Expert Mechanism on the Right to Development Holds Panel Discussion on Indigenous Peoples and the Right to Development
The Expert Mechanism on the Right to Development this morning held a panel discussion on indigenous peoples and the right to development.
Brian Keane, Expert Mechanism Member, introducing the panel discussion, said the participation and organisation of indigenous peoples was vital for achieving real progress; without such engagement, programmes could not capture the progress worldwide, nor the knowledge held by indigenous peoples worldwide. Indigenous peoples had the right to self-determination, including sovereignty and the control of their natural resources.
Indigenous peoples had suffered from historic injustices as a consequence, inter alia, of colonisation, preventing them from enjoying the right to development in the context of their own needs and interests and determining their own strategies for development. Mr. Keane said the conversation should be a beginning for lasting collaboration between different United Nations mechanisms that were dedicated to indigenous peoples’ rights.
The panellists were Sharon Peake, Deputy Permanent Representative of Canada to the United Nations Office at Geneva; Minerva Rivas Velarde, International Brain Initiative; Rémi Orsier, Director, Indigenous Peoples' Centre for Documentation, Research and Information; Antine Sonde, Indigenous Representative from Burkina Faso; Valmaine Toki, Chair, United Nations Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples; and Aluki Kotierk, Chair, United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues.
During the discussion, speakers said the realisation of the right to development must be firmly grounded in self-determination, with indigenous peoples exercising genuine agency over all decisions affecting their lives, territories and collective futures. The right to development required meaningful opportunities for indigenous peoples to take decisions that would shape their lives. This required respect for their identities, customary institutions and development priorities, taking into account national, constitutional and legal frameworks.
Several speakers supported closer cooperation between the Expert Mechanism on the Right to Development and the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples through joint dialogues, exchanges of good practices and practical guidance developed with indigenous communities. Speakers trusted that this institutional collaboration would foster a clearer multilateral roadmap, ensuring that the right to development was consistently advanced in full harmony with the fundamental rights of indigenous peoples worldwide.
Speaking in the discussion were Venezuela, Guatemala, Malaysia, Brazil, Mexico and Cuba.
Also speaking was the Cameroon Human Rights Commission. The following non-governmental organizations also spoke: Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development, APG23, Maloca International and Arab Council for Supporting Fair Trials and Human Rights.
The Expert Mechanism on the Right to the Development is a subsidiary body of the Human Rights Council, established in 2019 under resolution 42/23. It provides the Council with thematic expertise on the right to development in searching for, identifying and sharing best practices with Member States and promotes the implementation of the right to development worldwide.
Summaries of the public meetings of the fourteenth session of the Expert Mechanism can be found here, while webcasts can be found here. The programme of work of the Expert Mechanism’s fourteenth session and other documents related to the session can be found here.
The next meeting of the Expert Mechanism will be at 3 p.m. on Wednesday, 28 October 2026, when it will continue and conclude its general debate under item three of the agenda, and take up its agenda item four, “Coordination meeting with other United Nations mechanisms on the Right to Development”. The Mechanism will then issue its conclusions and close its fourteenth session.
Presentation of the Panel on Indigenous Peoples and the Right to Development
BRIAN KEANE, Expert Mechanism Member, introducing the panel discussion, said the participation and organisation of indigenous peoples was vital for achieving real progress; without such engagement, programmes could not capture the progress worldwide, nor the knowledge held by indigenous peoples worldwide. Indigenous peoples had the right to self-determination, including sovereignty and control over their natural resources. Indigenous peoples had suffered from historic injustices as a consequence, inter alia, of colonisation, preventing them from enjoying the right to development in the context of their own needs and interests and determining their own strategies for development. For many indigenous peoples, development had been something done to them rather than by them. The perspectives and objectives of indigenous peoples had been overridden by more powerful actors, and historic injustices perpetuated and continued.
