Consultation doesn't always equal consent
Tribal leaders play an important role locally, statewide and nationally. This could extend globally. 'It's important for tribal leaders to be here because you have a seat at the table,' said Joe Deere, co-chair of NCAI's international committee. 'Your voice is going to get heard. You're going to be able to communicate with other people across the United States, and now even other countries.'Over the last few years, the two national Indigenous organizations have ramped up their work internationally to advocate for the implementation of free, prior and informed consent in the United States, knowing it could take many years to actualize. 'We need to be ready to run a marathon to make that happen,' said Aaron Jones, co-chair of the international committee for the National Congress of American Indians. 'We're talking about implementing this and I know we're really in the early stages.'
HistoryIn 2007, an overwhelming majority of the countries that make up the UN General Assembly voted in favor of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. It's not shocking that the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand initially voted against the legal, nonbinding declaration. (Eventually the four countries changed their position on a document that in essence states that Indigenous peoples are human beings with the right to exist in perpetuity.) The most well-known and heralded right listed in the 46 articles is free, prior and informed consent. This principle doesn't just apply to land rights, which it's often conflated with. It also applies to culture, language, food systems, intellectual property, governmental laws and landback. The phrasing is intentional with every word having a principle behind it. Free meaning that consent is given without coercion, threats, violence, manipulation or bribery. Consent is given voluntarily.There are many examples of consent given under threat, violence or coercion in the United States.
Navajo leaders signed the Treaty of 1868 with the federal government after the tribe was death marched over 400 miles from their homelands that span New Mexico, Arizona, and Utah to Bosque Redondo in eastcentral New Mexico where they were placed in a concentration camp. More than 8,000 Navajo people were forcibly kept at Bosque Redondo for three years. During that time, illness, starvation, or exposure took the lives of over 2,000 Navajo people. During the termination era, the federal government passed the Indian Relocation Act of 1956. It would coerce thousands of Indigenous people to leave their homelands with the promise of job opportunities, more pay, and housing. Instead, many were left without work, training or housing. Prior means that Indigenous communities and nations have adequate time to go through the decision-making process well-before governments, companies or other third parties have made a decision. The third word of the phrase, informed, means that Indigenous nations must be completely and fully informed about the environmental, health and social impacts of a planned project.
'For example, in the Philippines, when there was a mining project in one area, and the community said, 'We want to know the details of the project. So if you don't share to us the full information of the project, we cannot come out with an informed decision. We need to know everything,'' said Joan Carling, a renowned Indigenous rights activist and environmentalist. The documentation has to include all the information about the proposed project including size, purpose, scope and time length. Most importantly, the information must be shared in a language the community is most comfortable with, and in a format that aligns with the community's needs. 'What can be the positive and negative impacts of the project? So, it should be complete and accurate information,' said Carling, Kankanaey tribe in the Philippines.The Philippines codified free, prior and informed consent in the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act passed in 1997. A year later, Ecuador passed a new constitution that recognized Indigenous peoples right to free, prior and informed consent. In 2011, Colombia's Constitutional Court, which acts much like the Supreme Court, made a historic ruling that recognized the decision-making framework as a human right for Indigenous peoples. However, its full and fair implementation hasn't come without controversy.ConsentThere is a big difference between consultation and consent. Consultation in the United States doesn't have to include consent but tribal nations have made great strides in this area. Although not required, it's often a goal for the federal government to reach a consensus or agreement with a tribal nation. Historically, this hasn't always been the case. In 1948, the federal government approved the Garrison Dam that flooded 152,000 acres of Mandan Hidatsa and Arikara land in North Dakota, despite objections from the tribe. It forced the relocation of 325 families from the tribe. Last year, a judge ruled against Arizona-based tribes, Tohono O'odham Nation and San Carlos Apache Tribe, in a suit that was challenging the construction of the SunZia transmission line in southern Arizona's San Pedro Valley. The line passes through an area that holds historic, cultural and spiritual significance for the nations. The two tribes have been fighting its construction for years, advocating that it be built alongside land that has already been developed. It crosses 'one of the most intact cultural landscapes in the Southwest,' a 2024 lawsuit by the Tohono O'odham Nation stated. The project was a cornerstone of former President Joe Biden's green energy agenda. 'The SunZia Transmission Project will accelerate our nation's transition to a clean energy economy by unlocking renewable resources, creating jobs, lowering costs, and boosting local economies,' Deb Haaland, former Interior Secretary, said in a 2023 press release. 'Through historic investments from President Biden's Investing in America agenda, the Interior Department is helping build modern, resilient climate infrastructure that protects our communities from the worsening impacts of climate change.'The case was appealed to the Court of the Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The panel of judges heard oral arguments on March 26. An opinion has yet to be released. Adopting the principles of free, prior and informed consent could help to alleviate legal issues like this. The federal government and companies could avoid lengthy and costly legal battles by engaging in this process. 'One thing we see over and over again, and I'm sure everyone in this room is aware that projects will come in, including now renewable energy projects, there will be human rights violations, violations of the right to (free, prior and informed consent), land rights. People will exercise their right to protest and raise concerns about those harms,' said Christine Dodsen, co-lead of the Civic Freedoms & Human Rights Defenders Programme. 'Then there will be a crackdown against human rights defenders, either directly by the company, by governments, and that will then lead... to financial risks, legal risks for the company. For business actors, this model could lead to reduced risks, and a competitive advantage.'The United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues will release a report with recommendations, to the United Nations and member states, based on interventions given during the two-week event. It will be released sometime this year. The forum concluded May 2.
