Short interview I did whilst in transit in Hong Kong, on the way home from Copsinhagen
12/27/09
Pacific reflections of the Copenhagen Summit
Short interview I did whilst in transit in Hong Kong, on the way home from Copsinhagen
11/22/09
Haere Atu No Co2lonialism in the Pacific-Te Ata Tino Toa on the Social & Climate Justice Caravan
Indigenous peoples in the Pacific have found the great ocean of Kiwa, a spiritual &cultural home for thousands upon thousands of years. We lived in harmony with our environment and each other; we were self-sufficient and had 100% of our lands, Culture, custom and language. White supremacist, Capitalist Imperialism & genocide shattered that world for many Indigenous peoples in the Pacific last century.
We live with the repercussions of that history of genocide & dispossession every day. Colonisation in the Pacific continues in the models of development that are being sold through a masquerade of trade," governance & security, & market based ‘solutions’ to climate change.
Te Ata Tino Toa, (a collective of Maori activists) are looking forward to forging a strong collective understanding & response to the dual threats of neo liberalism & climate change in the Pacific on the Climate Caravan .
The Social & Climate Justice Caravan 2009 wants to link the protests against the WTO with the protests against the climate summit. Between 3rd and 9th December, 60 representatives from global movements from the South will drive two routes from Geneva to Copenhagen. The Western route goes through Paris and Brussels, the Eastern one through Freiburg, Frankfurt and Cologne, including a delegation to Berlin. The activists will meet p in Hamburg in order to drive together over the Danish border to Copenhagen. With public meetings, discussions and actions planned, the caravan wants to draw attention to the consequences of trade liberalisation and climate change on people in the global South. Through meetings and workshops, participants seek to establish networks with local activists and hope to mobilize as many people as possible to Copenhagen.
Te Ata Tino Toa are representative of the long tradition of struggle and resistance by Maori against colonisation and the Crown sponsored theft of Maori land and resources. Maori continue to resist the pressures of colonisation and cultural and economic genocide. Such a concept embraces the spiritual link Maori have with 'Papatuanuku' (Earthmother) and is a part of the international drive by indigenous peoples for self determination."
The Pacific, is facing huge stress & huge regional pressures. Climate change is a clear and present danger to the Pacific peoples, land, lives; culture & peoples are at risk. Climate change is no distant threat it is happening now. Rising sea levels are eating up the land of the islands, salination means more & more arable lands for cultivation become untenable. The human face of climate change in the Pacific, is heart breaking, land is the cornerstone of the heart of all Indigenous peoples.
…….From Genvea
For much of the past decade the Pacific Islands Countries have faced immense pressure from NZ & Australia, and aid donors to move towards trade liberalisation through new free trade agreements (FTAs).
Free trade agreements involving the region include the Pacific Islands Countries Trade Agreement (PICTA), the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) with the European Union, and the extension of the Pacific Agreement on Closer Economic Relations (PACER) with Australia and New Zealand to include deeper “economic integration”.
The move towards free trade is driven largely by the interests of business (exporters, service suppliers and potential new investors) based in the Pacific’s developed-country ‘partners’. Clothed in benevolent, paternal words, greed & racism lie at the heart of Pacer-Plus, pushing the western, neoliberal way of doing things on the Pacific.
To Copenhagen
Te Ata Tino Toa stand with all Indigenous peoples of the Pacific. Together we can ensure those most responsible for climate change are held responsible and those most affected by are supported. In the defence of land rights, & our collective responsibility to care for lands, forests, our oceans & peoples. Pacific peoples standing together for mother earth & for lives of dignity, and self determination.
“Indigenous peoples of the Pacific are deeply alarmed by the accelerating climate devastation brought about by unsustainable development, and we are experiencing profound and disproportionate adverse impacts on our Pacific cultures, human and environmental health, human rights, well-being, traditional livelihoods, food systems and food sovereignty, local infrastructure, economic viability and our very survival as Indigenous peoples.
Consumer nations must adequately address the issue of ecological debt to the global south and not shift liability for their own unsustainable production and consumption to those nations not responsible for the high level of climate emissions.
We demand that forests not be included in carbon trading schemes, and call on all governments to halt deforestation and keep fossil fuels in the ground; not trade one for the other. “ (Nukualofa Declaration)
Against all the odds, and the threats we face to our lands, our cultures, and our ways of life in the pacific, we have survived and we continue to resist. Evolutionary processes have taken their course in the Pacific and the time has come for us to reach out across the vast ocean that binds us to support each other’s struggles and to halt the annihilation that we as peoples are facing.
I will be live tweeting 27th Nov onwards http://twitter.com/uriohau #climatejustice #Pacific
11/6/09
Maori Job Loss Outstripping Rest of Society
Source
New figures show Maori are suffering the brunt of job losses caused by the recession.
The Household Labour Force survey shows in the past year Maori unemployment has rocketed from 9.6 percent to 14.2 percent.
That’s an increase of almost 10 thousand out of work.
Pakeha unemployment has only gone from 3.1 to 4.5 percent.
Council of Trade Unions secretary Peter Conway says the recession has hit hard in the construction and manufacturing sectors, which employed large numbers of Maori.
“Maori are also a younger population on average and youth unemployment is now above 25 percent so part of it is that and there also may be still some discrimination in the labour market. I’m not saying it’s there but others say it’s there and hitting Maori hard,” Mr Conway says.