Indigenous peoples had too often been treated as obstacles to development by Western ideas of progress, considered at best as stakeholders, whereas the reality was that they were rights bearers. The panel would examine what it would mean for indigenous peoples to be considered as partners, with their own organizations and institutions, and with their own perspectives on what it meant to live a good life. He hoped the conversation would be a beginning for lasting collaboration between different United Nations mechanisms that were dedicated to indigenous peoples’ rights.
Statements by the Panellists
SHARON PEAKE, Deputy Permanent Representative of Canada to the United Nations Office at Geneva, speaking on how Canada was applying the commitments it had made to indigenous peoples at home, including free, prior and informed consent, on its development cooperation and its companies operating abroad, and what had the country learned that other States could use to make the right to development real for indigenous peoples, said Canada recognised that realising the right to development required processes that were inclusive, sustainable, participatory and respectful of human rights. For indigenous peoples, this must be grounded in recognition of their status as distinct rights holders and their right to self-determination.
Indigenous peoples were not simply stakeholders in, or beneficiaries of, development. Canada’s understanding was informed by its ongoing work toward reconciliation with First Nations, Inuit and Métis. Canada’s model recognised that indigenous peoples already possessed expertise, relationships and solutions that extended across State borders. Governments should support those relationships and remove barriers, rather than unilaterally lead development efforts. These lessons were not a universal template. Approaches must reflect the distinct rights, institutions and priorities of the indigenous peoples concerned. For Canada, development must do more than generate economic growth or deliver benefits. It must respect rights, advance self-determination and enable indigenous peoples to shape decisions affecting their lands, territories, resources and futures.
MINERVA RIVAS VELARDE, International Brain Initiative, speaking on what would it take for research and technology development to recognise and respect indigenous peoples’ data sovereignty, and to treat indigenous peoples as rights holders whose free, prior and informed consent shaped the research itself, rather than as sources of data to be collected, and whether there were safeguards the scientific community should adopt now, before these practices became entrenched, said today, indigenous peoples were carrying their role into a new domain, safeguarding data sovereignty, the fundamental right to choose and control data and give it meaning, a right now at stake in the rapid adoption of artificial intelligence-powered tools and uneven data governance frameworks. Indigenous knowledge must serve as an intellectual compass for the governance of these technologies, not as a footnote to it.
The ethical and legal grounding existed, but its implementation needed
reinforcement. Geopolitical fragmentation was the practical obstacle. Member States and standard-setting bodies should secure indigenous participation, with equal authority, immediately when mandates, membership and procedures of new artificial intelligence and new technology bodies were defined; develop adapted consent mechanisms, including collective decision-making and standing rights of withdrawal, across the entire data and artificial intelligence lifecycle; write sovereignty into operational rules on accountability, oversight, audit and benefit-
sharing; recognise indigenous peoples’ organizations as co-regulators rather than stakeholders; and invest in digital access and in the indigenous institutions that made existing legal recognition real.
ANTINE SONDE, Indigenous Representative from Burkina Faso, speaking on what the right to development meant to his community today, and whether, when development programmes and security responses arrived, communities were being consulted, and what would self-determined development look like if indigenous peoples were setting the priorities, said the first prerequisite for development was the right to life and security. No ethnic affiliation could justify death, persecution, enforced disappearances or forced displacement. The right to development could not become a reality when people lived in fear, lost their territories or were forced to abandon their livelihoods. The protection of life, dignity and the security of communities must therefore be considered a fundamental condition for development, not a secondary issue.
Free, prior, and informed consent must be respected in accordance with applicable international standards. Communities must have access to comprehensive, accessible and understandable information, in languages they understood, so that they could assess the consequences of projects on their territories, their resources and their future. Development must never become a tool for dispossession, exclusion or cultural erasure. Indigenous peoples were not asking for their future to be decided for them. They were asking for their rights to be recognised, for their voices to be heard and for their choices to be respected. The right to development must enable indigenous communities to preserve their mobility, protect their territories, pass on their knowledge to future generations and contribute fully to the peace and prosperity of societies. There could be no true development without the protection of life, without security, without effective participation and without respect for human rights.
