by Jonathan Liljeblad

The Rise of Indigenous Rights

Commencing in the latter part of the 20th century and continuing into the 21 st , a global effort gathered momentum through different avenues to recognize and address the concept of Indigenous rights. Indigenous peoples are present throughout the world and their existence predates the current global system of nation-states. Each nation-state has followed its own approach towards Indigenous cultures, varying in degree between actions spanning a spectrum from reconciliation and accord to marginalization and outright extermination. The authority by which nation-states deal with Indigenous
peoples is tied to a history of European empires that in the 1648 Peace of Westphalia created a global
system based on nation-states holding sovereignty, wherein a nation-state holds exclusive control over
all population, territory, and resources within its borders.

takayna country, lutuwitra (Tasmania) Australia. Source: Jennifer Adams

The conceptual primacy of nation-state sovereignty served to remove Indigenous civilizations from the
global order and subjugated them to non-Indigenous power, first from colonial administration and then
later national governments. The past few decades, however, has hosted a range of movements to erode
the status of nation-state sovereignty. Such erosion has come both from above, in the sense of a
burgeoning growth in the number of international institutions and international treaties that brought
nation-states within the rules of an expanding array of international regimes covering a host of issue
areas, and from below, in the sense of non-state social movements and social networks operating
transnationally to advance particular causes against nation-states. Among the issue areas and causes
has been the subject of Indigenous peoples.

Much of the international attention on Indigenous peoples has centered on the question of Indigenous rights. Of particular note was the work of United Nations (UN) institutions such as the Human Rights
Council (HRC), Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), and the Working Group on Indigenous Populations (WGIP). Their efforts led to the formation of the UN Permanent Forum on
Indigenous Issues (PFII) and articulation of Indigenous rights in international law, both through existing
human rights treaties like the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ICESCR)
or dedicated Indigenous rights instruments like the International Labor Organization (ILO) Convention
Concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples (No. 169) or the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous
Peoples (DRIP). Concurrent to such broad global efforts has been more issue-specific activities such as
the World Heritage system, whose advisory bodies—the International Centre for Study of Preservation
and Restoration of Cultural Property (ICCROM), International Council on Monuments and Sites
(ICOMOS), and International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN)—have issued guidelines to
promote the existence and exercise of Indigenous rights to cultural and natural heritage.

Potential Issues in Indigenous Rights

Wixáritari peyote ceremony. Photo taken for the Wixáritari People by Anaid Velsaco

Much of the work for Indigenous rights is driven by a desire to resolve the legacies of harms done in the past to Indigenous civilizations under the Westphalian system. While laudable, it is still insufficient. If the ulterior purpose is a resolution of the past, then it is not enough to implement a rights-based system. Beyond the confines of a rights-based system, there is the larger space of worldviews spanning perspectives drawn from different values, unique experiences, and diverse ways of thinking. Such phenomena are important because they direct decisions by various peoples about how they understand life and what they want from it. In essence, they explain why people believe what they believe and why they do what they do. Thus, they offer some understanding about purpose, not just with respect to the application of rights but to the manner of living that rights are supposed to protect.
The work of a rights-based system carries the risk of conflict in that an aggrieved party claims a right
either to halt a perceived aggression from another party or to force some ameliorative action from
another party, suggesting action with a tenor of antagonization. The danger of conflict only furthers the harmful legacies of the past, which pitted imperial powers and then later national governments in
antagonistic relationships with Indigenous peoples. The motivation to resolve the legacies of the past
calls for work to prevent or mitigate conflict instead of sustaining or inciting it. As a result, it is necessary to work on deeper levels to bring non-Indigenous and Indigenous perspectives together.

Finding Greater Resolution

There are examples of such kinds of work being done. Within cultural and environmental issue areas, a
host of actors are working to build relationships between non-Indigenous and Indigenous perspectives
to facilitate management systems over sites carrying cultural and environmental significance at local,
national, and international levels. Of particular note, the World Heritage system has sought to promote
the involvement of Indigenous actors in decision-making with respect to culture and environment
associated with Indigenous peoples, articulating principles such as self-determination, free prior
informed consent (FPIC), and equal treatment in governance systems.

Here too, however, some caution should be noted. If they are to be effective in resolving the legacies of the past, the above efforts must operate to nurture relationships with social capital—that is, meaningful relationships involving trust, communication, and familiarity. This is not to suggest that there is always consensus, but rather to provide a basis for finding mutually agreeable outcomes or otherwise, at minimum, a means of finding peaceful co-existence. Building sustainable relationships calls for efforts to integrate diverse perspectives in discourse, such as encouraging Indigenous voices to be heard alongside non-Indigenous voices and, more importantly, listening to Indigenous perspectives as having value commensurate to non-Indigenous ones.

