In many countries where UNDP works there are both indigenous peoples and minorities. Indigenous peoples have distinct rights in international law, but minority and indigenous identities can exist along a continuum and might overlap in some cases. In recognizing these identities, UNDP could – with minorities and indigenous peoples themselves – consider objective and subjective criteria to determine which relevant rights and principles apply.

The UN Development Group (UNDG) Guidelines on Indigenous Peoples’ Issues, 2008, will apply in situations where communities self-identify as indigenous peoples (subjective criteria) and have specific issues that need protection (objective criteria), such as their distinct cultural identity, social structure, economic system, customs, beliefs, their traditional way of life, and a special connection with the land and natural resources that is essential to their social and cultural survival.

It is paramount that UNDP take account of each country context and gain a good understanding of the relationship between indigenous peoples and minorities. Often both communities will have similar concerns, particularly from an economic, social and cultural rights perspective, and may be vying for the same government resources or land. A “do no harm” approach could be used to ensure that UNDP initiatives do not create or exacerbate conflict between communities by unfairly privileging some over others without a justification that is based on objective criteria and consideration of the human rights of all people and peoples affected. Creating opportunities for dialogue between communities and with government on shared issues of concern may present an effective way forward for inclusion.

The UNDG Guidelines on Indigenous Peoples’ Issues note that there is no legal definition of indigenous peoples. The Guidelines accept the prevailing view that no such definition is needed for the recognition and protection of indigenous peoples’ rights. In addition, the UNDG Guidelines note some of the attempts by international institutions to set out the key characteristics of indigenous peoples. For example, the UN Study on the problem of discrimination against indigenous populations (1986), prepared by Special Rapporteur, Jose Martinez Cobo, offers the following “working definition”:

Indigenous peoples have particular rights in international law. These include rights to:

• Self-determination
• Collective land rights
• Use of natural resources and territories
• Practice customary law
• Environmental conservation
• Protect traditional knowledge, intellectual property, and cultural heritage
• Free, prior and informed consent to measures that affect them or their lands and territories
  

The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples⁵ recognizes that indigenous peoples have the right to self-determination and the right to freely pursue their political status and their economic, social and cultural development. The rights of indigenous peoples allow for a high degree of autonomy and non-interference by the State. Collective rights, in particular to land, territories and natural resources, also feature prominently in indigenous peoples’ rights. The recognition of collective rights is necessary to ensure the continuing existence, development and well-being of indigenous peoples as distinct collectivities.

The rights of minorities, by contrast, are expressed in international law as individual rights of persons belonging to minorities. Some of these rights are exercised in parallel with others, for example, speaking a language or practicing a religion. Minorities often seek autonomy over their cultural, linguistic or religious lives. This may come in the form of non-territorial autonomy where minorities are dispersed or territorial autonomy if they are concentrated in a particular region. In addition, some minority groups (typically national minorities) may seek self-determination as ‘peoples’.

There are factors that influence self-identification as a minority or indigenous, including group cultures and interests, and State policies. It will be important to remember that identities are instrumental for groups, providing access to rights, opportunities and mechanisms. Some minority groups may identify as indigenous peoples with a view to accessing, inter alia, collective rights to land.

Other communities that are perceived to be minorities may live with issues that have strong parallels with those of indigenous peoples. Consequently, such communities may deserve protection emanating from human rights standards for indigenous peoples. The Garífuna Afro-descendant people in Central America, for example, have collective land ownership in their culture, and are legally recognized by several States as indigenous peoples (e.g. Guatemala and Nicaragua).⁶ The Inter-American Court of Human Rights held, in two cases involving Afro-descendant groups in Suriname, that their cultural practices vis-à-vis land use and ownership, and their historical residency on their lands, entitled them to similar land rights protection afforded to indigenous peoples.⁷

Groups may be pragmatic regarding which mechanisms to use in order to maximize the protection of their rights. For example, indigenous peoples in Canada and Nordic States have sought protection under article 27 of the ICCPR, relevant for minorities, before the UN Human Rights Committee and many Afro-descendant groups in Latin America have used ILO Convention 169 Concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples to claim land rights.

In many States, governments use the term ‘ethnic minorities’ for communities that identify as indigenous peoples. Factors such as historical categories, colonialism and State interests impact upon the acceptance of the ‘indigenous’ identity. In such cases, communities may use the term ethnic minorities domestically but self-identify in international fora as indigenous peoples.

There are also many communities for whom the boundaries between minority and indigenous status are blurred. They often respond by identifying as ‘indigenous minorities’ or by using different identity labels depending on the context.

Although in many cases indigenous peoples are also numerical minorities, in some countries they constitute large majorities of the population despite their relatively low political power. In some regions, indigenous peoples reject the ‘minority label’ altogether because it does not fit the numerical reality, their self-perception or the status they seek in society at large.

Any groups that self-identify both as minorities and indigenous peoples, and fit relevant objective criteria, could claim rights of both groups. The highest standard of rights will apply.

Some minority groups are also indigenous peoples Such groups may claim both minority rights and indigenous rights but the highest human rights standards will always apply The UNDG Guidelines on Indigenous Peoples’ Issues and the UNDP Policy of Engagement with Indigenous Peoples (2001) may be applied when working with indigenous peoples.