The United Nations Decolonisation Declaration 50th Anniversary

 Adopted  by United Nations General Assembly on 14 December 1960

"...After fifty years, the decolonisation era has not ended, but rather, it has entered an increasingly complex period requiring innovative solutions to ensure that the full measure of self-government with absolute political equality is attained by the peoples of the remaining non self-governing territories. Real decolonisation, as opposed to dependency reform, can only be achieved through the adherence to the international mandates contained in the United Nations Charter, relevant resolutions of the U.N. General Assembly, and the various human rights instruments concerning the inalienable right to self-determination, in particular the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The Decolonisation Declaration and its companion resolutions are as relevant today as they were fifty years ago..."

-  Dr. Carlyle Corbin, International Advisor on Governance and Multilateral Diplomacy

************************

The Decolonisation Declaration

by: Mr. Edward McWhinney

Professor of International Law

Past President

Institut de Droit International

The Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 14 December 1960. The deliberate location of the United Nations vote – in the General Assembly rather than in the Security Council where a permanent member’s veto would always be available to any one or more of the three permanent members that still had “colonial” legal ties or associations – was an obvious enough choice for the political activist States sponsoring resolution 1514 (XV). And the timing of the vote – in 1960, when the decolonisation process was already well under way – was hardly fortuitous. A working majority in favour of a patently anti-colonialist measure would not become politically possible until the General Assembly’s transformation from its original very narrow base of representation limited to the States members of the victorious wartime Alliance against Fascism to something more nearly reflective in cultural and ideological terms of the world community at large. By 1960, this had begun to be achieved, albeit on an intermittent, or casual, step-by-step basis, over the decade and a half from War’s end. The numerical breakthrough had occurred as late as 1955, when 16 new States had been admitted in one big step to membership, bringing the total to 76. In 1960 itself, 19 new States had been admitted, sealing the emergence of what became, in Cold War terms, a neutralist or uncommitted, majority voting coalition variously styled as the Non-Aligned bloc, the Group of 77, the Bandoeng group, the Developing or Third World countries. It was this informal electoral alliance, that provided the intellectual cohesiveness and also the political-tactical competence to secure the adoption of resolution 1514 (XV) without a single expressed dissent in the General Assembly.

Why a Declaration, and not something with more obvious and immediate concrete political and legal consequences? The answer must be that it was partly tactical, to convert potential negative votes in the General Assembly into softer, legally ineffective abstentions. But it also has something to do with the patently French civiliste, legal-systemic influences on its styling and drafting. The paradigm-model for resolution 1514 (XV) must be the great French Déclaration des droits de l’homme et du citoyen (Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen) of 1789. Resolution 1514 (XV), like that historical example, is short and succinct, and written in clear, non-technical, often poetic language.

In the end, the persuasiveness, in both political and legal terms, of resolution 1514 (XV) as Declaration must rest upon its claims to be an authoritative, interpretive gloss upon the Charter of the United Nations as originally written, amplifying and extending the Charter’s original historical imperatives so as to encompass the new historical reality of the post-World War II international society of the drives for access to full sovereignty and independence of erstwhile subject-peoples, in an emerging new, culturally inclusive, representative, pluralist world community.

In its substantive law stipulations, the Declaration postulates what may be described as ordering principles, intended to guide the progressive development of international law in accordance with the General Assembly’s own explicit mandate under Article 13, paragraph 1 (a), of the Charter of the United Nations:

- that the subjection of peoples to alien subjugation, domination and exploitation constitutes a denial of fundamental human rights (art. 1);

- that all peoples have the right to self-determination, but that this necessarily includes the right freely to determine their political status and freely to pursue their economic, social and cultural development (art. 2);

- that all armed action or repressive measures of all kinds directed against dependent peoples shall cease (art. 4);

- that immediate steps shall be taken, in United Nations Trust and Non-Self-Governing Territories or all other territories which have not yet attained independence, to transfer all powers to the peoples of those territories (art. 5).

And there is the warning, in the premonition of possible future post-decolonisation conflicts (as, at the time, in the former Belgian Congo), against any attempt aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity and the territorial integrity of a (post-decolonisation) country (art. 6); and as to the obligation of all States to observe the Charter of the United Nations and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as to equality and non-interference in the internal affairs of all States, and respect for the sovereign rights of all peoples and their territorial integrity (art. 7).

The Declaration’s subsequent history, as a call for legislative activism – affirmative action – within the General Assembly (and, if politically opportune, within the Security Council) and certainly also for parallel initiatives in other coordinate United Nations institutions and agencies (the International Court of Justice in particular), has helped in a process of elevating the Declaration’s claimed juridical status to the rank of imperative principles of international law (jus cogens), binding, as such, on the United Nations as authoritative interpretation of the Charter’s norms and entering into general international law in the result.

The Declaration was at the core of Security Council and General Assembly legislative initiatives that provided a legal base for reference to the International Court of Justice for Advisory Opinion in Namibia in 1971. The Declaration is also reflected, in its full spirit, in the International Court’s Advisory Opinion ruling on Western Sahara in 1975.

In the immediate political context of the drafting and the diplomatic lobbying leading on to its adoption, the Declaration was generally understood as being directed to “salt-water” Colonialism – occupation of the lands and territories of indigenous, native or aboriginal peoples, in Africa, Asia and the Caribbean, who were physically separated by the oceans from their colonial Powers. There is nothing in the language or the spirit of resolution 1514 (XV) inhibiting its legal extension to situations involving relations between European colonial Powers and other European or European-derived peoples overseas. In a major ruling, the International Court of Justice, being seised of a legal complaint of military and paramilitary support by the United States Government for forces from outside Nicaragua attempting to overthrow Nicaragua’s elected government, may have come close in its strong judicial majorities to making such a connection.

Within the General Assembly itself, the Declaration gave birth immediately to further legislative acts whose ties of consanguinity to resolution 1514 (XV) are clear: resolution 1515 (XV) of 15 December 1960, on the sovereign right of States to dispose of their own wealth and natural resources and resolution 1803 (XVII) of 14 December 1962, on States’ permanent sovereignty over those natural resources. The further Declaration on the Establishment of a New International Economic Order and the related Programme of Action (resolutions 3201 (S-VI) and 3202 (S-VI) of 1 May 1974), and the Charter of Economic Rights and Duties of States (resolution 3281 (XXIX) of 12 December 1974) are demonstrations of the prophetic quality of resolution 1514 (XV) in providing an inevitable legal linkage between self-determination and its goal of decolonisation, and a postulated new international law-based right of freedom also in economic self-determination.

Collateral questions arising from resolution 1514 (XV) concern its consequences for the continued validity in legal terms of the former territorial frontiers from the colonial era in the post-decolonisation context. The new Organisation of African Unity had displayed, in the early post-decolonisation period, a concern for avoiding the internecine conflicts over territorial frontiers and the resultant pursuit by military means of “natural frontiers”. The pragmatic conclusion was that it might be wisest for the new African States to accept, at least for the moment, the legitimacy of their own newly-inherited territorial demarcations even where, as very often happened, they had arbitrarily divided indigenous peoples or “nations” belonging to distinct ethno-cultural communities. Openings in judicial terms to the Latin American legal doctrine of uti possidetis, as in the legal discussion in Frontier Dispute (Burkina Faso/Mali), a ruling in 1986 by a Special Chamber of the International Court of Justice, perhaps do not take full account of that doctrine’s own special, intrinsically regional character as a concept limited to disputes inter se of the South American Succession States to the former Spanish and Portuguese colonial Powers. The Badinter Commission’s attempt in 1992 to extrapolate the Latin American uti possidetis doctrine to the international boundaries of the succession States to the Former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia may be questioned substantively on the same basis.

The large conclusion must be that the Declaration has essentially fulfilled its original legislative objective of consolidating the political process, already entered upon, of legally terminating the old Colonial Empires, and of pressing on with all deliberate speed to successful conclusion of the process. With political and economic self-determination now assured for the new succession States, and their control over their own natural and other economic resources guaranteed, the way would be open to pursuing supervening, collateral issues now being canvassed – rectification of inherited frontiers, autonomous development of economic resources on a fully regional basis, and related regional security questions – under other, different legal categories and in other, predominantly diplomatic-legal arenas in aid to the General Assembly’s original great legislative act.

