While the UNDRIP is directly mentioned in some recommendations, the Commission believe that all of the accepted recommendations can be linked to these principles. For example, the following recommendations are directly linked to the principle of effective participation: No. Recommendation Final response Explanatory response 87 Continue to support indigenous institutions that Accepts On the basis of cohesion to communities, such as the National existing law, Congress of the First Peoples of Australia (Peru); policy and action 88 Take necessary measure to ensure consultation Accepts On the basis of and participation of indigenous peoples in the existing law, processes of the elaboration of public policies that policy and action is of interest to them (Paraguay); 89 Ensure adequate consultations with indigenous Accepts On the basis of peoples in the formulation of policies affecting them existing law, (India); policy and action 90 Take all necessary measures to ensure Aboriginal Notes and Torres Strait Islander Peoples give consent to the development and implementation of policies and programmes that impact upon their communities and futures (Namibia); 91 Ensure that indigenous peoples are consulted Notes Will further when considering the viability of remote consider communities, and that those affected by closures of communities receive transitional support and unimpeded access to ancestral lands (United States of America); By applying the principles of the UNDRIP to the UPR recommendations, it is possible to develop subject specific indicators that are practical measuring tools for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander representative bodies. Measuring these indicators will support advocacy by providing an evidence base where policies and actions are not achieving their stated objectives. This evidence base can also be used by representative bodies to identify their own strategic priorities, which is of particular importance given funding and capacity constraints. The following case studies show how subject specific indicators can be developed and how they can form part of the monitoring process. The Commission encourage representative bodies to use these examples as a guide to develop their own indicators for the other relevant UPR recommendations. These indicators can form the basis for the UPR monitoring system over the next four years.
While the UNDRIP is directly mentioned in some recommendations, the Commission believe that all of the accepted recommendations can be linked to these principles. For example, the following recommendations are directly linked to the principle of effective participation: No. Recommendation Final response Explanatory response 87 Continue to support indigenous institutions that cohesion to communities, such as the National Congress of the First Peoples of Australia (Peru); Accepts On the basis of existing law, policy and action 88 Take necessary measure to ensure consultation and participation of indigenous peoples in the processes of the elaboration of public policies that is of interest to them (Paraguay); Accepts On the basis of existing law, policy and action 89 Ensure adequate consultations with indigenous peoples in the formulation of policies affecting them (India); Accepts On the basis of existing law, policy and action 90 Take all necessary measures to ensure Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples give consent to the development and implementation of policies and programmes that impact upon their communities and futures (Namibia); Notes 91 Ensure that indigenous peoples are consulted when considering the viability of remote communities, and that those affected by closures of communities receive transitional support and unimpeded access to ancestral lands (United States of America); Notes Will further consider By applying the principles of the UNDRIP to the UPR recommendations, it is possible to develop subject specific indicators that are practical measuring tools for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander representative bodies. Measuring these indicators will support advocacy by providing an evidence base where policies and actions are not achieving their stated objectives. This evidence base can also be used by representative bodies to identify their own strategic priorities, which is of particular importance given funding and capacity constraints. The following case studies show how subject specific indicators can be developed and how they can form part of the monitoring process. The Commission encourage representative bodies to use these examples as a guide to develop their own indicators for the other relevant UPR recommendations. These indicators can form the basis for the UPR monitoring system over the next four years.
AHRC_SJNTR_2016_0.docx