Our stories are worth telling. Our stories are worth sharing. Our stories are worth your support. Contribute $5 or $10 today to help ICT carry out its critical mission. Sign up for ICT's free newsletter.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Facing opposition, developer pulls planned $30B data center in Mooresville, NC
A Colorado developer withdrew its request for a $30 billion data center on east Mooresville land owned by Teresa Earnhardt, widow of the late NASCAR driver Dale Earnhardt, Mayor Chris Carney said Wednesday. 'This means the item will be removed from the Sept. 15 agenda and will not move forward,' Carney said on social media. 'There is no request to postpone — this is a full withdrawal. At this time, there is no active request for a data center in Mooresville.' In an exclusive interview with The Charlotte Observer on Friday, Carney said he and the six town commissioners couldn't support the Mooresville Technology Park rezoning without knowing which tech giant would buy, own and operate the center on Earnhardt's 400 acres, and their tax-incentive and other demands. Carney votes in case of a 3-3 deadlock by the commissioners. Carney said he informed Denver-based developer Tract of the board's likely rejection of the request. Tract could choose to request that its request be pulled from consideration, he said. 'We are both disappointed and surprised to learn of the Board's position in this manner,' Tract said Friday in an emailed statement to the Observer through a spokesperson. 'In light of this development, we are carefully evaluating our next steps.' At least 200 neighbors opposed the rezoning at public meetings, citing noise, light pollution, truck traffic and other concerns. 'Yes, this is a lesson for every taxpayer to get involved when the issue is tremendously bigger than you are,' opponent Lynne Taylor told the Observer on Wednesday after Tract withdrew its plans. 'Mooresville has gained national attention for the pushback and rightly so,' Taylor said. 'A huge congratulations to the grassroots group which spearheaded the direction of opposition.' Neighbors established a No Data Center Mooresville website and a No to Rezoning! No to Mooresville NC Tech Park Facebook group. Kerry Earnhardt, Dale Earnhardt's oldest son, recently criticized the project on the 'No to Rezoning!' site. 'Frankly, I'm ashamed our family name is involved in the request to rezone a community that is thriving as a Rural Residential/Agriculture zone to be changed to Industrial,' Earnhardt said. Carney said he and the Town Board appreciated 'the public's input and the collaborative discussions that helped determine whether this project was the right fit for our community. As always, we want to keep residents informed, and we felt it was important to share this update as soon as possible.' Solve the daily Crossword

USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
Report slams Trump's DC homeless policy. Should it be a crime to be homeless?