The CTU says the government needs to take specific action to fight Maori unemployment or the social consequences will be around for generation.
see also: Household Labour force Survey
New figures show Maori are suffering the brunt of job losses caused by the recession.
The Household Labour Force survey shows in the past year Maori unemployment has rocketed from 9.6 percent to 14.2 percent.
That’s an increase of almost 10 thousand out of work.
Pakeha unemployment has only gone from 3.1 to 4.5 percent.
Council of Trade Unions secretary Peter Conway says the recession has hit hard in the construction and manufacturing sectors, which employed large numbers of Maori.
“Maori are also a younger population on average and youth unemployment is now above 25 percent so part of it is that and there also may be still some discrimination in the labour market. I’m not saying it’s there but others say it’s there and hitting Maori hard,” Mr Conway says.
The CTU says the government needs to take specific action to fight Maori unemployment or the social consequences will be around for generation.
see also: Household Labour force Survey
11/2/09
Defending Melanesian Land
| Host: | |
| Network: | Global |
| Date: | Wednesday, November 4, 2009 |
| Time: | 6:30pm - 8:00pm |
| Location: | Amnesty International Action Centre, 79 Myrtle St, Chippendale |
An evening of film, photos and discussions about the importance of customary land in Melanesia. 'Defending Melanesian Land' is a short
video in which Melanesian activists explain why indigenous land is important to people in the Pacific, and why they have formed a regional alliance (the Melanesian Indigenous Land Defence
Alliance - MILDA) to defend indigenous Melanesian land.
The film was produced by Tim Anderson for Aid/Watch and MILDA,
with support from The Christensen Fund
10/25/09
Nuku Alofa declaration*
Nuku Alofa declaration*
From 29 to 31 July 2009, over 15 participants from 8 different countries in the Pacific/Oceania region, from Indigenous peoples, civil society and governments, gathered in Tonga to discuss global issues that severely impact our region on a daily basis: climate change, forest protection, and the role of Indigenous peoples and local communities.
Preamble
We [Indigenous peoples of the Pacific] are deeply alarmed by the accelerating climate devastation brought about by unsustainable development, and we are experiencing profound and disproportionate adverse impacts on our Pacific cultures, human and environmental health, human rights, wellbeing, traditional livelihoods, food systems and food sovereignty, local infrastructure, economic viability and our very survival as Indigenous peoples.
Consumer nations must adequately address the issue of ecological debt to the global south and not shift liability for their own unsustainable production and consumption to those nations not responsible for the high level of climate emissions.
We remind the parties that Indigenous peoples are on the front line of climate change, whether they are from “developed” nations or not, and do not automatically have access to the benefits of a developed economy.
Call for Action
We are concerned that in its current form REDD is misleading and is a false solution to climate change, erodes Indigenous land rights and fails to account for the long term and ongoing conservation and land management of forested areas by Indigenous peoples and forest dependent communities.
We call for all nations in the Pacific to sign on to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP).
We call for any agreement on forests to fully and explicitly uphold the rights under UNDRIP, the Convention on Biodiversity (CBD), and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).
All rights under UNDRIP must be included in the CBD and UNFCCC, and the customary and territorial land rights of Indigenous Peoples and forest-dependent communities must be recognised and enforced by any international agreement on forest policy.
We call for the suspension of all REDD initiatives in Indigenous lands and territories until such a time as Indigenous peoples’ rights are fully recognised and promoted, and community consent has been obtained.
The linkage of REDD to markets risks allows Annex-1 countries to avoid responsibility for reducing emissions in their own countries and could even increase net carbon emissions. Carbon offsetting and the inclusion of REDD credits in carbon markets will do nothing to address the underlying causes of climate change, nor will carbon offsetting and market mechanisms provide the predictable and reliable funding required for addressing deforestation.
We demand that forests not be included in carbon trading schemes, and call on all governments to halt deforestation and keep fossil fuels in the ground; not trade one for the other. Forests need to be protected, but they must be protected by strengthening and enforcing forest legislation, not using market mechanisms.
We support the call for binding emissions reductions targets for Annex 1 countries of at least 45% below 1990 levels by 2020, and at least 95% by 2050. Annex 1 countries must therefore deliver on their commitments to making real and effective emission reductions.
We call for real and genuine solutions to climate change, not false solutions like ocean fertilisation, REDD, biofuels and monocultures for plantations that erode and violate the rights of Indigenous peoples and forest-dependant communities, and destroy biodiversity.
Any definition of forests must strongly differentiate between plantations and natural forests to incorporate fundamental Indigenous understandings of forests and account for the vast differences in carbon storage capacity.
We call for accurate carbon accounting on forests, and for ANY funding for the reduction of emissions from deforestation and degradation, and appropriate technology transfer to be prioritised for community-based forest management schemes, managed through strengthened mechanisms within the UNFCCC. Donor nations should not fund international financial institutions like the World Bank to implement projects that support flawed solutions to climate change.
* This is an edited version of the Declaration
See Also:
Pacific Comments on REDDSpecial guest article from Fiu Mata’ese Elisara/Executive Director of OLSSI, Samoa
10/24/09
MAORI MADE EARLY CONTRIBUTION TO WORKERS’ RIGHTS
A trade union educator says Maori should use Labour Day to celebrate their contributions to workers' rights.
Helen Te Hira of Unite says the day marks the world-leading efforts of workers in this country for the eight hour working day, starting with carpenter Samuel Parnell's protest in Petone in 1840.
She says the momentum grew through the 19th century, and Maori were attracted to the collective nature of unions.
