Mining Groups Highlight Protections for Indigenous Peoples at UN Talks

Table of Contents

Anna V. Smith

High Country News

This tale is released via the Indigenous News Alliance, a partnership between various groups. High Country News, Grist, Indian Country Today (ICT), Mongabay Along with other Indigenous media sources.

In late April, the Trump administration gave approval for a contentious copper mine slated for development in western Arizona. This project would lead to the destruction of portions of Chi'chil Biłdagoteel, referred to as "Oak Flat" in English, despite opposition from the San Carlos Apache Tribe and at least 21 additional Native American tribes. Following this decision, fast-tracked The initiative aims to achieve President Donald Trump’s objective of more swiftly advancing the development of critical domestic minerals like copper and gold, vital components for renewable energy solutions. Additionally, nine other mining ventures received expedited processing, with seven situated in the western part of the country.

The mine, run by Resolution Copper, is a collaborative effort involving BHP, an Australian mining firm based in Australia, and Rio Tinto, a British-Australian multinational corporation. Both of these companies are involved in the operation. have previously destroyed or threatened Cultural heritage sites of Aboriginal communities in Australia are associated with both organizations belonging to the International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM), which supports mining activities. (Neither Rio Tinto nor BHP responded to comments seeking their input.)

Last week, the ICMM was present at the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues in New York City. the world’s largest annual gathering of Indigenous peoples , to stress their commitment to respecting Indigenous rights and obtaining the consent of Indigenous communities before mining.

An estimated 50 percent to 80 percent of the minerals that are critical to the renewable energy transition are located on or near Indigenous lands globally. “This does not give the industry license to mine at any cost,” said Haajarah Ahmed, senior manager at ICMM, which represents a third of global mining companies, on April 23.

Ahmed highlighted ICMM’s recently updated guidelines, which advise member companies such as Rio Tinto and BHP to engage with Indigenous people at the beginning of a project and to respect their rights and emphasize “the importance of reaching an agreement through a process that recognizes free, prior and informed consent.”

But the guidelines contrast bleakly with the reality on the ground. In the U.S., current laws and policies remain weak when it comes to tribal nations’ efforts to protect their ancestral lands and sacred sites off-reservation, far from international standards regarding how corporations and governments should address Indigenous concerns about projects that affect them.

In Canada, the courts have affirmed that the government has a duty to consult Indigenous communities are involved in projects that could negatively affect their treaty rights. Despite this, numerous initiatives proceed, such as those in Ontario’s Ring of Fire area and within Secwépemc territories. in British Columbia .

At the same time, in the U.S., there is an ongoing case before the Supreme Court questioning the legitimacy of the Resolution Copper mine project. This court will deliberate on whether the proposed destruction of Chi'chil Biłdagoteel would infringe upon Apache spiritual rights. The ruling might influence other indigenous groups striving to safeguard holy places beyond their tribal territories.

The U.S. government is hurriedly attempting to transfer ownership of our sacred land before the courts get a chance to decide, much as it has hastened to eliminate Native peoples over many generations," stated Wendsler Nosie Sr., from Apache Stronghold, the group leading the legal action composed of Apaches and other Indigenous individuals along with their supporters. "This represents the identical aggressive pattern witnessed throughout history.

Other mining Projects expedited by the administration last week have sparked opposition from tribal nations. The Nez Perce Tribe is worried that the planned Stibnite Mine in Idaho might jeopardize their fishing and hunting rights. Meanwhile, the Fort McDermitt Tribe has been opposing a proposed lithium mine at Thacker Pass in Nevada for quite some time; this area holds great significance as it was once the scene of an Indigenous massacre carried out by U.S. cavalry forces in 1865. These issues align with what the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples states should be properly considered.

A study released in February by the U.N. Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues highlighted that "the deficiency or fragility of legal structures safeguarding the specific rights of Indigenous Peoples within the framework of a worldwide shift towards renewable energy" poses significant issues. The authors noted that this inadequate legal coverage implies that mining corporations must secure the free, prior, and informed consent from Indigenous communities, irrespective of any legislative voids.

A change in corporate and industry practices regarding consent might encourage governments to incorporate consent into their legislation and policies, according to Kristen Carpenter, a law professor at CU Boulder. "It's encouraging to observe businesses and trade organizations adopting FPIC-based policies and guidelines," noted Carpenter, who previously served as an appointee for the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, aiding nations in implementing UNDRIP. She added, "More and more, these private entities seem to recognize FPIC as a means to mitigate risks, understanding that striving for agreements with Indigenous Peoples can prevent objections, legal challenges, and demonstrations triggered by violations of those peoples' rights."

Although voluntary guidelines promoted by groups such as the ICMM could potentially progress more swiftly compared to legislation and policies, they lack legal enforcement power. This allows industries to either establish them or disregard them at will, indicating that these guidelines cannot serve as an independent replacement.

"We aren't aiming to take over the responsibilities of the state, but we can assist in addressing accountability deficiencies when governments fail to meet their standards," stated Scott Sellwood, representing the Responsible Mining Initiative Assurance At the forum was IRMA, an organization comprising nonprofits, labor unions, mining firms, and "impacted communities." It features voluntary mining guidelines; however, member audits are conducted by an independent entity with findings made public to confirm adherence to these standards. The statement emphasizes that for effective implementation, such voluntary mining regulations must necessitate proof of (free, prior, and informed consent) being acquired from every involved Indigenous community.

This piece was initially released in High Country News