REMI ORSIER, Director, Indigenous Peoples' Centre for Documentation, Research and Information, speaking on where he saw the biggest gap between what indigenous peoples had asked for on development and what had actually changed in practice, and what the documentation said about which kinds of participation led to real influence, and which remained symbolic, on a situation that was particularly alarming, said the question was not whether indigenous peoples participated in development; it was whether participation could change the decision. The biggest gap lay between recognition and power. International standards increasingly recognised indigenous peoples’ rights to participate and give or withhold free, prior and informed consent, but too often they were brought in when the most important decisions had already been made. That was not participation; it was notification.
Indigenous peoples must be able to shape the terms of development, to determine their own priorities and strategies for the use of their traditional lands, and must participate in the development plans affecting them with free, prior and informed consent, with the ability to say no to a project affecting them. If development plans treated lands as available for external decision-making, this continued the very exclusion it meant to remedy. Indigenous peoples were not merely beneficiaries of services designed elsewhere; they held knowledge and institutions that could benefit development from the outset. Consent was not the signature collected at the end of a meeting; it was a process that should be respected and had consequences. Early participation was vital, as was integration of the full community, which must be given independent technical, legal and linguistic support to assess human rights impacts. There must also be an effective complaints process.
VALMAINE TOKI, Chair, United Nations Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, said the Mechanism had reaffirmed indigenous peoples’ right to development, and their right to decide and develop the priorities and strategies for exercising that right, and emphasised that States should recognise indigenous peoples as important contributors to sustainable development, rather than perpetuating the stereotype that indigenous peoples were obstacles to development, noting that this had been utilised as a justification for land dispossession. Development affecting indigenous peoples must be grounded in free, prior and informed consent.
The Mechanism had further addressed the negative impact that development projects may have on indigenous rights, highlighting concerns relating to violations of free, prior and informed consent, extractive industries, resource exploitation, disaster risk, cultural heritage and health, and advising that States consider and take measures against the possible impact of resource extraction development on increased disaster risk. It had highlighted the indispensable role of indigenous women as practitioners of sustainable development while drawing attention to the disproportionate harms that development projects may have on indigenous women and girls. The Mechanism had underscored the unique contribution of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples to discussions on development. Further, it had highlighted that the interlinkages between the two Declarations required the constant and active awareness of the context in which indigenous rights should be promoted and protected, and this could be done by the joint work of the two Mechanisms.
ALUKI KOTIERK, Chair, United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, said for indigenous peoples, the right to development began with the right to self-determination. Development built on collective rights, tradition and respect for ancestors, while also looking forward. Indigenous peoples’ concepts of
development were about values like reciprocity, solidarity and sustainability. Too often, development paradigms portrayed indigenous peoples as “obstacles” to development and that their cultures were contradictory to economic development. Indigenous peoples had paid the price for this kind of development designed by others. Real development strengthened indigenous cultures, languages, lands and ways of life.
Meaningful progress had been made, yet serious obstacles remained, especially regarding self-determination, free, prior and informed consent, and land rights. These tensions were the sharpest where natural resources were concerned. And in many legal systems, collective rights were not yet fully recognised. Participation in decision-making was a further challenge, yet development was most effective when the peoples themselves were directly involved at all stages. Resources dedicated to indigenous issues remained limited. Ms. Kotierk invited the Expert Mechanism to draw on the Forum's many recommendations on development as well as the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in its work.
Discussion
In the ensuing discussion, speakers said development must be based on the culture and traditional forms of organisation of indigenous peoples, as well as their political participation. It was important to build public policies which respected diversity and traditional knowledge. International cooperation needed to be enhanced, and conditions ensured so that communities could actively participate in development, defining their own priorities, and preserving their identity, culture and ancestral knowledge. The right to development could only be realised if indigenous communities had the right to determine their own future.
Free, prior and informed consent and consultation were closely linked to the recognition of the right to self-determination of indigenous peoples, and should promote genuine dialogue processes, built up by respecting ways of organisation, preventing conflict, strengthening co-existence and social cohesion. How could both Mechanisms draw up joint guidelines to help States include indigenous concerns in their policies, a speaker asked.