Related Materials

A. Jurisprudence

International Court of Justice, South West Africa (Ethiopia v. South Africa; Liberia v. South Africa). Second Phase, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1966, p. 6.

International Court of Justice, Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (South West Africa) notwithstanding Security Council Resolution 276 (1970), Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1971, p. 16.

International Court of Justice, Western Sahara, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1975, p. 12.

International Court of Justice, Frontier Dispute (Burkina Faso/Mali), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1986, p. 554.

International Court of Justice, Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America), Merits, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1986, p. 14.

B. Doctrine

M. Bedjaoui, Terra nullius, ‘droits’ historiques et auto détérmination, The Hague: Sijthoff, 1975.

M. Bedjaoui, “Non-alignement et droit international”, Recueil des Cours, vol. 151, 1976, p.406.

B. Boutros-Ghali, “The Arab League 1945-1970”, Revue Egyptienne de Droit International, vol. 25, 1969, p.67.

C.J.R. Dugard, “Organisation of African Unity and Colonisation”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, vol. 16, 1967, pp. 157-190.

E. McWhinney, Self-Determination of Peoples and Plural-Ethnic States in Contemporary International Law, Leiden, Boston, Martinus Nijhoff, 2007, particularly chapters 1-4.

E. McWhinney, United Nations Law Making: Cultural and Ideological Relativism and International Law Making for an Era of Transition, Paris, UNESCO; New York, Holmes and Meier, 1984, particularly Chapter 9 [French version: Les Nations Unies et la formation du Droit, Paris, Unesco, Pedone, 1986].

E. McWhinney, The World Court and the Contemporary International Law-Making Process, Alphen aan den Rijn, Sithoff & Noordhoff, 1979, particularly Chapters 2 and 4.

M. Mushkat, “Process of Decolonisation: International Legal Aspects”, University of Baltimore Law Review, vol. 2, 1972-1973, pp. 16-34.

A. Zamora R. (ed.), Actividades Militares y Paramilitares en y contra Nicaragua, (Nicaragua c. Estados Unidos), (Corte Internacional de Justicia), Managua, Nicaragua, 1999.

Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs Condemns Attack on Rapa Nui

UBCIC Condemns Attack on Unarmed Rapa Nui


Urgent News Release
 (Coast Salish Territory/Vancouver, Canada)

The Chilean government, and most recently the Canadian government, adopted the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples within the bounds of their legal and constitutional frameworks. The Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples was adopted by Chile and 143 States at the United Nations General Assembly in September 2007. Yesterday, December 3, 2010, after months of relatively peaceful reoccupation of their lands, Chilean troops opened fire on unarmed Rapa Nui (Easter Island) People.

Grand Chief Stewart Phillip, President of the Union of BC Indian Chiefs stated “What the Chilean government did was ugly, unbelievable and reprehensible. We as Indigenous Peoples must condemn the Chilean government for these unacceptable acts of violence and brutality. The UBCIC supports the Rapa Nui People protecting their lands, their island and their archaeological treasure, the Moai. Chile's President Sebastian Pinera must be directly involved to resolve this growing crisis."

As many as 50,000 tourists travel each year to see the Moai - huge stone heads carved by the Rapa Nui's ancestors. In recent years, tourism and migration have increased pressure to control available land on the 10 mile by 15 mile island, and the Rapa Nui have increasingly taken matters into their own hands, seizing a dozen properties they said were illegally taken from their families generations ago. The latest media reports state additional reinforcements have landed on the island and Chile's Interior Minister stating they will continue "evicting" Rapa Nui People.

“As Indigenous Peoples, our fight is the same the world over. Indigenous Title and Rights are ignored, dismissed and violated," said Grand Chief Phillip. “Chile is one of many countries who adopted the UN Declaration but continue to deny the international legal reality of our Indigenous Title and Rights. As demonstrated yesterday, it seems the Chilean government would rather attack unarmed people than find a lasting and peaceful solution. In the spirit and true intent of the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, the UBCIC calls on the Canadian government to join the many voices of many Peoples to denounce the violent actions of the Chilean government.”

Media inquiries:
Grand Chief Stewart Phillip, Union of BC Indian Chiefs
Phone: (604) 684-0231

The UBCIC is an NGO in Special Consultative Status with the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations.

Rapa Nui Demands Return of Indigenous Lands

Dozens injured in Easter Island land disputes

By Federico Quilodran        
The Associated Press

SANTIAGO, Chile -- A land dispute on Easter Island turned violent Friday when riot police evicting islanders from their ancestral home were surrounded by rock-throwing protesters. About two dozen people were injured in a seven-hours-long confrontation.

The clash began at 5 a.m. when officers moved in to evict 10 people from the home they had been occupying since ousting a government official from the property in September, Rapa Nui lawyer Maka Atan told The Associated Press.

The Rapa Nui resisted and the violence left 17 officers and eight civilians hurt, according to police. Three islanders and one policeman were evacuated to mainland Chile for treatment. But protesters said that 19 islanders were injured and denied seeing any police hurt.

The official native name of Easter Island, known for its stunning gigantic stone heads known as Moais, is Rapa Nui, and that's what many natives call themselves, refusing to identify with Chile, which annexed the island in 1888.

In recent years, tourism and migration have increased pressure to control available land on the 10 mile (16 kilometer) by 15 mile (24 kilometer) island, and the Rapa Nui have increasingly taken matters into their own hands, seizing a dozen properties they said were illegally taken from their families generations ago.

A woman who answered the local government official's phone in the island's main town of Hanga Roa said there would be no official comment on Friday's violence.

But Atan, speaking by phone from the island 2,237 miles (3,580 kilometers) west of Chile, said riot police used batons and shotguns against them, firing pellets at close range at their heads. He said he himself was shot in the back with pellets.  Images shared with The AP show several islanders bleeding from head wounds.

About a dozen buildings are currently being occupied by Rapa Nui people, who say Chile illegally took their family's ancestral homes on tiny Easter Island, where a total population of fewer than 5,000 people include about 2,200 Rapa Nuis.

The island's top government authority, Valparaiso Governor Raul Celis, said from mainland Chile that "the evictions will continue."  Chilean media reported that a planeload of police reinforcements was on its way to the island.

Atan said he witnessed police firing pellet guns at people's faces from a distance of just one meter (yard).
"They were shooting to kill. It seems like this is going to end with them killing the Rapa Nui," he said, adding: "The land on this island has always been Rapa Nui. That's why we're asking for our land to be returned."


Rapa Nui leader denounces Chile government over violent evictions
Radio New Zealand International


The president of the Rapa Nui Parliament has denounced Chilean leaders over the way they have tackled the land occupations on Easter Island.

Leviante Araki says the President of Chile, Sebastian Pinera, and the interior minister, Rodrigo Hinzpeter, are scoundrels and thieves following last Friday’s violent eviction of Rapa Nui occupiers of public buildings. Mr Pinera has justified the police action, saying they moved in to uphold public order and execute court orders.

But Mr Araki has told Chilean media his people have no fear and if they have to die they will. He says before last week’s violence they used to believe in Chile but now they want nothing from Chile and move away from it. The Chilean authorities say they want to end the remaining occupations within weeks.


Calls for calm in violence-hit Easter Island
TVNZ

There are calls for calm on Easter Island after Chilean security forces opened fire on indigenous land protesters, who have been occupying a government official's house for months.

Three islanders and one policeman were evacuated to mainland Chile for treatment following the violence, while another 20 were injured.

Chilean forces had gone to a property on the Polynesian island to evict 10 people who had been occupying the house since ousting the government official from it in September. They opened fire after being surrounded by rock-throwing protesters.

The protesters, who are the descendants of the original Polynesian inhabitants of the island, claim 13 properties on the island, including one hotel, were all illegally taken from their families decades ago and are demanding their return.

Last month, a Court of Appeal ruled they had a legitimate claim to ancestral ownership but the island tribunal decided to issue eviction notices anyway.