The recently published book: Indigenous Perspectives on Sacred Natural Sites: Culture, Governance and Conservation, edited by: Jonathan Liljeblad and Bas Verschuuren

A reflection of the above philosophy is the book entitled Indigenous Perspectives on Sacred Natural Sites: Culture, Governance and Conservation (2019, Routledge, Jonathan Liljeblad and Bas Verschuuren, eds.). The motivation behind the book is to facilitate self-expression by Indigenous authors about their respective approaches towards sacred natural sites. The World Heritage system has pursued an agenda in recent years in support of conservation for sacred natural sites, and the efforts have encompassed sacred natural sites of Indigenous peoples. Much of the published work, however, largely comes from non-Indigenous authors, and so leads to cases of non-Indigenous experts writing about Indigenous cultures and the resulting exclusion of Indigenous voices from considerations of their own heritage. The subject of sacred sites carries a sensitive nature, particularly in situations when it is central to historically marginalized Indigenous cultures. In the spirit of resolving the legacies of the past and finding a more promising future, the book seeks to place Indigenous voices alongside existing non-Indigenous work on sacred natural sites and thereby enrich considerations within this area of conservation. The authors encourage other efforts pursuing similar goals and welcome discussions on ways to do so.

The post Paths to Peace, Sharing the Sacred: Finding Meaning for a Common Future first appeared on Sacred Natural Sites.

The recognition that “other-than-human” entities have legal personality can be seen as an emerging eco-spiritual paradigm around the world. The Romans introduced jus gentium which provided the conceptual basis of “public trusts” and of “juristic persons”. Many sacred natural sites (SNS) are characterised as biodiverse habitats that have formed in response to ritual protection in the context of animistic beliefs rather than a ‘conservation ethic’. As far as many indigenous and local people are concerned, the numina that inhabit and enspirit most SNSs are “juristic persons” in all but name, and the numina engage in “spiritual governance” (Studley and Awang 2016). This article reviews the history and recent developments on this topic.

Recognition of other-than-human entities as juristic persons
Roman law recognised both natural persons and persona ficta, which were later known as “juristic persons” (Gierke 1868). Natural persons is the term used to refer to human beings who have certain legal rights automatically upon birth, which expand as a child becomes an adult. In contrast a legal or juristic person refers generally to an entity or legal subject that is not a human being, but one on which society has decided to recognise as a “subject of rights” and obligations (Sohm 1892;Shelton 2015). In the context of enspirited SNS (inhabited by a numina) the concept may be better understood with reference to the literature on “other-than-human personhood” (Hallowell 2002), “new animism” (Harvey 2006 Page 3) and “legal experiences with animated entities” (Petrazycki 2011).

Various attempts have been made since Roman times for according legal status to other-than-human persons (OTHP).

In a seminal article, ‘Should Trees Have Standing?’, Stone (1976) highlighted the absurdities of granting legal personality to corporations and ships but not animals, trees, rivers and ecosystems. He argued for conferring legal personality and rights on the environment because, as a rights-holder, the natural object would:

“have a legally recognised worth and dignity in its own right, and not merely to serve as a means to benefit ‘us’….”

Stone’s innovation was to propose that the interests of nature should be represented (in court) by a guardian and that the burden of proof should rest upon the party that has allegedly compromised the integrity of the ecosystem or organism.

Stone’s comments echoed remarks made by Justice William O. Douglas who argued in a landmark environmental law case Sierra Club v. Morton 1972 that environmental objects should have standing to sue in court because:

“Contemporary public concern for protecting nature’s ecological equilibrium should lead to the conferral of standing upon environmental objects to sue for their own preservation..” (US Supreme Court 1972)

In the years since Stone’s and Douglas’s comments, various innovations in law have allowed for the concept of juristic personhood to be expanded.

Recognising Mother Earth or Pachamama as a juristic person
In 2008, Ecuador became the first country in the world to declare in its constitution that nature is a legal person. Articles 10 and 71-74 of the Constitution of the Ecuador National Assembly 2008; recognize the inalienable rights of ecosystems, gives individuals the authority to petition on the behalf of ecosystems, and requires the government to remedy violations of nature’s rights (Republic of Ecuador 2011)

Bolivia followed Ecuador in 2009 by similarly giving Constitutional protection to natural ecosystems which were amended in 2010 (Legislative Assembly of Bolivia 2010). The amendments redefining the country’s mineral deposits as “blessings”, established new rights for nature and the appointment of an ombudsman to defend or represent Mother Earth.