The right to development required meaningful opportunities for indigenous peoples to take decisions that would shape their lives. This required respect for their identities, customary institutions and development priorities, taking into account national, constitutional and legal frameworks. National and international planning should provide space for indigenous peoples’ knowledge, customary practices and development models. Access to education, healthcare, connectivity and economic opportunities should respond to community needs while safeguarding cultural heritage and the environment. It was also important to ensure the participation of indigenous women, youth, persons with disabilities and older persons, among others.
Several speakers supported closer cooperation between the Expert Mechanism on the Right to Development and the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples through joint dialogues, exchanges of good practices and practical guidance developed with indigenous communities. Speakers trusted that this institutional collaboration would foster a clearer multilateral roadmap, ensuring that the right to development was consistently advanced in full harmony with the fundamental rights of indigenous peoples worldwide.
The realisation of the right to development must be firmly grounded in self-determination, with indigenous peoples exercising genuine agency over all decisions affecting their lives, territories and collective futures. This understanding was particularly critical in the context of the accelerating global demand for critical minerals required by the energy transition. While these resources were essential to advancing sustainable development and international climate commitments, the transition could not come at the expense of human rights. Development initiatives affecting indigenous territories must strictly adhere to international standards, including free, prior and informed consent.
The right to development was key, as there were many unfulfilled promises made to indigenous peoples. When human rights defenders were silenced, a whole community lost its eyes and ears, and free, prior and informed consent was silenced. Access to courts could help prevent harm, and indigenous women must be given support to access their rights.
Closing Remarks
SHARON PEAKE, Deputy Permanent Representative of Canada to the United Nations Office at Geneva, said development should begin with the recognition of rights, self-determination and indigenous leadership, not with predetermined projects or outcomes. Indigenous peoples must be able to lead development based on their own priorities, as well as participate through their own representative institutions in decisions initiated by others, with the resources and information needed to influence those decisions. Ultimately, development must do more than generate economic growth or deliver benefits. It must respect rights, advance self-determination and enable indigenous peoples to shape decisions affecting their lands, territories, resources and futures.
MINERVA RIVAS VELARDE, International Brain Initiative, said it had been a rich discussion and addressing the colonial risk was an ongoing process, which must be recognised and acts taken to stop it. Frameworks were emerging, and they needed to be monitored and supported in their implementation. On institutional gaps, silos in policy making and legislation had cost indigenous communities a lot.
ANTINE SONDE, Indigenous Representative from Burkina Faso, said it was a relief for indigenous peoples to be able to speak to this distinguished podium: it was extremely important. Very often, African States unanimously, at each international meeting, said there were no indigenous peoples in Africa, but there were hidden realities that were not taken into account, with peoples who had undergone historic marginalisation, and States did not wish to recognise this. The issue of self-determination did not imply that communities wished to withdraw from the State: it was not an action implying claims, but it should enable communities to express viewpoints and be involved.
REMI ORSIER, Director, Indigenous Peoples' Centre for Documentation, Research and Information, said the key expression used by all participants was “free, prior and informed consent”, which should be at the centre of all initiatives. He was also delighted to see the participation of indigenous peoples in the work of the United Nations system. To indigenous peoples, he urged them to contact the Centre, which would be delighted to support their work.
BRIAN KEANE, Expert Mechanism Member, concluding the discussion, said that over the course of the last three days, a lot had been heard, and this was a fitting panel to end the discussions. What had struck him was that every issue discussed really hit indigenous peoples the hardest, and they were the best positioned to help the world find solutions to these problems, including food insecurity and climate change. This was an interesting moment in development, and the topic of the discussion led all to consider “what was development, how was it measured, were these the relevant indicators, and who decided what development looked like”. He hoped the discussions would lead to a thematic study, including best practices and recommendations to Governments.
__________
Produced by the United Nations Information Service in Geneva for use of the media;
not an official record. English and French versions of our releases are different as they are the product of two separate coverage teams that work independently.
M26.005E