The first recorded wages dispute happened in the Bay of Islands in October 1821, when Maori sawyers went on strike for the right to be paid in money or gunpowder.
10/22/09
Petition for Sri Lankan Asylum Seekers
**Please Circulate Widely**
Hello everyone,
Sign up the petition for Sri Lankan asylum seekers in Indonesia.
As you notice the Australian government has neglected the recent Sri Lankan boat arrivals and trying to send them back to their Sri Lanka. RISE (riserefugee.org) has written a petition to bring the asylum seekers back to the Australian.
Circle this email around with attached document and get people to sign up
the petition. Ask everyone to join together to bring the war victim to
Australia.
Follow the link and sign up
http://riserefugee.org/the-urgent-situation-of-255-sri-lankan-asylum-seekers-in-indonesia/
Also, please print out the document and get your friends, families and
neighbors and workmates to sign up the petition.
Post the petition to
House Of Representatives
P.O.Box 6021
Parliament House
Canberra
ACT 2600
For more information go to: http://riserefugee.org
Hello everyone,
Sign up the petition for Sri Lankan asylum seekers in Indonesia.
As you notice the Australian government has neglected the recent Sri Lankan boat arrivals and trying to send them back to their Sri Lanka. RISE (riserefugee.org) has written a petition to bring the asylum seekers back to the Australian.
Circle this email around with attached document and get people to sign up
the petition. Ask everyone to join together to bring the war victim to
Australia.
Follow the link and sign up
http://riserefugee.org/the-urgent-situation-of-255-sri-lankan-asylum-seekers-in-indonesia/
Also, please print out the document and get your friends, families and
neighbors and workmates to sign up the petition.
Post the petition to
House Of Representatives
P.O.Box 6021
Parliament House
Canberra
ACT 2600
For more information go to: http://riserefugee.org
10/19/09
10/17/09
Haunani-Kay Trask at 'Iolani Palace on September 2, 2002
Aloha, my people, aloha.
I want to talk today about the causes, both historical and contemporary, for the situation that we, the native people of Hawai'i, now find ourselves in.
If we go back in time to contact with the syphilitic Captain Cook, what we realize is that the first thing that was a gift of Western civilization was disease. The second thing that was a gift of Western civilization was violence -- they tried to take our chief hostage, and as a result of that we killed him. That was called Justice. Death to the conqueror is justice, that's what it is.
In 1848 the missionaries -- the disease-laden racists -- that's a very good word. Racism. Racist. Race. Very very good words. These were racist people. They came here to colonize us because we didn't have the right gods. Who were they to say we didn't have the right gods? Who were they to say that? And what are their descendants doing today -- Mr. Freddy Rice, taking away our entitlements. That is the geneology of racism. They came with racism in their hearts, they lived here with racism in their hearts, and they are still racists today.
And Hawaiians, do not be afraid to name the enemy. The enemy is racism. Your own people can practice racism. Your own people can tell you, as they always tell me, "Don't be so angry!" Why not? Why not? Do we think Kamehameha was a peacemaker? Only when he defeated his enemies.
Don't let anybody tell you not to be angry. We have every right to be angry. We have every reason to be angry. And we ARE angry. And the reason that we're angry -- the reason we are angry -- is because this is OUR country, and they took our government and imprisoned our queen -- right here she was imprisoned in her palace. And they banned our language. And then they forcibly made us a state of the racist, colonialist United States of colonial America. Do you have a right to be angry? Of course you do. Of course you do!
Never, never forget your own history. We don't need to know what the haole is telling us. What we need to know is what really happened to our people. Who brought the disease? Who created private property? Who overthrew our queen? You won't find any Hawaiians there. There were FOREIGNERS who overthrew our queen. There were FOREIGNERS who made us a state. There were FOREIGNERS. And they are still FOREIGNERS today. Rice. Conklin. Burgess. They are FOREIGNERS. This is OUR country Hawaiians.
And you have to stand up and tell the truth. That is our job. That is what the great black American leader said. [chanting] "Tell the truth. Tell the truth." His name was Malcolm X. We must tell the truth. And that is the truth.
Foreigners came. They conquered. They took our lands. They imprisoned our queen. And THEY divided us by blood quantum. THEY did. Isn't it ironic that a HAOLE -- Freddy Rice -- Mr. missionary, whose illustrious ancestor overthrew Kalakaua and created the bayonet constitution that that racist man, who received so much of our land, now says that we are racists. IMPOSSIBLE! That is impossible!
You have to have power to be a racist. Number one. Do we have power? No. But Freddy Rice does. Ken Conklin does. Burgess does. They all have power. The power of white supremacy. The power of white courts. The power of a white country called the United States of white America.
I don't understand why Hawaiians aren't angry. I don't understand it. Every time somebody tells me I'm so angry at 5 ft. 4, 120 pounds my answer to them is "And why aren't you?" What is the matter with our people that they are not angry! It's not enough to pray to the kupuna, to pray to gods. It's not enough to participate in culture. Those things are important, but they are not important as politics.
Politics has to do with power. Who has it and who doesn't. Do WE have power? No! If we have power, what are we doing here? They took away the queen's land. They did. Who is "they?"
The city council. Hawaiians didn't have city council. That was created during after the overthrow, during the Territory. That's not OUR political form. Why do we have to be subjugated to them? Why do we have to be subjugated to the state? To the federal government? The racist Bush "bomb every dark person" federal government.