Speaking to ONE News on the Chilean mainland, the governor of the seaport city of Valparaiso, Raul Celis, said that the situation on Easter Island was complicated.

"The situation, I would not say it's serious, but complicated. There was an eviction and buildings had been occupied illegally for several months," he said.

"Obviously there isn't a situation of complete normality on Easter Island."

The Pacific Conference of Churches (PCC) has now intervened, urging all parties to seek a peaceful outcome. It says it is concerned for the indigenous people of the island.

"We are concerned about the outcome because we have not received any more news. I think there is a media clampdown on Rapanui as of now," PCC spokesperson Fe'iloakitau Tevi said.

The council has also asked the Red Cross for help in a bid to prevent violence escalating further. Easter Island, also called Rapanui, is one of the most isolated inhabited islands in the world and a territory of Chile.
The tiny island is famous for more than 800 moai or statues carved by the original Polynesian inhabitants.


Troops open fire as Rapa Nui land conflict escalates
Radio Australia

Armed Chilean troops have opened fire on unarmed civilians on the island of Rapa Nui during conflict over land rights. The Chilean government annexed the island which lies about three thousand miles off its coast, more than a century ago.

Hawaii Public Radio's Kayla Rosenfeld spoke to cameraman Santi Hitorangi who was filming the violence, when he was shot, along with dozens of other people. He has since told Pacific Beat that he has gone into hiding.

Grant McCall is an anthropologist from the University of New South Wales in Australia who lived on Rapa Nui, or Easter Island, for seven years.

Cruise Ships Visiting Puerto Rico, US Virgin Islands Must Comply with New emission rules

New emission rules to target ships in Puerto Rico, USVI



By DANICA COTO

SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico (AP) — Federal (U.S.) officials are looking to clear the air in two U.S. Caribbean territories by requiring cruise liners, tankers and other large ships in the region to reduce their emissions or face penalties.

The plan is to take effect in late 2013. It will target ships traveling in waters around Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, which have some of the busiest ports in the Caribbean, Judith Enck, regional administrator for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, said Wednesday.

The two islands * were initially excluded from a plan adopted earlier this year by a United Nations agency to control emissions from large ships that sail within 200 nautical miles of the U.S. and Canadian coasts, she said.

"There is a real problem with local pollution," Enck said.

The Port of San Juan in Puerto Rico sees more than 1 million cruise ship passengers every year, along with nearly 3,800 cargo ships laden with 11 million metric tons of goods. Some 800 cruise ships arrive every year in nearby St. Thomas, which is the largest cruise port in the U.S. Virgin Islands.

Under the plan, ships will have to use cleaner fuel or install special equipment to reduce air pollution. As a result, the EPA estimates sulfur dioxide and fine particles that are linked to asthma and cancer could be cut by roughly 90 percent within a decade. Many big ships outside the jurisdiction of the U.S. government often run on fuels with high sulfur levels.

Under the plan, which needs approval from the United Nations' London-based International Maritime Organization, EPA officials will randomly show up at ports to check whether ships are in compliance, Enck said.

The penalties have not yet been established, but impounding ships has been suggested as one option, said Elias Rodriguez, an EPA spokesman.

Shippers and cruise companies initially opposed the plan, saying it would be expensive and create arbitrary boundaries. Several cruise companies contacted Wednesday referred comment to the Cruise Lines International Association, which issued a statement saying it was committed to working with international environmental regulators. It also said cruise companies have taken several steps to reduce emissions by their ships, including operating diesel electric engines.

The EPA estimates the plan will increase the price of a cruise and the cost of transporting a 20-foot (6-meter) container by less than 1 percent.

* The US Virgin Islands is comprised of three islands, St. Croix, St. Thomas and St. John).

International Governance Expert Discusses Changes in Northern Marianas Covenant

'It's always good to assess NMI political status periodically'

By Haidee V. Eugenio
Reporter

A United Nations adviser and expert on political self-determination said yesterday it is always good for the CNMI, or any other insular area, to assess its political status periodically to take into consideration recent developments, including the federal takeover of local immigration.

However, despite the federal takeover of CNMI border control in 2009, Dr. Carlyle Corbin said the CNMI remains the most autonomous, self-governing of five U.S. territories.

“Just comparing the political relationship-and this is of course prior to the changes-that the model, as it was initiated, signed and adopted, was very autonomous and it provided for internal self-government, far greater than the rest of the other U.S. territories,” he told Saipan Tribune in a brief interview after his presentation before 12 local lawmakers on small island governance.

Among other things, the CNMI indigenous population still has full control of its lands as exemplified by the land alienation provision of its constitution.

“The CNMI is probably the most autonomous model of all of us,” he said, compared to American Samoa, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico and Guam.

American Samoa, he said, seems to be at the opposite end of the spectrum because the U.S. Department of the Interior has veto power over the territory, a statement echoed by Senate floor leader Pete P. Reyes (R-Saipan).

House minority leader Diego Benavente (R-Saipan) said the CNMI, in his opinion, may not be the most autonomous territory after the federal takeover of local immigration.

Corbin, an international adviser on global governance and former minister of state for external affairs of the U.S. Virgin Islands, said in his “observation,” it is about time the CNMI assess its political status.

“I guess it is time to look at it. It is not a recommendation but an observation. It's always good to assess periodically and I think in some cases even constitutions have a requirement to assess every five years or every 10 years. Assessment is always good,” he said in an interview.

Corbin has served as a United Nations expert on self-determination for over a decade, and as an independent expert for the UN Development Programme on U.S. missions to Bermuda and to the Turks and Caicos.

Rep. Stanley Torres (Ind-Saipan), who has been pushing for a re-examination of the U.S.-CNMI relations, particularly whether a “commonwealth” status is still desired by people under the terms of the original Covenant agreement, echoed Corbin's observations about the assessment of the islands' political status.

“I am not advocating for independence but I want the U.S. and the CNMI to come to the negotiating table and for the U.S. to fulfill its promise. To quote former justice Jesse Borja, the U.S. is supposed to provide the CNMI people with a standard of living comparable to that in the mainland,” said Torres, whose attempts since 1997 to create a Second Marianas Political Status Commission had always been rejected.

Sen. Jovita Taimanao (Ind-Rota) also said Corbin is right about the need to assess the islands' political status from time to time, “and to involve the younger generation in the discussion of the CNMI's future.”

Prior to meeting with lawmakers, Corbin also made a courtesy call on Gov. Benigno R. Fitial on Capital Hill yesterday.

Former Guam senator Dr. Hope Cristobal facilitated Corbin's visit to the CNMI after visiting Guam. Also accompanying Corbin and Cristobal yesterday to Saipan was attorney Julian Aguon.

Corbin is the author of two UN studies on the participation of non-independent countries in the UN system.

Cooperation Between Eastern Caribbean and French Overseas Territories Encouraged

BASSETERRE, ST. KITTS
(CUOPM) – 

Developing closer ties between member nations of the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) and the French Overseas Territories in the Caribbean was discussed in Paris, the French capital.

St. Kitts and Nevis Prime Minister and current Chairman of the OECS, Hon. Dr. Denzil L. Douglas discussed the strengthening of cooperative links in trade, vocational education and renewal energy with France’s Minister of Overseas Territories, Her Excellency Madame Marie-Luce Penchard.
The meeting described as “warm and productive” also focused on healthcare, university exchanges and prospect of securing financing from the European Development Fund (EDF).

Madame Penchard, in conformity with the outcome of Council of Ministers of Overseas Territories also raised the possibility of involving the French Caribbean and Guianese regional authorities toward participation in future meetings of the OECS and CARICOM, a point that was particularly well received by Prime Minister Douglas.

During the talks, Prime Minister Douglas underlined the importance of these links in his capacity as Chairman of the OECS. “We ardently wish to develop cooperation between the French territories and our community in the Caribbean,” said Dr. Douglas.

Governance Expert to speak at University of Guam

Will discuss recent developments in small island governance

 The University of Guam will host Dr. Carlyle Corbin, International Advisor on Governance and Multilateral Diplomacy, who is visiting Guam from the sister territory of the Virgin Islands for a series of lectures and colloquia. He will deliver a featured address at the University of Guam CLASS Lecture Hall on November 30 at 6:00 pm. The topic of his university address is "Recent Developments in Small Island Governance: Implications for the Self-Determination Process."

