Statement by Hon. Richard, Ariihau TUHEIAVA
(Senator for French Polynesia)
Caribbean Regional Seminar on the Implementation of the Third International Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism
United Nations Special
Committee on Decolonization
"Question
of French Polynesia"
Quito,
ECUADOR
28-30 May
2013
Mr. Chairman, Your Excellency Ambassador Diego
Morejon-Pazmiño of the Republic of Ecuador
Representatives of
U.N. member states,
Distinguished representatives of non-self-governing
territories, and members of this Seminar,
Ladies and gentlemen,
I am Richard
Tuheiava, elected member of French Polynesia in the French Senate, and also
elected member of the House of Assembly of French Polynesia from the Group
"Union for Democracy" (UPLD). It is indeed my priviledge, on behalf
of the UPLD political alliance led by the Hon. Oscar, Manutahi TEMARU, to
extend best wishes to the distinguished participants of this regional seminar
and to acknowledge, through you Mr. Chairman, the hospitality and the solid
dedication of the Government of the Republic of Ecuador to the main subject of
this event : decolonization.
Mr.
Chairman,
At the outset,
I wish to reiterate our deepest appreciation to the General Assembly of the
United Nations for the adoption of the consensus resolution on 17th
March 2013 providing for the re-inscription of the territory on the U.N. list
of non self-governing territories. This singular act was achieved after over
two years of intense discussions between our delegates from Tahiti and member
States. The resolution A/67/L.56/Rev.1 entitled "Self
Determination of French Polynesia" was adopted some 35 years after the
Hon. Oscar Temaru, President of the Tavini Huiraatira-FLP Independence Party,
began the long journey to achieve re-inscription.
In this regards, I had the pleasure to be advised yesterday that
the reference code of the General Assembly resolution regarding French
Polynesia's re-inscription on the U.N. List of non Self-governing territories
is definitely A/RES/67/265.
The resumed international oversight of the self-determination
process of French Polynesia has finally came after the unilateral de-listing,
without a General Assembly resolution, of both New Caledonia and French
Polynesia from the U.N. list back in 1947. The General Assembly corrected the
omission from the list of New Caledonia in 1986 with its adoption of resolution
41/41 of that year. It is only in 2013 that the omission was then corrected for
French Polynesia.
In this connection, it is to be emphasized that the General
Assembly has repeatedly reaffirmed that it is within the purview of the
Assembly alone to determine whether a territory is non self-governing within
the scope of the U.N. Charter. It was never meant that such a decision was to
be made by the administering power alone, despite their protestations. That
would be a classic conflict of interest and contrary to the meaning of the U.N.
Charter.
Mr.
Chairman,
It must be borne in mind that the genuine act of
self-determination for the Ma’ohi people of French Polynesia is consistent with
relevant international instruments, in particular the International Covenant on
Civil and Political rights; the International Covenant on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights; and the U.N. Charter itself. It is also important to emphasize
the relevance of the U.N. Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, in
particular the few provisions related to their self-determination.
In this connection, the
Noumea Accord back in 1998, which governs the self-determination process of New
Caledonia formally, recognizes the rights of the Kanak people in determining
the political future of the territory through realistic voter eligibility criteria for participation in the process. It
means that not all the current inhabitants of New Caledonia are qualified to
vote the upcoming self determination referendum in New Caledonia planned in
2014 or 2018. The European Court of Human Rights has confirmed the legality of
this criterion in January 2005.
Accordingly, I wish to emphasize three points:
First: if the process is to proceed to a genuine act of
self-determination exercised by the Ma'ohi people of French Polynesia, in the
light of resolution 67/265, such eligibility
criteria must be also employed in French Polynesia, as it has been
in the case in New Caledonia, and not unduly influenced by the participation of
recent settlers whose right to self-determination had long been exercised in
Europe.
Mr. Chairman, allow
me to strongly state that such eligibility criteria in French Polynesia is critical
for the achievement of a fair and equitable self determination process
to take place in my Country, should this criteria be set in parallel with the
implementation of a Polynesian citizenship.
Second, I would like to stress the concern of the uncertainty
of the legal status of the indigenous People of French Polynesia by virtue
of the French Constitution. Before the revision of the French Constitution in
March 2003, all inhabitants of the French overseas territories were constitutionally
called "Peoples",
regardless of the status of their territories (French overseas departments, or
French overseas territories). Since this revision, the language "Peoples" was replaced by "populations" without any
local consultation. The purpose was for France to prevent itself from any
recognized precedent after the due adoption of a specific chapter within the
French Constitution in 1999 on the issue of New Caledonia (in particular, the
recognition of the indigeneity of the Kanak people), and for France to preserve
itself from the legal perspectives of ratifying the U.N. Declaration on the
Rights of the Indigenous Peoples in September 2007.
In this regard, the
proper implementation of the resolution 67/265 on French Polynesia requires to
clearly lift this legal uncertainty and to allow the due recognition of
the Mā´ohi People as the indigenous People of this non self-governing
territory.
Third, I wish to point out that the mandate of the
General Assembly on the decolonization of French Polynesia can only be achieved
through the development of an authentic political education programme
on the legitimate options of political equality with direct support of the
United Nations in all stages of the process. Indeed, the mindset of peoples of
such former colonies is not prepared for quick political and economic shifts,
unless sufficient time is allowed, educational assistance is provided and
specific economic and social measures are achieved locally, prior to the Self
determination referendum.
