Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) of Indigenous Peoples before Human Rights Courts and International Investment Tribunals: Two Sides of the Same Coin?

Abstract

This article highlights the advances and drawbacks in the recognition and implementation of the right to free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) of indigenous peoples in light of international litigation. Although a certain amount of progress has been achieved, this article demonstrates that a normative gap subsists between the international norms applicable and state practice. In exploring the topic, the article brings together diverse legal and theoretical components from several areas of law, some of which are not usually regarded as associated with FPIC. In particular, the article considers the interpretation of case law decided by international human rights bodies, regional human rights courts and investment tribunals, critically examining the constraints on their interpretation. The article concludes by analysing the various strategies followed to implement FPIC, and argues for an understanding of FPIC that reaches beyond the human rights arena.

Satu kampung enam iman: Penguatan integrasi sosial melalui perayaan Tujuh Liku pada suku asli Anak Rawa di Siak, Riau

“…Tahun 2008, penulis bersama Lembaga Swadaya Masyarakat Scale Up mengelola program FPIC (Free, Prior, and Informed Consent), atau dalam Bahasa Indonesia disebut PADIATAPA (Persetujuan Dengan Informasi Awal Tanpa Paksaan) di Semenanjung Kampar. Beberapa sarjana aktivis mengilustrasikan FPIC sebagai program yang bertujuan untuk memediasi konflik sumber daya pada masyarakat lokal (Elfitra, Afrizal, and Zuldesni 2019;Filer, Mahanty, and Potter 2020;Giupponi 2018). Seiring dengan peran sebagai koordinator program FPIC, penulis pertama juga menginisiasi kegiatan penguatan tata kelola keragaman agama.…”

Access and Benefit Sharing Effectiveness: International Environmental Law Implementation at the Domestic Ethiopian Level

“…Like in many countries and international fora, there is a remote possibility of procedural rights realization relevant to indigenous people's ABS in Ethiopia (Arjjumend, 2018: p. 102). Among them, PIC demands an understanding that reaches beyond the human rights arena and extends to protecting and access natural resources as a principle (Giupponi, 2018). From the international law and practices, securing free PIC is one of the mandatory requirements to expropriate, develop or decide any project related to land, territories, and resources under ownership and management of indigenous people (ILO/169, Articles 15 (2) & 16 (2)).…”

Private Processes and Public Values: Disciplining Trade in Forest and Ecosystem Risk Commodities via Non-Financial Due Diligence

“…195 This means that companies must not violate the substantive and procedural rights of such communitiesencompassing participation in decision making, FPIC, access to justice and information, as laid down in International Labour Organization (ILO) Convention 169, the non-binding UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), and in customary international law. 196 The UNGPs also require and outline firm-level grievance mechanisms to support the identification of adverse human rights impacts and provide remedies. 197 Public intervention could still clarify the expected standard for land use and cultural identity of Indigenous communities, and the relevant procedural expectations.…”