The event is free and open to the public, and  is sponsored by the University of Guam Division of Social Work and the Guåhan Coalition for Peace and Justice.

Corbin is the former Representative for External Affairs in the Government of the US Virgin Islands, and has lectured widely on political and constitutional advancement. He is the author of three books and numerous scholarly articles on governance and political development with specific focus on non-independent countries.
 
He has served as an advisor to several Caribbean territorial governments, and presently is the international advisor to the Fifth Constitutional Convention of the US Virgin Islands. He has been an expert on self-determination and decolonisation for United Nations Caribbean and Pacific regional seminars for over a decade, and has served as the independent expert to United Nations missions to several non self-governing territories.
 
He presently serves as the Executive Secretary of the Council of Presidents of the United Nations General Assembly.

Puerto Rico Tax Cuts Proposed

Governor Fortuño files balance of sweeping tax reform

By : John Marino Caribbean Business
marino@caribbeanbusinesspr.com

Gov. Luis Fortuño announced Monday that the second and final phase of his proposed tax reform aimed at providing relief to all Puerto Ricans was filed with the Legislature. The reform will provide on average $1.2 billion in taxpayer relief every year for each of the next six years, which constitutes the largest tax relief granted in Puerto Rico history, he added.

“Today we responsibly comply with the pledge we made to all Puerto Rican workers: the most sweeping, equitable and just tax reform every adopted in Puerto Rico,” the governor said. “This reform is based on our commitment to bring relief to Puerto Ricans through just tax rates and control of government spending that will be the formula for our economic development.”

The highlights of the reform, which will phase in the reduced tax rates over the six-year period, include:

— A zero tax rate for those who earn less $20,000 annually.

— A 7 percent rate for those who earn from $20,000 to $30,000.

— A 14 percent rate for those who earn from $30,000 to $70,000.

— A 25 percent rate for those who earn more than $125,000.

— A reduction in the maximum tax rate for businesses to 30 percent from 39 percent.

— An increase to $600 from $300 in the maximum earned income tax credit and an increase to $35,000 from $20,000 in the income cap to be eligible for the program. This will benefit 217,000 additional taxpayers.

— A $400 tax credit for people 65 and older with income under $15,000 annually.

— A deduction of up to 100 percent for charitable donations, up to a limit of 50 percent of adjusted gross income.

The governor also touted the reform’s simplifying of the tax code, reducing to three from five the different taxpayer classifications and eliminating all deductions, except for mortgage interest, charitable donations, medical costs, student loan interest and contributions to retirement or education funds.

The tax reform will mean an average annual savings of $1,500 per taxpayer, with average individual tax rates cut 50 percent and business tax rates 30 percent. It also provides incentives for work and is geared toward economic development and the creation of jobs, Fortuño said.

“History has taught us that a dollar in the hands of Puerto Ricans goes much further than a dollar in the hands of the government,” the governor said. “By putting more money into the pockets of our workers, we are recognizing the fact that they — and not the government — have the power to determine what is best for themselves and their loved ones.”

'We Are Guahan' Joins lawsuit Against Military Build-up

Almost one year exactly after the release of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement, We Are Guåhan has joined the Guam Preservation Trust and National Trust for Historic Preservation in a lawsuit against DoD (U.S. Department of Defence).

http://weareguahan.com/2010/11/19/we-are-guahan-joins-lawsuit-against-dod/

. This lawsuit is about Pågat, but it is not just about Pågat. This lawsuit is also about DoD deciding that “operational efficiency” was more important than the requests of our Legislature, our Governor, our Congresswoman and our community. In the name of military convenience, DoD has broken promises and, as will be shown in this lawsuit, it has broken the law.
 
How can we expect DoD to voluntarily help us pay for the 9 new schools and 500 additional hospital beds that will be needed outside the fence when a lawsuit is required to force DoD to follow the law?
 
To be clear, this lawsuit is about protecting Pågat, a site that has great cultural and historical significance to our island. But to be equally as clear, We Are Guåhan has and will continue to oppose the buildup as proposed. We are here, and we will use every tool that is available to us to protect our home, including legal action.


See also:  "Guam Preservation Trust and We Are Guahan, joined by the National Trust for Historic Preservation, Files Complaint for Injunctive and Declaratory Relief"

Lawsuit Calls for New Elections in Guam

*****

Gutierrez Files Lawsuit Seeking to Overturn Results of 2010 Gubernatorial Election

Written by Kevin Kerrigan
PNC Pacific News Center
Guam News

Guam - Lawyers for the Gutierrez-Aguon Gubernatorial Campaign this afternoon [Friday] filed a lawsuits in District Court seeking to overturn the results of the 2010 Gubernatorial Election that has already been certified in favor of the rival Republican team of Calvo-Tenorio.

The lawsuit was filed by Attorney David Lujan on behalf of Carl Gutierrez ... Frank Aguon Jr...The Democratic Party of Guam and 1-thousand John Doe's ...citizens of Guam, all of whom, the lawsuit alleges, were "illegally and arbitrarily deprived of their right to vote." Among the factual allegations in the lawsuit are:

* locked ballot boxes were opened at polling sites ... secret ballots were removed and exposed to the public
* ballots were removed by Guam Election Commission Executive Director John Blas who transported them to other polling sites.

* absentee ballots were destroyed or removed

* absentee ballots were not mailed to voters who requested them

* absentee ballots were mailed too late for voters to return them in time

* registered voters were turned away at numerous polling sites and not allowed to vote

* the chain of custody was compromised when ballots were secured and held by a private security company owned and/or controlled by Republican Lt. Gubernatorial candidate Ray Tenorio.

* the number of ballots issued to voters did not match the number of ballots returned at various precincts

* residents of other U.S. jurisdictions ... like Saipan, were allowed to vote in Guam's election.

* underage voters were allowed to cast ballots

*illegal ballots were counted

*voting tabulation machines malfunctioned

The lawsuit also reveals new totals in the election count:

Calvo-Tenorio: 19,879 or 50.38 %
Gutierrez-Aguon 19,296 or 48.90 %

* 484 over-votes
* 702 under-votes

On the issue of the over and under votes, the lawsuit notes that the tabulation machines rejected those votes on November 2ed election night. But the Election Commission Board Members spent much of their time during the re-count on November 6th trying to determine voter intent. But that process too comes under criticism in the lawsuit which states:

"The machine re-count ... included numerous incidents of ballots being chewed up/mutilated by the machines ... and there were problems with several machines ... several additional recounts had to be done for at least 6 precincts." But "despite the fact of the obvious failures of the tabulation machines ... the GEC (Guam Electoral Commission) accepted and certified the results of the machine recount."

The lawsuit cites violations of the 5th and 4th Amendments to the Constitution and it also cites the Guam Organic Act and the Help America Vote Act which all guarantee that a citizens right to vote may not be arbitrarily denied.

The lawsuits suit seeks:

*declare the results of the election for governor and lt. governor certified by the GEC legally invalid

*require the GEC to schedule and conduct a new election at the earliest practicable time.

Communiqué from (U.K.) Overseas Territories Consultative Council

Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO)
Press Centre

http://turksandcaicosislands.fco.gov.uk/en/news/?view=PressS&id=118620682



18 November 2010

Minister for the Overseas Territories Henry Bellingham met leaders from the Overseas Territories for the Overseas Territories Consultative Council on 17 November.

The UK and Overseas Territories represented at the Consultative Council discussed a number of issues of mutual interest and concern. Mr Bellingham emphasised the Coalition Government’s determination to improve and strengthen the UK’s relationship with the Overseas Territories and to represent their interests in international fora. He also made clear that other Government Departments were now more closely involved in Overseas Territories work. The Caribbean Territories welcomed the important emergency assistance provided by the Atlantic Patrol Task (North) during the recent hurricane season. The Minister noted that the Coalition Government had restarted the vital Air Access project for St Helena and had agreed to provide assistance for Tristan da Cunha’s harbour. All parties agreed on the need to work together to help the commercial and economic development of the Territories.

