Saint Eustatius.

13.      Further endorses and supports fully the trajectory of Bonaire and Sint Eustatius for re-inscription on the list of Non-Self-Governing-Territories of the United Nations

14.      Aware that the proposed Raizal Statute which was negotiated between the Government of Colombia and the recognized representatives of the Archipelago of San Andres, Providence and Santa Catalina, has been submitted  to the previous Colombian Congress in 2018, and the new Congress which convened after the congressional election of 2018, is currently reviewing the proposed statute.

15.      Concerned, however,  that the State has not yet recognized the rights of the people to self-determination as recommended by the  Raizal representatives in the originally proposed statute.

16.      Once again, urges the  Colombian State to modify its constitution in order to recognize the inalienable right of the peoples of the Archipelago to self-determination in accordance with international law, in particular, the U.N. Charter, U.N. Resolution 1541, U.N. Resolution 742, and relevant human rights instruments.

17.      Calls on the Government of the Netherlands to adhere to the spirit of its Charter to provide for the autonomous functioning of Aruba, Curaçao and Sint Maarten, Sint Eustatius and Bonaire

18.      The political movements, Movemento Kousa Promé and Pueblo Soberano call on the government of the Netherlands to end the consensus laws of Curacao and to respect the vision and spirit of the U.N. Charter in the same way as it respects the Treaty of Lissabon regarding the European Union and to implement the U.N. Charter on the self- determination of our people.

19.      Calls on the Government of the U.S. to implement the U.N. Charter as related to the self-determination of peoples, and to implement the 37 resolutions of the U.N. Special Committee on Decolonization calling for the self-determination and independence of Puerto Rico,

20.       Calls on the Government of the U.S. to facilitate the self-determination of the people of the U.S. Virgin Islands consistent with the relevant resolutions of the U.N. General Assembly.

15 October 2018

Inter-American Commission on Human Rights summoned the United States about the political status of Puerto Rico



By José A. Delgado Robles

The Organization of American States’ advisory group admitted two pro statehood lawsuits and called for a hearing in Colorado on October 5.

Washington - After 12 years, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) will reach a decision next month on the complaints filed against the US for violating the human and civil rights of residents in Puerto Rico under the current colonial status.

On October 5, in a public hearing, IACHR will examine the independent complaints filed by attorney Gregorio Igartúa and former Governor Pedro Rosselló against the US for denying the inhabitants of the island the participation in the US Electoral College, which elects the President and representatives with full rights in Congress.


The hearing will be part of the IACHR session period number 169 and will take place at the University of Colorado Law School, in Boulder, headquarter of the meetings scheduled from October 1 to 5.

The IACHR is an autonomous body of the Organization of American States (OAS), with jurisdiction to investigate the compliance with the commitments made by member states in the American Convention on Human Rights.

"I anticipate, with full confidence, that the Commission will prove us right by ruling in our favor and declaring that the US is violating human rights under the international law of their American citizens in Puerto Rico by denying them the right to vote at a federal level for the President and vice president and for representatives and senators before Congress, "said Orlando Vidal, attorney for former Governor Rosselló’s.

The complaints about the lack of participation of Puerto Rico’s residents in the federal government were filed in 2006, three years after the IACHR resolved another similar case in favor of Washington DC, whose residents vote for the US president, pay taxes on income, but have no representation with full rights in Congress.

In 2003, the IACHR determined that the US denies "equal rights" to residents in Washington D.C. "Due to their place of residence", by not granting them full representation in Congress.

Limited reach

Determinations such as IACHR’s in the case of the federal capital are not binding on the US government, as is the case with the expressions of the Special Committee on Decolonization in favor of Puerto Rico’s independence and free determination. 

But they question American democracy.

As in Puerto Rico, little has the political landscape of Washington D.C’s residents changed after IACHR’s decision.

For example, the bills introduced in Congress for Washington D.C. to become the 51 state, which usually have only Democratic support, have never finished the legislative process.

The furthest they have gone was the approval, in 2007, of a measure in the House that sought to give Washington D.C a representative with full rights, that usually supports Democrats, adding another one to the state of Utah, with Republican inclinations. But the legislation never advanced in the US Senate.

Deponents

Former Governor Rosselló and attorney Igartúa will speak at the hearing on October 5. Each one will have about 12 minutes to present their arguments.

Igartúa said that he will reaffirm his position, which he has promoted without success in federal Court, regarding that the US Constitution "has been applied (in Puerto Rico) to such an extent that we are practically a state, what is missing is the right to participate in federal elections."