Why are WE, as native people, subjugated in our own land? Why are we made to be afraid? Because we are colonized. We live in a colony. The United States of America. All that military theft of our lands, our homelands, our ceded lands, all of that, all of that was done by the United States of America.
All you Hawaiians who think the United States is good think again. Take my class. Hawaiian Studies 390. Read the Blount Report. Read the report that shows what the haoles [white people] thought of us. They think the same thing today. That's where we get Rice and Conklin and Burgess. These are your ENEMIES Hawaiians, your ENEMIES. When Kamehameha was getting ready to go to war, he didn't sit there and think, "Oh gee I wonder if we should make nice. I wonder if I should go over to Kahekili and say hey, let's have a little pa'ina [party]." No.
When you gonna make war, you get your facts down and you make war. The opposition knows that. Aren't they making war against us? You bet they are. Who do you think is funding that war? The guy who owns the Advertiser that's who. Whose illustrious ancestor overthrew the queen, created the Mahele. Learn your history, and then you will know which side of history you belong on.
And you do not belong on the American side. You do not belong on the Hawai'i state side. You belong on the side of your people --lahui Hawai'i [racially defined Hawaiians] -- that's the side you belong on.
And if people are upset, so what? So what? I'm so tired of people telling me I make them feel bad. Good! Ten flights a day. United Airlines. Beat it!
If this is our country then we have to ACT like it is our country. I don't want to see people walking around at the University of Hawai'i walking like this [shuffling, downcast]. I never walk like that. And I'm only five feet four and a half inches. I never walk like that. If this is your country then BEHAVE like it's your country. You tell those racist haoles "You're a racist haole." That's the word we need to use. RACIST!
Racism. That is what is going on right here and right now in Hawai'i. The same thing that's going on against black Americans. The same thing that's going on by Bush. Bush wants to bomb Islamic countries. Why? Because he's a racist. Because Islamic people don't believe in Christianity. Because they have their own region of the world, called the Middle East. Who bombed us? Wasn't Hawaiians.
We need to think very, very clearly about who the enemy is. The enemy is the United States of America, and everybody who supports it. Rice. Conklin. Burgess.
You have to know which side of history you're on, and who is there with you. They are not there with you, Hawaiians. They want to take every single thing away from you.
And now, let us go to the city council. Where is the position on the city council? They want the land. The queen's land. Every time somebody says the queen was racist, I laugh. If she was a racist, why did she leave her entitlements to orphan Hawaiian children? Why did Bernice leave her moneys and lands to the Kamehameha Schools? Not because they were racists. But because they understood as ali'i their job was to care for their people -- for lahui Hawai'i. And right now, right now what we have is another foreign entity named the city council, filled with FOREIGNERS, named city council persons, who want to take away our land. When your children say to you, "Auntie, why are they doing that?" "Mom and Dad, why are they doing that?" Your answer is "Because they are racists. Because they want to take every last entitlement that Hawaiians have, and replace our own people with FOREIGNERS."
We have the largest diaspora in Hawai'i, which means people out-migrated. And who are those people? The native people of Hawai'i, that's who they are. The native people. This is what is affecting us today is RACISM. And we have to tell it like it is. As black people say, it's not [inaudible], it's racism. That's what it is. You are not a racist because you fight racism. You're a warrior, like I am. You are a warrior.
You name it. You name -- you name the enemy. You name the enemy so your people know who the enemy is. The enemy is anybody who takes anything from Hawaiian people. I don't care who they are. I don't care what their position is. That is your enemy. And we need Hawaiians to understand that.
We need to have an analysis of the current situation and understand that. And once we understand that we will not be afraid to speak the truth. Malcolm X used to always say "Speak the truth brother, speak the truth." What's wrong with the truth? It's the truth. That's why nobody wants us to speak the truth. And that's what we need to do. And that's what the purpose of this rally is today. To speak the truth.
And the truth is, that racists are taking everything away from Hawaiians, and they will not be content until Hawai'i has no Hawaiians left. That IS the truth. And I don't care what their names are. That is their intent. Ku'e! [resist] Ku'e! Ku'e! Mahalo nui. [thanks very much]
10/16/09
10/7/09
Press Conference- Report Calls for the Rejection of REDD in Climate Treaty Part 1 of 3
Indigenous Environmental Network calls for alternative solutions that reduce emissions, protect forests and respect rights
Press Conference (Part 1 of 3)
October 1, 2009
Bangkok, Thailand
Contact:
Indigenous Environmental Network
Tom Goldtooth
+1 218 760 0442
ien@igc.org
10/6/09
Jailbreak - INDIGENOUS AUSTRALIA
This video is dedicated to all our people who were down from day one.. Video featuring Dennis Walker, Gary Foley and the Lex Wotton Protest march. Music by Yothu Yindi
Thanks to http://www.youtube.com/user/ORIGNALAUSTRALIAN
10/3/09
Racism- A history part 2: Fatal Impacts
Series looking at how racism impacts on people's lives. Part Two: Looks at Scientific Racism in the 19th century, which drew on now discredited sciences
10/2/09
Economic Impact of Tsunami on Samoa
Afioga Afamasaga Toleafoa shares his initial thoughts on the economic impact of the tsunami on the Samoan Economy.
An economist by training, Afamasaga served for 20 years as a diplomat for Samoa. After leaving diplomatic life, he served a term as Member of Parliament, and as a consultant in public sector reform, governance, including village government. Afamasaga is a regular contributor to print media and radio in Samoa and the region.