Mr. Chairman,
I emphasized these three points in the context of the recent
advocacy by the recently elected territorial government of French Polynesia, in
early May 2013, that the French expedite the organization of a self
determination referendum in the territory designed to legitimize the status quo territorial arrangements – and with the deliberate inclusion of
French or European settlers. This is an unacceptably distorted process, and is
radically inconsistent with the established and internationally recognized
precedents for the self-determination of New Caledonia.
Such recognized precedents include :
1. the conduct of a genuine political education
program with direct U.N. support;
2. the setting of a reasonable eligibility
criteria to vote the self-determination referendum
3. the achievement of selected legal, economical
and social measures locally and prior to the referendum.
Accordingly, we ask that the Special Committee on Decolonization
to pay very close attention to post-reinscription developments in French
Polynesia. Because the opportunity is offered for the very first time before
the Special Committee of Decolonization, please allow me, Mr. Chairman, to
provide you a quick overall view of the selected measures to be necessarily
achieved before a self-determination referendum would take place in
French Polynesia:
· creation and implementation of a Polynesian
citizenship, in parallel with the setting of a reasonable eligibility
criteria to vote the self-determination referendum,
· local electoral system, to be revised,
· Fair and equitable compensation of the
health and environmental consequences of the French nuclear testings in French
Polynesia,
· legal competency on deep-sea or terrestrial strategic
minerals within the Economic Exclusive Zone of French Polynesia,
· positive labour discrimination in favour
of locals, to be set,
· land tenure and division, to be revised,
· legal competency on control of immigration,
and visas deliveries for non EU citizens,
· legal recognition of the Tahitian language
as second official one in French Polynesia,
· legal system of the communes of French
Polynesia, to be fully revised according to the geographical, demographical and
financial constraints,
· full-recognition of the legislative status of
the Laws voted by the House of Assembly of French Polynesia,
Before concluding this statement, Mr. Chairman, I wish to point
to the nature of the so-called “autonomous” status of French Polynesia. In the absence of U.N. oversight of our
political and economic evolution for over 66 years, a particular type of unilateral authority by the
administering power emerged through changes in the French Constitution and the
creation of various French “autonomy statutes” – all of which retained the
reins of power in Paris.
What was – and is termed – as autonomy, is in fact nothing more
that non self-governing territorial status under another name. This is
political subterfuge of the first order, and needs to be addressed by the
Special Committee in the course of its upcoming session in a few weeks time.
As a preliminary initiative, let me very shortly list you a few
provisional items, applicable to the territory of French Polynesia, that would
testify its non self-governing status:
· Whereas the provision of article 73 of the U.N.
Charter asserts the priority of the interests of the inhabitants of the
self-governing territories, beyond those of their administering powers,
the current provision of article 74 of the French Constitution under which
French Polynesia is placed shows that the particular interests of this French
overseas collectivity need to be considered within the French Republic.
Therefore, the unilateral authority of the administering power still exists and
is subject to political variations.
· Whereas the proper understanding of the self
governing status of a territory, under the U.N. Charter, is that the transfer
of the competencies by the administrating powers to its self-govering territory
is not reversible, this is not the case of French Polynesia. Indeed, the
powers and competencies transferred by the French to the local elected government
of French Polynesia are identified and negotiated through a Organic Law
that is voted by the French Parliament from Paris. Therefore, the final say
remains in the hands of the periodical majority of the French Parliament in
Paris, whatever the will of the elected members of French Polynesia would be.
· the constitutional separation of Legislative,
Executive powers and Justice is not fully implemented in French Polynesia
as the judicial system remains in full control of the administering power, even
the designation and turn-over of the judges. The elected members of the
institutions of French Polynesia have no say nor control on the Judicial system
in this territory.
· the electoral system applicable to the
French overseas collectivity of French Polynesia is fully determined, adopted,
controlled and implemented by the administering power. There is absolutely no
power of the members of the House of Assembly of French Polynesia, nor the
Mayors and Council members of the 48 communes of French Polynesia, to amend or
correct the electoral rules under which they have been elected.
· the control and ruling of the foreign immigration
- entering and exiting French Polynesia – remains fully in the hands of the
administering power.
· the determination of the local currency,
which is different from the EU currency, however is not controlled by the local
elected government of French Polynesia. The current currency is still named
C.F.P., for French Colony in the Pacific.
A relevant assessment of self governance was proceeded to
French Polynesia over the past two years and has clearly indicated that the
so-called autonomous status of this territory, under the French
Constitution, was not consistent with the U.N. self governance indicators that are
reflected in numerous General Assembly resolutions.
The adoption by consensus of the resolution 67/265 last 17 May
provides now the highest evidence of the non self-governing status of
French Polynesia. Now that the General Assembly has paved the way, the Union
for Democracy-UPLD is engaging with the Special Committee to achieve, under the
auspices and with the support of this U.N. Body, the next step forward, i.e.
the achievement of a fair and equitable process of self-determination in
favour of the Ma’ohi people of French Polynesia.
We look forward to active participation in your session in the
coming weeks at U.N. Headquarters in New York in order to provide further
background to our situation, and to make concrete recommendations on the
realization of the self-determination of our people.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman
Richard, Ariihau TUHEIAVA
Senator for French Polynesia
Elected member of the Assembly of French Polynesia - UPLD Group