Under the current territorial status, residents of the island do not have to pay federal income taxes. But Igartúa stated that, nonetheless, through Medicare and Social Security, the inhabitants contribute more to the US Treasury than 15 states.

PUBLICIDAD

In addition to the complainants, a representative of the US government, probably from the US mission before the OAS, will be able to respond to the complaints, and the seven members of the IACHR will have the opportunity to ask questions. The federal government's response would be an opportunity for the Donald Trump administration to interpret how he sees the island's latest local plebiscite, held in June 2017.

"The US government will need to face the reality of Puerto Rico and the violation of rights to which they have subjected the American citizens residing on the island," said, in a written statement, former Governor Rosselló, whose youngest son, Ricardo Rosselló Nevares, is now the governor of the island.

In the 2017 plebiscite, statehood obtained 97 percent of the votes. But the consultation took place amid a boycott of the opposition parties and with a turnout of 23 percent.

The government of the New Progressive Party (PNP) has introduced in Congress and the White House, during this federal legislative session, pro-statehood bills by Resident Commissioner in Washington D.C., Jenniffer González.

The most recent on, from June, proposes to create a Congress Working Group to examine the laws that must be changed for Puerto Rico to be the US State 51, in January 2021.

González believes that her legislation, if approved, would incorporate Puerto Rico as a territory, which would be perceived as leading the island towards statehood, while awaiting for the Congress Working Group’s consideration.

Lawyers consulted by El Nuevo Día believe that the language of the legislation does not contain a clear incorporation of the island as a territory. However, as an incorporated territory, Puerto Rico would remain outside the US Electoral College, even though its residents would have to pay income taxes.

The chairman of the House Committee on Natural Resources, Republican Rob Bishop (Utah), told the newspaper last week that he still considers calling a hearing to examine Gonzalez's bill, and said he does not see why it cannot go to a voting in that committee and in the plenary session.

But the issue is not on the federal Senate’s agenda, the session of Congress closes in December and, due to the midterm elections in November, the work schedule is very tight.

Process before IACHR

The complaints that IACHR examines about the political status of Puerto Rico were admitted last March.

The session on October 5 will be the fourth time, in 18 years, that IACHR holds a hearing on issues of the island.

In 2000, IACHR reviewed the violation of human and civil rights because of US military maneuvers in Vieques.

PUBLICIDAD

In March 2015, they hold a hearing on the human rights situation in Puerto Rico, in which civic groups denounced violations against LGBTT communities, immigrants, children, women and the federal insistence on implementing death penalty.

In December 2017, three months after Hurricane Maria’s devastation, a coalition of civic and academic organizations in Puerto Rico denounced to IACHR an alarming increase in poverty, which keeps many people "in inhuman conditions", and urged them to examine the island's crisis on the ground.

Then, Commissioner Margarette May Maculay of Trinidad and Tobago, in charge of US affairs, told the media that they would ask Trump’s government for authorization to send a mission to Puerto Rico to closely examine the human rights situation and poverty on the island.

On January 18, IACHR also expressed concern about what it considered was a "less rapid and efficient" response from the US government in Puerto Rico after Hurricane Maria, compared to other jurisdictions.

Attorney Vidal considers that, after the hearing, IACHR should not take more than one year to decide on the complaints.

"A ruling like this will be another blow to the current political status," said Vidal, referring to PROMESA, which accentuated the colonial situation of the island with the imposition of a Financial Oversight and Management Board, which controls the financial decisions over the elected government, and the decision of the US Supreme Court in the case of Sánchez Valle, that stressed that the ultimate source of power over the country lies in the US Congress.

Status debate

When the US government appeared in the case before IACHR, in April 2011, they maintained that residents in Puerto Rico have repeatedly supported the current status, officially called Commonwealth.

"The results of the voting have not expressed a preference for statehood, the status that would give them the right to federal vote," said Milton Drucker, deputy representative of the US before the OAS.

Later, the government of the island called two plebiscites, which continue to generate controversies.

The other plebiscite was in November 2012, when 54 percent of the voters expressed their opposition to the current territorial status. 61 percent supported statehood in a second question, but if the high number of ballots left blank is considered, as requested by the Governing Board of the Popular Democratic Party, the percentage did not exceed 45 percent.

In January 2014, Congress approved a language that urged Puerto Rico to hold a new referendum, consulting status alternatives with the US Department of Justice.