Imprisoned People and Social Justice Forum Podcast Series
On Thursday the 10th of September 09, the Imprisoned People and Social Justice Forum was held at the Koori Heritage Trust down on King Street.
The forum was organised by the Decarceration Working Group, with support and collaboration from Flat Out, Sisters Inside, the Centre for the Human Rights of Imprisoned People and the Aboriginal Family Violence Prevention Legal Service.
The day aimed to facilitate discussions on systemic issues in imprisonment, strategies for decarceration and social justice for imprisoned men and women in Victoria, with input from national and international speakers including formerly imprisoned people.
3CRs Done by Law has uploaded recordings of the speeches as a special podcast series, where you can download and listen to some of the highlights of the day.
go HERE
The forum was organised by the Decarceration Working Group, with support and collaboration from Flat Out, Sisters Inside, the Centre for the Human Rights of Imprisoned People and the Aboriginal Family Violence Prevention Legal Service.
The day aimed to facilitate discussions on systemic issues in imprisonment, strategies for decarceration and social justice for imprisoned men and women in Victoria, with input from national and international speakers including formerly imprisoned people.
3CRs Done by Law has uploaded recordings of the speeches as a special podcast series, where you can download and listen to some of the highlights of the day.
go HERE
10/1/09
Explosive Expression - Art Exhibition and Auction, Oct 2009
Explosive Expression. Creative Resistance to the State Terror Raids of October 2007. Thistle Hall Gallery 13-18 October 2009. Exhibition and Auction. To view all the artworks on line and for more information visit: http://october15thsolidarity.info/artauction
All Artworks featured are a selection of works from the exhibition & auction from Explosive Expression
Music:
Drums of War - by Flowision
Album: Tu Kotahi - Freedom Fighting Anthems
Audio:
October 15, 2007 - by Tame Iti
Album: Tu Kotahi - Freedom Fighting Anthems
"Tu Kotahi - Freedom Fighting Anthems" is a CD Compilation to raise money for those affected by the October 15th 'Terror' Raids.
Audio:
Recording: Tame Iti
Album: Burn This CD
Burn This CD: Responses to October 15. The two CD set includes the voices of poets, writers, activists and people directly affected by the police raids around the country on October 15.
9/23/09
Tapene Whanau (Tawhai)
-=[.TU ANA.]=-
TU ANA AU KI NGA TIHI TAPU O NGA PAE MAUNGA...
O TE WHARETAPU O NGA PUHI...
KA TITIRO, KA WHAKAARO
KI TONA MAKOHA MA KI AHAU E, ANO....
ANO, TE ATAAHUA, O NGA WHENUA NEI
E WHAKARONGO ANA MAUA KO TARINGA KI TE REO, O NGA PUHI
PAREKAREKA KI TE TARINGA
PAREKAREKA KI TE WHAKARONGO ATU
AHAKOA ITI REAREA NOA IHO AHAU
TEITEI KAHIKATEA, KI TE AKO, I TE REO O TA KAINGA
KA TAEA E AU, KA TAEA KO AHAU (2X)
(KEY CHANGE)
TU ANA AU KI NGA TIHI TAPU O NGA PAE MAUNGA
O TE WHARETAPU O NGA PUHI
9/22/09
9/18/09
The Prison: A Sign of Democracy?
UC Santa Cruz professor Angela Davis explores the range of social problems associated with incarceration and the generalized criminalization of those communities that are most affected by poverty and racial discrimination. She urges her audiences to think seriously about the future possibility of a world without prisons and to help forge a 21st century abolitionist movement. [2/2008] [Public Affairs] [Show ID: 13826]
8/20/09
Petition: Appeal for the immediate release of USTKE trade unionists in Kanaky
By Collectif Solidarité Kanaky
On June 29, 2009, in Noumea, Kanaky [also known by its colonial name of New Caledonia -– Kanaky is a colony of France] twenty-eight members of USTKE (Federation of Unions of Kanak Workers and the Exploited) were given prison sentences. Six of them, whose committal orders were read out in court, are now serving time at Camp Est, a prison which is already overpopulated. The judgement targeted the leadership of the union, particularly the president Gérard Jodar, sentenced to one year’s imprisonment, and the general secretary of the construction union, Michel Safoka, also given one year.
The official grounds for the guilty verdict are “hindering the flight of an aircraft”. On Thursday May 28, a day of action organised by USTKE, during a protest outside Noumea Airport to support Air Caledonia workers who had been fighting for two months against a wrongful dismissal, mobile police and the GIPN (Intervention Group of the National Police) pushed the unionists onto the tarmac. Twenty-eight of them took refuge in an empty plane to protect themselves against a stream of tear gas. At the time of the police intervention, there were no planes in circulation and it was the very action of the police which disrupted the demonstration.
The verdict is a political verdict against the pro-independence union federation. Those in power are trying to muzzle the territory’s foremost organisation for defending the rights of all workers, whether they be Kanak [the Indigenous people of Kanaky] or of other origins. In this far-away colony where there are no industrial tribunals, employees are often forced to lead long conflicts to assert their rights, faced with arrogant bosses who mock their dignity.
We refuse to accept either the growing criminalisation of union action or unionists’ imprisonment.
We demand the immediate release of the USTKE unionists and their leaders.
To sign this petition, please send your name, town, country and organisation (and position if you hold one) to: contact@solidaritekanaky.org. Visit Collectif Solidarité Kanaky's website at http://solidaritekanaky.org.