During the criminal justice session there were discussions about rising crime in some of the Territories; about drugs and organised crime; and about possible UK technical assistance to the Territories in these areas. In the session on transport there were discussions about maritime and aviation safety regulations; and the importance of meeting international safety standards. Territory leaders raised concerns about the cost of this and about Air Passenger Duty.

During the session on the environment, it was agreed that Territory Governments and relevant UK Departments would work together to help manage the natural environment and the impact of climate change in the Territories, including highlighting examples of good practice and successes already achieved in the Territories.

During the session on passport issues, the UK and the Overseas Territories discussed arrangements for handling the printing of passports in light of the UK Government’s decision to repatriate to the UK the printing of all British passports.

During their separate session on financial services and public finances, the UK and the Caribbean Territories and Bermuda agreed:

*   the importance of complying with international financial sector standards (on tax transparency, financial regulation and anti-money laundering/counter terrorism financing) and that these standards must be applied without discrimination

*    the importance of continuing to take action to return public finances to a sustainable footing to take forward work on a framework for fiscal responsibility

During their separate session the South Atlantic Territories agreed a number of areas in which they could work together more closely.

Chamoru Students to Discuss Decolonisation of Guam

United Nations Guam Forum

University of California Los Angeles (UCLA)

 THURSDAY NOVEMBER 18, 2010

5:30-7:30

170 DODD HALL

THURSDAY NOVEMBER 18, 2010

This forum will discuss the testimonies of the Guam Delegation who testified at the United Nations Special Political and Decolonization Committee in October 2010

SPEAKERS INCLUDE:

 Josette Quinata

Michael Tuncap

Alfred Flores

Edward Browne

UCLA Graduate Coalition of the Native Pacific

UCLA Pacific Islands' Student Association

Pacific Islander Studies Initiative
NAPA

UCLA Post Colonial Theory & Literature Colloquium

Testimony to the United Nations Special Political and Decolonization Committee

Chamoru Self-Determination in Guåhan (Guam)

October 5-6, 2010

Hafa Adai distinguished members of the Special Political and Decolonization Committee (Fourth Committee) and Chairman, H.E. Mr. Chitsaka Chipaziwa. Dankolo na si yu’us ma’ase (thank you very much) for your time in allowing me the opportunity to address this esteemed international body.

Guahu si Josette Marie Lujan Quinata and I am a proud Chamoru daughter of Guåhan. I am a graduate student in the Master of Social Work program at the University of Southern California and a member of Famoksaiyan. "Famoksaiyan" translates to either "the place or time of nurturing" or "the time to paddle forward and move ahead." We are a grassroots network of activists, scholars, students, community leaders and artists who seek to push for a political, economic, and social agenda for Chamorus on local, national and international levels.

I am here today to express to you the crucial concerns that are in dire need of your attention, advocacy, and support especially during this extremely critical time in Guåhan’s history. Currently, Guåhan is under grave attack as it has been designated by the United States, its administering power, as the stage for the largest U.S. military buildup since World War II. The overwhelmingly colossal transference from Okinawa, Japan to Guåhan includes military personnel, their families, and foreign construction workers and is scheduled to take effect by 2014. This massive influx is expected to increase Guåhan’s population by 34 percent. Resources to land, community facilities, and infrastructure capacity will undeniably be impacted by the drastic number of people utilizing these amenities and will devastatingly reinforce the economic, social, and financial dependency the U.S. has over Guåhan. Therefore, the political and decision-making process for Chamorus continues to be one of an insider-outsider perspective as Chamorus remain on the outside fences barred from making decisions that ultimately impinges on their indigenous rights and native claim to the land. This inability to include Chamorus in the very decisions that affect their land, their culture, and their lives permeates the power struggle, political dominance, colonialism, and militarization that the U.S. gravely has over the native people of Guåhan.

Furthermore, what makes this potential atrocity even more horrific is that despite the multitude of people who have advocated for their voices, their concerns, worries, fears, and questions surrounding the military buildup to be addressed, the “green light” to move forward with the continued militarization of Guåhan was recently announced in the U.S. Department of Defense’s Record of Decision. This heartrending decision to move forward with the military buildup will not only alter the lives of the Chamoru people, but it will also significantly impact the environment of Guåhan. For instance, according to the Environmental Impact Statement, the aspirations of the military buildup include excavating ancestral, native and sacred lands in exchange for live firing ranges and the expansion of hotels, resorts, and housing markets. Such a disregard for the cultural ties to our land and historical sites of our ancestors will be detrimental in preserving our Chamoru culture and learning about our history.

In addition, the U.S. government has allocated funding for the development of naval infrastructures while civilian infrastructures continue to deteriorate, posing health and environmental risks on the people of Guåhan. Both the administering power and the Government of Guåhan have stated that the island’s infrastructure is inadequate to meet the needs of the military buildup and the increased number of people it will serve. However, costs needed for the upgrades to Guåhan’s infrastructures are different from the funds that are applied to the military bases. Therefore, Guåhan will not only have to support the local community, but also the demands of the military buildup without having any control of the financial expenses or responsibility over the expansion.

Thus, vital aspects of Chamoru society are impounded by the underlying theme of militarization that affects land resources, health, financial stability, and political sovereignty. The colonization of Guåhan continues to deny Chamorus decision-making power on issues that truly affect their lives. This is evidenced in the lack of inclusion that Chamorus are faced with as our voices and ethical issues are second to militarization and colonialism. And while we have provided our input in the planning process of the buildup, ultimately, we have no real control over what happens to our island and the impacts it would have on future generations.

Therefore, as we question the effects and consequences of this proposed plan, it is overwhelmingly apparent that the security interests and national policies of the U.S. are not inclusive of the Chamoru people’s plight and concerns. Guåhan to this day remains colonized even though it was placed under the United Nations list of Non-Self Governing Territories, and after the UN passed General Assembly Resolutions 1514 (the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples) and 1541(which establishes the three options for self-determination). However, we have the chance to prevent history from repeating itself and from suffering at the hands of colonialism which will lead to ongoing detrimental effects on our land, culture, and humanity. More importantly, we have the opportunity to further the process for self-determination, sovereignty, cultural preservation, and land security by collaborating with the Fourth Committee to help facilitate the political process that enforces the United States’ obligation under the UN Charter to help the Chamoru people attain their basic right to self-determination.

At a time when our homeland is threatened by militarization and heavy dependency on the United States, I recommend that the Fourth Committee immediately enact the process of decolonization for Guåhan in lieu of the severe, irreversible impacts of U.S. militarization with a fully funded and far-reaching education campaign informing all Chamorus from Guåhan of their right to self-determination and decolonization options. I also hope you will join me in understanding the social and political impacts of Guåhan, and acknowledging the Chamoru people’s desire to inspire change and evoke action that will allow us to have a real voice in our political future.

Saina Ma’ase.
Josette Marie Lujan Quinata
MSW Graduate Student
University of Southern California

Famoksaiyan

  I dedicate this testimony to all those who have inspired and motivated me in this journey, and for those who have left a legacy on our island.  I am especially grateful for my Nana, Veronica Lujan and Grandmother, Rosita Quinata who have been extremely profound throughout my journey.  I am moved by your compassion, encouragement, and belief in me and in the Chamoru people’s right to self-determination.  I especially want to say si yu’us ma’ase to Sid Gardner, President of Children and Family Futures, a non-profit organization whose mission is to improve the lives of children and families, particularly those affected by substance use disorders.  Your organization’s profound enthusiasm and outpouring support have undoubtedly been the backbone behind my 2010 United Nations testimony.  I am forever grateful for your commitment and influence in this journey.  Dankolo na si yu’us ma’ase. 

