Yet, a situation emerged which we found C'µrious. Mr. Niall MacDermot, the chairman of the legal commission, was frequently at odds with the Native delegates. His manner was seen by some as high-handed.and obstructive~ even disrespectful, though he constantly made reference to his own commitment to objectivity and impartiality. The conflict emerged as the delegates of various nations attempted to ex,plain their defensive position against the displacing and extractive processes of Western Civilization. The following is an exchange between Segwalise of the Hau de no sau nee delegation (and other delegates) and chairman MacDermot. It took place during an attempt to define the wording to a resolution that would protect indigenous land rights. ' Segwalise: "[We want] ... protection from the processes by which governments can acquire ownership without the agreement of those presently on the land." MacDermot: " ... would give this right to anybody ..." Segwalise: "That's right." • MacDermot: " . .. would be not only through indigenous people's lands, it would mean a highway anywhere ..." Segwalise: "That's right, yes." MacDermot: " . .. because anybody, if they had a choi~e, if they had the power to refuse a highway ..." Segwalise: "You got it." Laughter. MacDermot: "Yes, well, depends on what kind of society • , you want." Segwalise: "Right! " Laughter. MacDermot: "But I am afraid you'll have great difficulty getting any modern state to acc;ept the idea that the.re q.n be no infringement on your land rights wjthout your consent. I think you are asking a bit too much." • • Segwalise: "We are .not saying1without our consent-we are saying without the agreement of those who presently own the land." MacDermot: "That is consent. Agreement is consent ..." Segwalise: "And I mean, if they think that they are just going to:ram anything through-I mean-throughout the entire Western Hemisphere, every doggone country that occu- . pies our land over there does it-they just ram the road right through the middle of Nicaragua (Mesquito country) wi~hout consulting anyone. They just ram roads through all over the place and this'is to bring a screeching halt to that." MacDermot: "Ah, well . .. I think your solution is a bit too drastic to be practicable." ' Jane Penn (delegate from California): "Mr. Chairman, this business about lan'a ... we in California, of the Morongue - India.n Reservation passed an ordinance within our tribe and it took three elections but it did pass and the Secretary of Interior recognized its passage and demanded that the Bureau of Indian Affairs abide by our ordinance. It's standing todaythis took place in 1958. So that this does happen. Any rights of way for anything must go to the people for full vote to agree. This can be done. I hope that will give you information." MacDermot: "Yes." Jose Mendoza (delegate from Panama): "A new wording. The lands occupied by the Indian nations are their property and are under their control. The lands,that have been taken away by the various governments, or private individuals, and· that the Indians need now, should be returned, in accordance with procedures by which the Indian nations have equal standing with the Western governments represented. This with particular emphasis on the demand for equal standing as a nation-because if this is not recognized, the solution will be an imposed one and not an agreement. Mr. Chairman, in one of your phrases you used the word, to "consult." Well, as long as ,we are not recognized as equal nations, the consultation July 1978 RAIN Page 5 will be nothing more than simply to be informed-'Your lands are about to be occupied.' And that's to be consulted." MacDermot: "The difficulty that I still see is that it would give indigenous peoples a greater right to their land than anyone else has to their land." Murmur: "That's because no qne else has any rights left at all!" • Segwalise: "If we work on the basic premise that the indigenous peoples, by prior existence in the hemisphere, have prior land rights to those laws that were imported and that our prior rights were such that we did not allow those kinds of things to go on amongst ourselves-then,we are reenforcing the premise that w~ are not going to allow these things to go on. The Six Nation lands and the Lakotah lands are not part of the United States. The United States .do·es not have ownership where it can just blatantly run its roads through our lands. It has to go in there and consult with us." MacDermot: "I know that is your contention and we've put that forward ... I am afraid that you are focusing your mind too much on your own particular problem." • What ostensibly began as a simple task of defining precise wording for the indigenous position on th.e right to own their own territories turned quickly into something larger. It became apparent very early on that the position being put forth by the Indian Natipns w_as making Chairman _MacDermot uncomfortable. Nonetheless, he continually referred to his own objectivity, claiming that he was primarily concerned with arriving at a position acceptable to all conc_erned. Yet, as we looked about the room, observing the total situation, the physical set:up, (again) the time element, and even the very idea of so-called objectivity, it became apparent that the clash of cultures (of world~views) represented in that room was inevitable. • In contrast to the full circle oi our internal meetings, the Indian delegates had been seated in long rows, one behind the other, and facing a raised platform, which held a long, thick table where the chairman and the official rapporteurs sat. The offi.cials thus towered above the delegates, commanding attention. It was no wonder that some of the delegates continually and'mistakenly referred to the chairman as "judge." The matter of the time limi'tation was important. Jose Mendoza, Guaimi from Panama, had expressed it best when he said: "We the Indian people, when we gather together, we do not look at the clock. We do not have minutes. We have a whole _lifetime to talk, because it is the problems of our people, of our lives." As chairman, Mr. MacDermot seemed at times so preoccupied with definition and the time element that often speakers had difficulty getting their points across. This was interesting because if there was one question upon which the various Indian nations were intimately united it was on the right of Indian peoples to ownership and control of their own territories. Furthermore, the many forms and processes by which Natural World peoples have been dispossessed were also intimately analyzed and u·nderstood. There was no confusion on this. This matter of so-called objectivity is an important one, particularly in the context of the Native position being put forth in Geneva. ·The traditional Native position is so funda- / mentally oppoSt!d to the whole .process of Western .Civilization that it is very difficult for people who are coming out of that context, and who represent states (wkich are also products of it) not to be somewhat shaken by the presentation ofit. The concept of impartiality, of "objectivity" comes out of the . same confusion that tells us that Man can stand "apart" from Nature. It is a curious notion that tells us an individual can step out ofhis place in history-and that in this way he can better judge the truth. • Reprinted from Akwes.asne Notes, Mohawk Nation, via Rooseveltown, NY 13683, December, 1977.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NTc4NTAz