8/15/09
THE LEGALITY OF EXCLUDING FIJI FROM PACER-PLUS DISCUSSIONS
Prof Jane Kelsey LLB(Hons), BCL (Oxon), MPhil (Cantab), PhD
School of Law, University of Auckland
Summary
Article 1 of PACER defines a ‘Party’ to mean a State that has signed and ratified the Agreement pursuant to Article 19. The Republic of the Fiji Islands is such a State. It is therefore a Party to PACER.
It should be presumed, in the absence of provisions to the contrary, that decisions under PACER are to be made in accordance with the convention of the Forum, being by consensus. That would require the participation of Fiji.
In any case, a process or decision under PACER that involves all parties to the agreement collectively must include Fiji. There is nothing in PACER to suggest that any implied power to suspend a Party from its rights and obligations under PACER was intended.
There are three routes by which a decision to launch free trade negotiations under PACER might lawfully be made:
(i) Commencement of negotiations in 2011 as agreed in Article 5. There is nothing in Article 5:1 (or the rest of the treaty) that entitles any Party to PACER or any group of such Parties to exclude any other Party to PACER from those collective negotiations, although a Party may elect to do so by withdrawing from the agreement.
(ii) If a PIC Party to PACER commences negotiations on a free trade agreement in goods with a non-PACER Party, it may trigger earlier consultations with a view to negotiations as soon as practicable. There are two relevant triggers:
Ø In Article 6:3 this applies to individual countries. Any such obligation is strongest in relation to Fiji and PNG, which have initialed (but not signed or ratified) the Interim EPA on trade in goods. It ceases to apply to individual FICs whose negotiations have concluded without an agreement.
Ø Article 6:4 applies where all the Parties to PICTA jointly commence such negotiations and requires collective action by PICTA Parties under PACER. Fiji is a Party to PICTA. Any collective action required of PICTA Parties, especially relating to the EPA goods negotiations with the EU, must include Fiji.
(iii) Agreement to launch negotiations before 2011 following a general review of PACER under Article 16:2. Article 16:3 states that one purpose of a review of PACER is to make decisions on the opening and timetabling of negotiations for economic integration agreements or arrangements. This provision must refer to a general review, unless a general review transferred that power to another forum. General reviews involve all Parties collectively. A Party cannot be arbitrarily excluded from the conduct of such a general review, or decisions as to its form or timing, or as to the transfer of any exercise of its functions.
A general review is distinct from an annual review by Parties to PACER of ‘the implementation and operation of the agreement and all aspects of trade and economic cooperation’ under Article 16:1. The Government of Fiji as a Party to PACER is entitled to attend this annual review. The annual review of PACER is distinct from the Forum Trade Ministers’ Meeting and may be held at the FTMM of or otherwise.
The exclusion of Fiji from either an annual or general review on the grounds that Fiji’s participation in the FTMM has been suspended cannot be justified. There is an implied obligation on the Parties to PACER to convene such meetings at a time and place from which no Party is excluded. Failure to do so would render decisions taken at such meetings open to legal challenge.
It is important to stress that Article 17 formally assigns to the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat certain administrative and clerical functions under PACER that are separate from the responsibilities that it performs under its legal personality as the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat. The suspension of Fiji from the Forum cannot affect the responsibilities of the Forum Secretariat in relation to Fiji under PACER.
What are the implications of this argument for the validity of any decision to launch the negotiation of ‘PACER-Plus’? The Parties, convened as the Pacific Island Forum Leaders, agreed in Niue last year on ‘the need for officials to formulate a detailed road map on PACER Plus, with the view to Leaders agreeing at the 2009 Forum to the commencement of Negotiations.’ However, no decision to commence those negotiations has been taken.
That decision is being sought by Australia and New Zealand at the Forum Leaders’ Meeting in Cairns in August 2009. The Leaders’ decision is largely contingent on a decision of the Trade Ministers of the Parties to PACER in Apia on 18 and 19 June 2009. That decision is intended to take place within the Forum Trade Ministers’ Meeting. The Government of Fiji has been excluded from both those meetings.
This opinion concludes that it is not lawful for the Parties to PACER other than Fiji to convene for their annual review, or to make a decision to launch negotiations under PACER, in the absence of the Government of Fiji.
The only way to proceed with the forthcoming meetings or to make decisions regarding PACER-Plus negotiations in a manner that is consistent with PACER, in the absence of the Government of Fiji, would be if:
(a) Fiji has consented. There is no evidence of such consent; or
(b) the PACER text has been amended to legitimize the exclusion of a Party to the agreement from activities in which it would otherwise be entitled to participate. Article 18 requires unanimous agreement of the Parties to any amendment to the text. Fiji’s exclusion from participation makes that impossible per se. Fiji would presumably veto any such amendment if its agreement were sought.
If the Government of Fiji considers that the actions of other Parties to PACER have breached its rights under the agreement it can notify them, through the Forum Secretariat, of its wish to enter consultations. The other Parties must respond in good faith and as soon as possible, with a view to seeking a mutually satisfactory solution.
THE LEGALITY OF EXCLUDING FIJI FROM
PACER-PLUS DISCUSSIONS
Prof Jane Kelsey LLB(Hons), BCL (Oxon), MPhil (Cantab), PhD
School of Law, University of Auckland
This legal opinion is provided for the Pacific Network on Globalisation PANG).
FIJI’S STATUS IN THE FORUM
Fiji was ‘suspended from full participation in the Forum’ as of 2 May 2009 on the terms agreed by the Forum Leaders in Port Moresby on 27 January 2009.