The Decolonisation Process in Western Sahara

Kamal Fadel
Representative of Polisario in Australia


The Western Sahara issue is an important and relevant issue to all those who are interested in the role of the United Nations, human rights, justice and peace. Western Sahara is situated in northwest Africa along the Atlantic coast, and was a Spanish colony for almost 100 years. In 1975, Spain signed a secret agreement with Morocco and Mauritania, dividing the territory between them. 1/ Both Morocco and Mauritania invaded and illegally occupied territory. However, in 1979, Mauritania abandoned its territorial claim over Western Sahara and signed a peace treaty with the Indigenous people. Despite this, Morocco maintains administrative control and continues to claim sovereignty over most of the Territory. The United Nations (‘the UN’) and the Organisation of African Unity (‘the OAU’) have been trying to organise a referendum on self-determination in Western Sahara. 2/ 

The United Nations Decolonisation Program


The Charter of the United Nations recognises the right of peoples to self determination. 3/  Furthermore, the UN passed landmark resolutions and established important decolonisation programs. 4/ In 1963 Western Sahara was included in the UN list of the non-self-governing territories, and in October 1964 the UN Decolonisation Committee adopted its first Resolution on Western Sahara, urging Spain to start the process of decolonising the territory. 5/ The UN General Assembly issued a similar Resolution on December 16, 1965. 6/

Initially, Spain was reluctant to start the process of decolonisation; but in August 1974, it informed the UN that it was prepared to organize a referendum on self-determination. In this referendum, the people of Western Sahara could choose either full independence or to remain attached to Spain. Morocco and Mauritania opposed the referendum idea as they wanted the Territory for themselves.

The Moroccan Sovereignty Claim and the International Court of Justice (ICJ)

In order to postpone the referendum, Morocco, with the support of Mauritania, asked the UN General Assembly to seek arbitration from the International Court of Justice (‘the ICJ’) and to give legal advice on this matter. On 13 December 1974, the ICJ was asked to give an advisory opinion on: (1) whether or not the Western Sahara had been terra nullius - a territory belonging to no one - at the time of Spanish colonisation; and (2) if it was not terra nullius at the time of Spanish colonisation, then what was the legal relationship between Western Sahara and Morocco, and Western Sahara and Mauritania . 7/

In international law, sovereignty has two elements: territorial and jurisdictional.  8/ Morocco claims that before Spanish colonisation, Western Sahara was Moroccan territory. To satisfy the jurisdictional test for sovereignty, it cites evidence that at the time of Spanish colonisation, some Sahrawi tribes paid allegiance to the Moroccan throne. Specifically, it relies on the Islamic concept of the bayaa, an allegiance amounting to ‘a contractual agreement whereby the Muslim community offered a conditional loyalty to its caliph (leader) in response to his recognition of his obligations under the sharia’ . 9/

On this basis, Morocco claims firstly that it, not Spain, has a legitimate claim to sovereignty over the territory of Western Sahara. It also claims that the principle of uti possidetis juris, 10/ which holds that colonial boundaries cannot be altered on independence or decolonisation, applies to that territory.

The ICJ studied all the documents presented to it by Morocco, Mauritania, Spain and Algeria; but the Sahrawis were not allowed to appear before the Court since the ICJ can only hear evidence from States. 11/ After twenty-seven sessions, the ICJ issued its opinion on October 15, 1975. 12/
The Court decided unanimously that Western Sahara was not terra nullius when Spain proclaimed a protectorate over it in 1884, since it ‘was inhabited by peoples which, if nomadic, were socially and politically organised in tribes and under chiefs competent to represent them’.  13/ The court then gave the conclusion of its opinion regarding the legal ties between Western Sahara, Morocco and Mauritania:

The Court’s conclusion is that the materials and information presented to it do not establish any tie of territorial sovereignty between the territory of Western Sahara and the Kingdom of Morocco or the Mauritanian entity. Thus the court has not found legal ties of such a nature as might affect the application of resolution 1514 (XV) in the decolonisation of Western Sahara and, in particular, of the principle of self-determination through the free and genuine expression of the will of the peoples of the Territory. 14/

The decision of the ICJ is of great significance. As Thomas Frank put it, ‘the judges asserted the supremacy of the norm developed by UN resolutions and the practice of decolonisation: the Sahrawi population was entitled to self-determination within the perimeters of the existing colonial entity’.  15/ It is clear that the ICJ decision is a rejection of the Moroccan claim of sovereignty over Western Sahara.

The Postponed Referendum


Despite the Court’s decision, Morocco and Mauritania invaded and occupied Western Sahara in 1975 in a grave violation of international law. The UN Security Council adopted a resolution deploring the invasion and calling on Morocco to withdraw from the Territory 16/ , but the resolution was never enforced. The invasion provoked a prolonged war; causing great suffering to the Indigenous Sahrawis who have been denied their basic human rights. Yet it is a human tragedy rarely noticed by the rest of the world.

In August 1988, as result of war-weariness and international pressure, Morocco agreed to a UN-OAU peace process. Central to the UN-OAU peace plan (‘the plan’) is the holding of a referendum providing an opportunity for the Sahrawi people to exercise their right to self-determination in a free and fair manner. A cease-fire was declared in September 1991 and a UN mission (MINURSO) was deployed in the territory. According to the original plan, 17/ the referendum should have taken place in January 1992.

Furthermore, Morocco signed the Houston Agreements negotiated under the auspices of James Baker, the former Personal Envoy of the Secretary-General. The agreements were endorsed by the Security Council and should have lead to the organisation of the referendum.

In an attempt to break the deadlock, James Baker presented what became known as the Baker Plan that was endorsed by the Security Council in July 2003. The plan envisaged four to five years autonomy under Moroccan sovereignty, followed by a referendum on the final status of the Territory in which Moroccan settlers who resided in the territory since December 1999 would vote. As a gesture of good will and in a spirit of co-operation, Polisario, a Sahrawi movement working for Western Sahara’s independence, accepted the Plan despite the risks involved in it- but Morocco rejected it.

In August 2004, Morocco decided to abandon the peace process and the referendum idea altogether, due to fears of the verdict of the Saharawi people. In response, the UN Security Council called on Morocco and Polisario to enter into direct negotiations without preconditions, in good faith, and with a view to ensuring the respect for the right of the Saharawi people to self-determination..

Morocco and Polisario met four times at Manhasset neat New York in 2007 and 2008 for direct negotiations under UN auspices, but the talks have so far failed because Morocco refuses to consider the referendum idea and will only offer what it calls “autonomy”; which the Saharawis consider falls short of the right of self-determination.

The right of peoples to self-determination is enshrined in the declarations of the United Nations and the Organisation of African Unity. 18/ Furthermore, the ICJ verdict upheld that the Sahrawi people are entitled to exercise this right. Therefore, the invasion and occupation of Western Sahara in 1975 was an act of aggression and a violation of international law.

The UN has so far failed in its efforts in Western Sahara, because of the lack of major powers in the international community politically and publicly supporting the referendum. Unlike the referendum process in East Timor, which has benefited from the involvement of regional and international actors, the Western Sahara peace process has not yet attracted international attention. Unless there is international pressure on Morocco, the chances of the referendum proceeding in Western Sahara are very slim.

After 47 years on the UN agenda, it is tragic that Western Sahara’s decolonisation is still incomplete and that the Sahrawi people are still denied their basic and legitimate right to decide their own future. At the same time, the Saharawis have faced horrendous human rights abuses by Morocco. In addition, their natural resources continue to be illegally exploited by companies from all over the world. 165,000 Saharawis have endured life in harsh conditions in refugee camps for the past 33 years.

It is the duty of the international community to make sure that a final and lasting decolonisation process is achieved in Western Sahara. The alternative to a peaceful solution will be the resumption of hostilities and the destabilisation of the whole region, something the Saharawis wish to avoid.

See also: http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2010/gaspd452.doc.htm
_____________________________________

1/ Note that this deal has no status in International law.

2/ For the best historical background in English, see Tony Hodges, Western Sahara: The Roots of a Desert War (1983); and Karin Arts and Pedro Pinto Leite (eds).International Law and the Question of Western Sahara.

3/ Article 1 of the United Nations Charter1945.

4/ Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Territories and Peoples General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) 14 December 1960 UNDoc A/4684 (1960), GAOR 15th Session, Supp 16, p66. General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) 15 December 1960, Principles VI-IX, UN Doc A/4684 (1960), GAOR 15th Session, Supp 16, p29.

5/ GAOR, 19th Session, Annex No. 8 (part I), UN Document A/5800/Rev.1 (1964), pp.290-91.