As President Donald Trump tries to forcibly remove homeless people from Washington, D.C., one think tank is warning that policies that criminalize or punish people for sleeping outside are not just cruel, they're ineffective. Trump plans to seize control of Washington's Metropolitan Police Department and sweep homeless people off the city's streets, he said at an Aug. 11 press conference. Those steps would go against evidence that anti-homeless laws and actions can exacerbate the problem, according to an Aug. 6 report by Mari Castaldi, director of state housing policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP), a nonpartisan Washington-based think tank often described as left-leaning. When people are removed from public spaces where they've been living, the report noted, they may lose personal property, have traumatic encounters with law enforcement and incur criminal records and fines that make it harder to get a job or rental housing. "Communities implementing these practices actively hinder people from exiting homelessness, thus worsening, not solving, the nation's homelessness crisis," Castaldi wrote. Homelessness can lead to jail in many states, cities "Since 2022, at least eight states have passed — and dozens more have considered — legislation to ticket, fine, or jail people simply for having no safe place to sleep," Castaldi wrote. What's more, the report said, more than 320 local ordinances to fine or arrest people for sleeping outside have been introduced since the Supreme Court's Grants Pass v. Johnson decision determined that it may be considered a crime. On July 24, Trump signed an executive order making it easier for cities and states to remove homeless people from the streets. When rental assistance and similar services are well-funded, homelessness declines, the report says, citing such policy experiments in Chattanooga, Tennessee, Los Angeles and among veterans nationally. The CBPP report is among several that critique policies championed by the Cicero Institute, a think tank that describes itself as nonpartisan. Cicero was founded by Joe Lonsdale, a Silicon Valley entrepreneur who backed Trump's campaign for president in 2024. More: America's housing is pulling further out of reach, report finds The policies endorsed by CBPP are "untenable," Cicero argues. "Instead, states should pursue minimally viable shelter options and sanctioned encampments with services. Permanent supportive housing doesn't address homelessness – it creates demand for more homelessness and supports cronyism." The group also believes that such policies trap the homeless where they are, rather than providing a path to self-sufficiency. "That's why, despite increased spending, homelessness has continued to rise over the past two decades," Cicero says. Read next: Why do over 1 million Americans live in 'plumbing poverty,' lacking running water? CBPP and other groups see the increase in homelessness as stemming from a failure to respond to the affordable housing crisis. "Homelessness is solvable," Castaldi says. "The way forward is not through punishing people for struggling under a flawed system, but through prioritizing supports that can end their homelessness or prevent it from occurring in the first place."

Business Insider
an hour ago
- Business Insider
U.S. imposes sanctions on 4 groups linked to DRC's conflict minerals trade
The United States government has announced targeted sanctions against a network accused of fueling conflict and engaging in illicit mineral trading in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo, as Washington intensifies efforts to support peace initiatives in the region while securing access to its vast mineral resources. The United States announced targeted sanctions against groups engaging in illicit mineral trading in eastern DRC. Four organizations are identified, including armed groups and mining cooperatives tied to smuggling minerals. The sanctions aim to disrupt the financial networks of armed groups and promote lawful resource exploitation. The Washington Post reports that a senior U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity ahead of the formal announcement, confirmed that the sanctions imposed jointly by the State Department and the Treasury Department target four groups: • Coalition des Patriotes Résistants Congolais–Forces de Frappe (PARECO-FF), an armed group that from 2022 until early 2024 controlled the strategic coltan mining site of Rubaya in North Kivu province. Coltan, a vital source of tantalum used in electronics, is one of the region's most sought-after resources and a major driver of conflict financing. • Coopérative des Artisanaux Miniers du Congo (CDMC), a Congolese mining cooperative accused of purchasing and selling minerals smuggled from PARECO-FF-controlled areas. • East Rise Corporation Limited, a Hong Kong-based firm alleged to have purchased smuggled minerals for export. • Dragon Corporation Limited, another Hong Kong-based firm accused of buying these illicitly sourced minerals and feeding them into international supply chains. U.S. officials described the measures as part of a broader Trump administration strategy to disrupt the financial lifelines of armed groups in eastern Congo, curb the illicit mineral trade, and promote transparent, lawful exploitation of the country's natural resources. A report by a United Nations Group of Experts published last month revealed that Congo's army had received support from PARECO-FF in late 2024 and early 2025. The move further highlights the Trump administration's continued engagement in the Great Lakes region, positioning Washington as a central player in both regional peacebuilding and the global race to secure critical minerals. US' moves to restore peace in the DRC The United States has stepped up its diplomatic and economic engagement to help restore peace in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), where the mineral-rich eastern provinces have endured decades of armed conflict. These measures are part of a broader Trump administration strategy to stabilize the Great Lakes region, curb cross-border smuggling, and ensure that the DRC's vast mineral wealth benefits its citizens while entering legitimate global markets. The sanctions are a central element of a wider approach that blends economic pressure with diplomacy, aiming to cut off revenue streams that sustain armed groups while pressing regional actors toward negotiated settlements. This effort also ties into the controversial 'Minerals-for-Security' proposal, under which President Félix Tshisekedi offered the United States preferential access to the DRC's reserves of cobalt, lithium, tantalum, and copper in exchange for formal security assistance against the M23 rebellion and other militias destabilizing the east. By targeting both local and foreign actors in the illicit minerals trade, Washington seeks to disrupt conflict financing and lay the groundwork for lasting peace in the DRC's volatile east. However, rights groups note that over the years some U.S. companies, particularly in the technology and manufacturing sectors, have also faced accusations of sourcing cobalt, tantalum, tin, and gold from suppliers linked to armed groups.