Participation ‘by the leader, ministers and officials of Fiji from all Forum meetings and events arranged by the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat, including the annual Pacific Islands Forum Leaders Meeting’ was suspended indefinitely.
The Chair of the Forum made it clear that Fiji was not being expelled from the Forum and that the Republic of Fiji remains a member of the Forum group of nations.
FIJI’S STATUS UNDER PACER
Article 1 of PACER provides a number of relevant definitions:
‘Party’ means a State that has signed and ratified the Agreement pursuant to Article 19. The Republic of the Fiji Islands is such a State. It is therefore a Party to PACER.
‘Forum Island Countries’ are explicitly defined to include the Fiji Islands.
‘Forum’ means the Pacific Islands Forum, as referred to in the agreement establishing the PIFS. As noted above, suspension from participation is not expulsion. Fiji remains a member of the Forum.
DECISION MAKING PROCESSES UNDER PACER
Article 16 sets out the institutional mechanisms for decision-making under PACER, but it does not specify the rules for making decisions.
It should be presumed, in the absence of provisions to the contrary, that decisions under PACER would be made according to the convention of the Forum, being by consensus. That would require the participation of Fiji.
That interpretation is consistent with the requirement under Article 18 that any amendment to PACER can only be made by unanimous agreement of the Parties. The exclusion of Fiji would be a de facto amendment to the treaty to which it has not agreed.
Even if the requirement for consensus in general under PACER was doubted, any process or decision that involves all parties to the agreement collectively must include Fiji.
It might be argued that an activity involving or decision by ‘all parties’ means all parties present and voting or participating in an attempt to reach a consensus, and that a decision in the absence of Fiji would still be valid. However, United Nations’ precedents to that effect involve situations where a state has voluntarily absented itself from a meeting or decision, not the exclusion of a party from the process without its consent.
There is nothing in PACER to suggest that any implied power to suspend a Party was intended.
THE ROLE OF THE FORUM SECRETARIAT
In Article 17 the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat is formally assigned the responsibility to provide secretariat services for PACER and other international agreements established pursuant to it.
The Secretariat is performing administrative and clerical functions under PACER that are separate from the responsibilities that it performs under its legal personality as the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat. The suspension of Fiji from the Forum cannot affect the responsibilities of the Forum Secretariat in relation to Fiji under PACER.
Its functions are articulated in Article 17:2, as being a repository and conduit of communications and the provision of administrative and technical support services.
The Forum Secretariat has no other role in relation to PACER. Any direction of the Parties to the Secretariat requiring it to perform other functions would need to involve all the Parties, unless one or more Parties has voluntary absented itself from making such a decision.
The Secretariat cannot therefore act in any way that denies Fiji access to PACER meetings or decisions, or the right to send or receive communications among PACER Parties.
PROCESSES FOR A DECISION TO LAUNCH PACER-PLUS NEGOTIATIONS
There are three routes by which a decision to launch negotiations under PACER might lawfully be made:
1. A pre-commitment to negotiations in 2011 under Article 5;
2. ‘Triggering’ consultations with a view to negotiations before 2011 under Article 6;
3. Agreement to launch negotiations before 2011 following a general review of PACER under Article 16.
It is not clear which of these is currently being relied on, but it seems likely to be the third.
1. A Pre-commitment to begin negotiations in 2011 (Article 5)
Article 5:1 is a pre-commitment among the parties, including Fiji, collectively to enter into collective negotiations with a view to establishing reciprocal free trade arrangements between the Forum Island Countries (including Fiji) and Australia and New Zealand.
Such negotiations must be entered into eight years after PICTA came into force, i.e. 2011, unless earlier agreed under Article 16 or triggered by the provisions of Article 6.
There is nothing in Article 5:1 (or the rest of the treaty) that entitles any Party to PACER or any group of such Parties to exclude any other Party to PACER from those collective negotiations.
[Article 5:2 allows any party to PACER (eg Australia or NZ) to notify the Forum Secretariat that it wants to enter consultations with a view to negotiating the terms and conditions of new trading and economic integration arrangements. Whether or not Australia or NZ has formally notified the Secretariat under this provision, there is no corresponding obligation on any Parties who receive such notification to respond. It seems likely that any such notification would inform discussions under Article 16.]
2. Triggering of negotiations before 2011 (Article 6)
It might be argued that the process of consultations with a view to commencement of negotiations with Australia and NZ before 2001 has been triggered by the action of the FICs in two ways. It is important to note that these triggers relate to negotiations with non-PACER countries for a free trade agreement in goods.
Ø Article 6:3: an individual FIC that is party to PACER begins formal negotiations for a free trade agreement in goods with one or more developed non-Forum countries.
The trigger activates the obligation to ‘offer to undertake consultations with a view to commencement of negotiations free trade arrangements’ with Australia and/or New Zealand ‘as soon as practicable’.
Any reliance on this provision is strongest in relation to the two Parties that have initialed the Interim EPA on trade in goods, being Fiji and PNG.
This obligation is on each individual FIC Party to PACER that has commenced negotiations with an external developed country. It does not presume collective negotiations, as are currently under discussion.
The Article 6:3 obligation ceases, pursuant to Article 6:9, if the negotiations with the non-Forum country are discontinued without an agreement on trade in goods being reached. It is arguable that Article 6:3 no longer applies to the majority of FICs who have not signed the interim EPA on trade in goods and indicated that they do not intend to do so.