6/ UNGA Resolution 2072, December 16, 1965, GAOR, 20th Session, Supplement 14, UN Document A/6014, pp.59-60

7/ General Assembly Resolution 3292, 29 UN GAOR Supp. 31, UN Document A/9631 1974, paras. 103-4.

8/ These elements of sovereignty are expressed in Article 2(4) of the UN Charter 1945, which states in part that ‘[a]ll members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State...’. Cf Dixon & McCorquodale, above n 3, chs 7 & 8.

9/ George Joffe, ‘International Court of Justice and the Western Sahara’ in Richard Lawless and Laila Monahan (eds) War and Refugees: The Western Sahara Conflict (1987) 26.

10/ Paragraph 6 of the UN Resolution 15 14 (XV) of 1960. Cf Dixon & McCorquodale, above n 3, 266-7 & 301-5; George Joffe, ‘Self-determination and Uti Possidetis: The Western Sahara and the "Lost Provinces"’, (1996) 1 Morocco 10.

11/ Statute of the International Court of Justice 1945, Article 36(2)

12/ ICJ Rep 1975 12. Cf Hodges, above n 12, 368

13/ ICJ Rep 1975 12 para 81.

14/ ICJ Rep 1975 12 para 162.

15/ Thomas Frank, ‘Theory and practice of decolonisation’ in Lawless and Monahan, above n 17, 12.

16/ S/RES/380 (1975) of 6 November 1975, adopted by the Security Council at its 1854th meeting.

17/ The Secretary General Report S/21360 adopted by Security Council Resolution S/RES/658 (1990), and Secretary General Report S/22464 adopted by S/RES/690 (1991).

18/ Articles 1 (2), 55 and 56 of the UN Charter ; Article III (3) of the OAU Charter 1963.

Reflections on the Dissolution of a Country

Bonaire Reporter

 10/10/10-  Bonaire is now an integral part of The Netherlands.

“Pabien, Congrats, Gefeliciteerd. Nos ta den un Reino ku a renase. We live in a reborn Kingdom. We leven in een herboren Koninkrijk! With our will in the right direction, we will reap new fortunes…”  Message from Bonaire Governor Glenn Thodé on 10/10/10.

 10/18/2010- The October 22- Nov. 8 edition of The Bonaire Reporter

Commentary on the moment of transition: 

  -Special to The Bonaire Reporter 
 by Norwin E. Leito

     Journalist for Papiamentu language media.

" It was Saturday night. Bands were playing music. Some people were dancing. Other people were having a cold beverage. Important people were speaking on the stage. Well, it is now almost 12 o’ clock at midnight. Almost everybody was curious to know what was going to happen when the children, the islands of the Dutch Antilles, separated and Bonaire became a public entity of Holland. 

A local singer sang a very sad song in which he said goodbye to the Antilles. It was a covered song of Eva Peron. The original song is: “Don’t Cry For Me, Argentina.”  The Antillean flag went down. Many people were dressed in black. Were they really aware of this or was it just a coincidence?

  In a way we could say that there was a certain feeling of funeral. It is not that there was never a fight between the islands. However, there was still a feeling of “we.” Now it feels as if the family has been torn apart. Everyone could see the beautiful fireworks in the sky. But one really could feel the nostalgia among the people.

One guy tried to congratulate two other guys who were passing by. But they really did not appreciate this and they said that according to them there was no reason at all for congratulations. They even were ready to fight. In general, during the day of Rincon or other cultural events, the faces are happy. Unfortunately, on this day many people were looking very sad. There were even some people who could not hold their tears. I am one of those people to be honest. I feel that I have lost my brothers and sisters. In other words: the other islands.

  The politicians have their reason to do what they are doing. But the most important thing that’s affecting the local people is “fear.” They are afraid because they say that they are not well informed. One can hear them talking in the local bars. Most of them do not have any idea of what this transition really means. Some think that the Dutch are taking over the place. Others think that they are about to lose their identity. Well, in general, one feels comfortable when a situation is predictable. 

Despite this we do not know what changes this transition will bring. It might bring positive things. So I guess that the best thing is to try to live in harmony with each other, give our contribution each day to Bonaire, and together we can help Bonaire to progress. If it progresses, all of us will pick the fruits. 

God bless our Flamingo Island."

            

_____________

 
WILLEMSTAD- -The Netherlands Antilles no longer exists, but the bonds between families on the various islands still do.

However, there is as yet no cooperation arrangement between the new entities that allows easy passage between neighboring Dutch islands using only a sedula (ID card). The Reporter was informed that this is recognized as a problem and is being reviewed by the appropriate authorities.


- Bonaire Reporter

Military Build-up in Guam an attempt to Contain China - UK Telegraph

The US Is Building An £8 Billion Super Military Base On the Pacific Island of Guam In An Attempt to Contain China's Military Build-Up.


by Praveen Swami, Diplomatic Editor
Telegraph.co.uk

The expansion will include a dock for a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, a missile defence system, live-fire training sites and the expansion of the island's airbase. It will be the largest investment in a military base in the western Pacific since the Second World War, and the biggest spend on naval infrastructure in decades. However, Guam residents fear the build-up could hurt their ecosystem and tourism-dependent economy.

Estimates suggest that the island's population will rise by almost 50 per cent from its current 173,000 at the peak of construction. It will eventually house 19,000 Marines who will be relocated from the Japanese island of Okinawa, where the US force has become unpopular.

The US's Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has said that this could trigger serious water shortages. The EPA said that dredging the harbour to allow an aircraft carrier to berth would damage 71 acres of pristine coral reefs. The EPA's report said the build-up would "exacerbate existing substandard environmental conditions on Guam".

Local residents' concerns, however, have been sidelined by the US-China strategic competition. China has significantly expanded its fleet during the past decade, seeking to deter the US from intervening militarily in any future conflict over Taiwan, which Beijing claims as its own, and to project power across disputed territories in the gas and oil-rich South China Sea.

Beijing's naval build-up is also intended secure the sea lanes from the Middle East, from where China will import an estimated 70-80 per cent of its oil needs by 2035 supplies it fears US could choke in the event of a conflict. China has therefore invested in what are called its "string of pearls" a network of bases strung along the Indian Ocean rim, like Hambantota in Sri Lanka and Gwadar in Pakistan and in developing a navy which can operate far from home.

Experts agree China does not currently have the capability to challenge US supremacy in the Pacific and Indian Ocean. "China has a large appetite", says Carl Ungerer, an analyst at Australian Strategic Policy Institute, "but it hasn't got enough teeth".  But China clearly intends to add bite to its naval arsenal. The country has acquired several modern Russian-made submarines and destroyers. Its shipyards are building new nuclear-powered submarines, as well as an aircraft carrier. There have also been reports that China is planning to test a new type of ballistic missile, the Dong Feng 21D, which would effectively render US carriers defenceless.

"China's charm offensive is over", says Ian Storey, an expert at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies in Singapore, "and its given way to what you might call an adolescent foreign policy. The country's flexing its muscles, letting us know it won't be pushed around".

The US is also investing another £126 million on upgrading infrastructure at the British-owned Indian Ocean atoll of Diego Garcia, 700 miles south of Sri Lanka. Key among the upgrades at Diego Garcia, which are due for completion in 2013, will be the capability to repair a nuclear-powered guided-missile submarine which can carry up to 154 cruise missiles striking power equivalent to that of an entire US aircraft carrier battle group. Diego Garcia, which has served as a launch-pad for air strikes on Iraq and Afghanistan, is already home to one third of what the US navy calls its Afloat Prepositioned Force equipment kept on standby to support military deployment anywhere in the world.

Caribbean Legal Expert Reflects on Legacy of Edward Wilmot Blyden

Blyden was born in the Danish West Indies  (presently the U.S. Virgin Islands) to free parents on 3rd  August 1832.

BLYDEN AND PAN-AFRICANISM

A PRESENTATION AT THE EDWARD WILMOT BLYDEN CELEBRATION SYMPOSIUM FOR THE 350TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE ST. THOMAS REFORMED CHURCH

16 OCTOBER 2010

PRIOR-JOLLICK HALL, ANTILLES SCHOOL

St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands

A Presentation by

Judith L. Bourne, J.D., LL.M.

I thank the St. Thomas Reformed Church and its 350thAnniversary committee, especially the indefatigable Roland Euwema for inviting me to participate in this important celebration.

We know that Edward Wilmot Blyden was a genius and that his genius manifested itself in many, often long-lasting, ways. Some of the beneficiaries of that genius, such as Marcus Garvey, John Henrik Clarke, and Kwame Nkrumah, were very much aware of their debt to Edward Wilmot Blyden. Some, such as the US Black Power advocates of the 1970s and 1980s, may not have been aware.

During most of Blyden’s lifetime (3 August 1832 – 7 February 1912), there was no movement known as Pan-Africanism. That term did not begin to become current until the first Pan-African meeting in London in 1900, which was organized by a Trinidad barrister, Henry Sylvester Williams, with the objective of "bringing into closer touch with each other the Peoples of African descent throughout the world."

However, forty years before that meeting, Blyden lectured, wrote and taught the concept of an African personality. He ascribed to the then current “scientific” belief that there were distinct and differing races. European and European-descended peoples of the USA believed that the races were ranked hierarchically, with themselves at the top and the “race” which they most exploited at that time to develop their own wealth - Africans - at the bottom. Of course, this was a highly practical arrangement for them.

Blyden countered this “common knowledge” of the time with the concept that no race was better than any other but that each race had its own personality or genius, which contributed to the completeness of humankind and that each had developed a way of life, a culture, appropriate to its circumstances. Africans, or Negroes (he used the terms interchangeably to refer to African peoples throughout the world) therefore should not attempt to copy Europeans or European-descended peoples, but should develop themselves and their race in accordance with their specific racial qualities as seen in the traditional societies of Africans living outside the influence of Europeans.

Politically, Blyden campaigned for the establishment of a modern West African state, perhaps with Liberia as the core, that was respectful of African customs and institutions and which would protect and promote the interests of African peoples everywhere. Let me give you an example of Blyden’s Pan-Africansim affecting real life.

On one of his two trips back to North America and the Caribbean, he sent messages to various islands encouraging emigration to Liberia. One of those messages went to the African Colonization Society of
Barbados, which had as its treasurer a leading merchant, London Bourne. Although he was in his 70s and too old to go himself, he helped to organize the expedition and his daughter, Sarah Ann Bourne Barclay, her husband, Anthony Barclay and their eleven children were among the 346 persons who landed in Liberia from Barbados in 1865 on the ship “Cora”. One of their children, Arthur Barclay grew up in Liberia and became Postmaster-General and later President of Liberia 1904 - 1912. As Arthur Barclay attended Liberia College, probably in the late 1870s, it is likely that he was once again influenced by Blyden during that time. Although he was not at the College at that time, he was very active in educational and political circles.

Blyden was completely a man of his time, while at the same time transcending that time. He was a Victorian man, but had the unusual ability to approach the objects of his study with an open and analytical mind and considerable intellectual curiosity. One major object of his study were the African societies located awayfrom the coast that remained uninfluenced by Europe or America and that maintained their traditional civilization, He had the opportunity to do this work when he served in Sierra Leone as Government Agent to the Interior 1871-73 when he was sent on a mission to the tribes in the interior of Sierra Leone by the British government, and as Liberia’s Minister of the Interior 1880-84.

While maintaining his strong devotion to Christianity, Blyden could separate the doctrines of that religion from the European culture with which it had become encrusted. He could therefore appreciate that the manner in which Islam was propagated amongst Africans was much more beneficial to Africans because the missionaries of Islam taught the doctrines of the religion without attempting to change the basic culture of the people - one did not have to become Arabized to become Muslim - and once there were sufficient converts who knew and understood the Koran, the missionaries withdrew and allowed the new Muslims to continue the work. However, as he set forth in his acclaimed book, “Christianity, Islam and the Negro Race” in 1887, the practice of Christian missionaries was to Europeanize the convert and to maintain direct supervision and control. This, Blyden said, caused the Christianised African to look to all things European as the good, which he as an African could, of course, never achieve, and that crushed his self-esteem or as Blyden referred to it, his manliness. Blyden pointed out the results of this in the everyday life of Liberia. These observations and analyses are the basis of the book. The book caused great consternation and dispute when it was first published in England, not just, or even mainly, because of its content, but because, due to its high quality, the Europeans refused to believe that it had been written by a “Negro”.

But Blyden also transcended his times by confronting and refuting the then current doctrines of African inferiority by going back to the works of classical Greece and Rome which indicated that Africans are the originators of civilisation and, as he saw it, the guardians of spirituality for the human race. Blyden insisted on using these classics as the basis for the curriculum in Liberia College not only because he believed in their educational value, but also because there was nothing in those classical works of Greece and Rome which denigrates Africans.

From his experience with the racism he had met in the US (which by the way, was not just what we would now refer to as discrimination because of his race, but his very realistic fear that he might be seized and sold into slavery in the South) and the attitudes of the missionary societies, Blyden became convinced that African people could never fully develop themselves in a modern industrial world except in their own country and by their own efforts. He therefore encouraged the emigration of qualified, trained and experienced Africans from North America and the Caribbean to West Africa for what we would today refer to as “nation-building”.
He saw all Africans, wherever they lived, as one race whose people needed to unite in the interest of the race as a whole.

He founded several newspapers, both in Liberia and in Sierra Leone. He named his 1870's newspaper “The Negro” and stated as its purpose “to recognize and greet the brotherhood of the race wherever found.”

In his first book (1857 - A Vindication of the African Race;...), Blyden stated “We need some African power, some great center of the race where our physical, pecuniary and intellectual strength may be collected.”

These principles, the oneness of the African race, its equality with other races, its distinctive attributes, the need for solidarity within the race, and the development of its homeland by its own members - remained the bedrock of the Pan-African movement throughout the twentieth century. W.E.B. Dubois and Marcus Garvey were directly inspired by Blyden. Garvey said of African-Americans and Afro-Caribbean peoples that if “you do not know anything of your ancestryit will do you well to read the works of Blyden, one of our historians and chroniclers, who has done so much to retrieve the lost prestige of the race”.

Kwame Nkrumah, the independence leader and first president of independent Ghana and the much-honored historian, the late John Henrik Clarke, attended meetings of an organization called the Blyden Society for the Study of African History in their formative years in Harlem in the 1940s.

Edward Wilmot Blyden’s ideas, including his explication of the social relations found in indigenous African societies, informed both the African Socialism of Julius Nyerere, the first President of Tanzania and the short-lived Union of African States, formed by Nkrumah of Ghana, Sekou Touré of Guinea and Modibo Kéita of Mali from 1958 to 1962, as well as the less immediately ambitious, but longer lasting, OAU.

The meetings and publications of anglophone and francophone Africans from Africa and from the Caribbean living in Europe in the 1940s and 1950s based their organizations on principles elaborated by Blyden, both in their separate languages, such as the Négritude movement of Léopold Sédar Senghor of Senegal, Léon Damas of French Guiana and Aime Césaire of Martinique, and especially in the several joint language endeavors, such as La Revue du Monde Noir, which had as its aims: “to create among the Negroes of the entire world, regardless of nationality, an intellectual, and moral tie, which will permit them to better know each other, to love one another, to defend more effectively their collective interests and to glorify their race.”

In the USA, the Nation of Islam, the Black Panther Party for Self-Defense and the myriad Black Power organisations of the1970s and 1980s that called on African-Americans to love themselves as themselves and to exercise self-reliance in their economic, educational and cultural endeavors all hark back to the seminal teachings of Edward Wilmot Blyden.

The legacy of Edward Wilmot Blyden has spread throughout the world as the sons and daughters of Africa are spread throughout the world and continues to reverberate. We now know that the only way to begin to secure true peace and cooperation among individuals is to ensure that each person maintains that strong and stable self-respect which enables one to have respect for others. What better legacy can one have than a body of work which encourages a people who were, and who continue to be, denigrated and abused to recognize that their true worth, ability and potential is equal to any and all others, an attitude which supports that healthy self-esteem which leads to self-reliance and commands general respect.

That legacy is a gift to the world.