Ø Article 6:4: all the Parties to PICTA jointly commence negotiations for a free trade agreement with a non-Forum country.
This trigger involves a collective action by all the Parties to PICTA. Fiji is a Party to PICTA.
When, and even whether, formal negotiations a free trade in goods agreement with the EU commenced is disputed. However, it is certainly arguable that all the Parties to PICTA, organized as the PACP states, did jointly commence such negotiations.
A number of PACP states appear to have since discontinued their participation in the goods EPA, which would remove any obligation under this paragraph. That seems to contradict the purpose of this trigger, which is to entitle Australia and NZ to negotiations where all PICTA Parties have negotiated an agreement on goods. Whatever, that situation does not apply to Fiji.
Assuming that the triggering has been activated, the obligation under this paragraph is for the PICTA Parties collectively to offer to undertake consultations, as soon as practical, with Australia and New Zealand, individually or separately.
The words ‘individually or separately’ must be read as referring only to the consultations with Australia and/or New Zealand, given identical wording in paragraph 3, which refers to an offer of negotiations by an individual FIC, and the joint action by PICTA parties that triggers this obligation.
Again, any collective action required of PICTA Parties, especially relating to the EPA goods negotiations with the EU, must include Fiji.
3. A General Review of PACER (Article 16)
Article 5 states that negotiations with a view to establishing reciprocal free trade arrangements between the FICs and Australia and NZ may be agreed to earlier than 2011 as part of a general review under paragraph 2 of Article 16.
Article 16 provides for two different kinds of reviews of PACER.
Article 16:1 provides for an annual review by Parties to PACER of the implementation and operation of the agreement and all aspects of trade and economic cooperation.
This annual review may take place at the annual meeting of the Forum Trade Ministers or ‘otherwise as appropriate’.
The meeting of PACER Parties is clearly distinct from the Forum Trade Ministers’ Meeting and could be held in a different form, time or place.
The Republic of Fiji is a Party to PACER and is entitled to attend this meeting. The exclusion of Fiji from the annual review of PACER on the grounds that Fiji’s participation in the FTMM has been suspended cannot be justified.
There is an implicit obligation on the other Parties to PACER to convene an annual meeting from which no Party is excluded. Failure to do so would render decisions taken at such a meeting open to legal challenge.
Article 16:2 mandates a general review of the operation of PACER no later than three years after it enters into force, and every subsequent three years, unless otherwise agreed by the Parties.
‘Otherwise agreed’ relates to the conduct of a general review at three yearly intervals. The wording is ambiguous. It could relate to agreement to conduct a general review of PACER otherwise than through three yearly reviews; or that the frequency may not be every three years. Whichever, it still refers to the conduct of a general review.
Paragraph 2 refers to all Parties collectively. This does not justify the exclusion of any Party from the conduct of the general review or decisions as to its form or timing.
As argued previously, it must be assumed that decisions under Article 16:2 are made by consensus in the absence of any contrary intention. Fiji is therefore entitled to be present at and participate in the conduct of any general review, in any decision on any agreed alternative to a general review, and in any such alternative process.
Article 5 explicitly states that the decision to launch negotiations earlier than 2011 would be made as part of a general review under Article 16:2, not an annual review under Article 16:1.
As Fiji is entitled to participate in the activities mandated under paragraph 2, it is entitled to participate in any decision to launch negotiations.
Article 16:3 refers generically to ‘the reviews’, whereas paragraphs 1 and 2 distinguish between annual reviews and three yearly general reviews.
One of the purposes of ‘the reviews’ specified in paragraph 3 is to make decisions on the opening and timetabling of negotiations for economic integration agreements or arrangements. This cannot override the explicit intention of Article 5 that a decision to begin negotiations prior to 2011 must be made at a general review conducted either three yearly as otherwise agreed.
The Parties, convened as the Pacific Island Forum Leaders, agreed in Niue last year on ‘the need for officials to formulate a detailed road map on PACER Plus, with the view to Leaders agreeing at the 2009 Forum to the commencement of Negotiations.’
No decision to commence those negotiations has been taken. That decision is being sought by Australia and New Zealand at the Forum Leaders’ Meeting in Cairns in August 2009.
The Leaders’ decision is largely contingent on a decision of the Trade Ministers of the Parties to PACER in Apia on 18 and 19 June 2009. That decision is intended to take place within the Forum Trade Ministers’ Meeting.
The Government of Fiji has been excluded from both those meetings.
CONCLUSION
It is not lawful for the Parties to PACER other than Fiji to convene for their annual review, or to make a decision to launch negotiations under PACER, in the absence of the Government of Fiji.
If Fiji considers that the actions of other Parties to PACER have breached its rights under the agreement it can notify them, through the Forum Secretariat, of its wish to enter consultations. The other Parties must do so in good faith and as soon as possible, with a view to seeking a mutually satisfactory solution.
The only way to proceed with the forthcoming meetings or to make decisions regarding PACER-Plus negotiations in a manner that is consistent with PACER, in the absence of the Government of Fiji, would be if:
(a) Fiji has consented. There is no evidence of such consent; or
(b) the PACER text has been amended to legitimize the exclusion of a Party to the agreement from activities in which it would otherwise be entitled to participate. Article 18 requires unanimous agreement of the Parties to any amendment to the text. Fiji’s exclusion from participation makes that impossible per se; and Fiji would presumably veto any such amendment if its agreement were sought.
8 June 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)