The constitutional changes made by Bolivia and Ecuador resulted in a “Pachamama movement” that has spread to sub-Saharan Africa, Australia, Canada, India, Nepal, New Zealand, UK and USA and to “Harmony with Nature” resolutions in the UN (2009 2016 2015). Efforts have also been made to secure a Universal Declaration of the Rights of Mother Earth at the UN but these have not been forthcoming to date (Weston and Bollier 2013).

The Ganges and its tributaries – declared as multiple juristic persons in 2017 [Permission from Richard Haley]

In 2014, New Zealand was the first nation on earth to give up formal ownership of a National Park under the aegis of the Te Urewera Act 2014 and declare the area known by the local Tuhoe as Te Urewera, a legal person (The New Zealand Parliamentary Counsel Office 2014).

Personhood means that lawsuits to protect the land (Te Urewera) can be brought on behalf of the land itself, obviating the need to show harm to a human being. The new legal entity is now administered by the Te Urewera Board which comprises joint Tuhoe and Crown membership who are empowered to file lawsuits on behalf of Te Urewera and  “to act on behalf of, and in the name of, Te Urewera” and “to provide governance for Te Urewera” (The New Zealand Parliamentary Counsel Office 2014).

The Board must consider Tuhoe “spirituality” and give expression to tuhoetanga (Tuhoe identity and culture) and the Tuhoe concepts that underpin nurturance, namely: mana (authority, identity), mauri (life-force), kaitiaki (spiritual guardians), tikanga (traditional custom), ture (societal guidelines), tohu (signs and signals), tapu (sacredness), muru (social deterrent), and rahui (temporary bans) (The New Zealand Parliamentary Counsel Office 2014).

New Zealand followed up by declaring that the Whanganui River was a legal person after 170 years of litigation from the Maori (Pearlman 2017). The House of Representatives passed the Te Awa Tupua (Whanganui River Claims Settlement) Bill at its third reading on 15 March 2017 (Scoop News 2017). The legislation established a new legal framework for the Whanganui River (or Te Awa Tupua) predicated on a set of overarching “intrinsic values,” or Tupuate Kawa (New Zealand Government 2016).

Furthermore in a “statement of significance” (schedule 8) recognition is also given to the numina or kaitiaki (Jenkins et al 2016) that inhabit each of the 240 plus rapids (ripo) on the Whanganui River and are associated with a distinct hapu (sub-tribe):

“The kaitiaki provide insight, guidance, and premonition in relation to matters affecting the Whanganui River, its resources and life in general and the hapu invoke (karakia) the kaitiaki for guidance in times of joy, despair, or uncertainty for the guidance and insight they can provide”.

The legislation makes provision for two Te Pou Tupua or guardians appointed jointly from nominations made by iwi (Maori confederation of tribes) with interests in the Whanganui River and the Crown. Their role is to “act and speak on behalf of the Te Awa Tupua … and protect the health and wellbeing of the river” (New Zealand Government 2016).

On the 20^th March 2017, the High Court of Uttarakhand in their adjudication during Salim v State of Uttarakhand and Others 2017 declared that the:

“Ganga and Yamuna Rivers and all their (115) tributaries and streams…. are juristic persons with all the corresponding rights duties and liabilities of a living person” (Uttarakhand High Court 2017a)

The court’s decision was necessary because both rivers are “losing their very existence” and both “are sacred and revered and presided over by goddesses” (“Ganga Maa” and “Yamuna”) (Uttarakhand High Court 2017a)

The court appointed 3 officials to act as legal custodians responsible for conserving and protecting the rivers and their tributaries and ordered a management board be established within three months.

Expanding on their previous judgment (of 20 March 2017), the High Court of Uttarakhand re-examined a previous (failed) petition namely Miglani v State of Uttarakhand and Others and declared on 31 March 2017 that the Ganges and its Himalayan ecosystem were juristic persons. In contrast to the earlier judgment, the court recognised the role of other riparian states (under the aegis of an inter-state council), community participation and the importance of extending juristic personhood to the Himalayan ecosystem. It appointed 6 government officials to act as persons in loco parentis of the geographic features in the State of Uttarakhand and permitted the co-option of seven local representatives (Uttarakhand High Court 2017b).

The judgment quotes extensively from “Secret Abode of Fireflies” (Singh 2009) which underlines the sacredness of mountains (as the abode of deities), the sacredness of specific Indian trees and plants, and emphasises the “rights for nature”.

On the 2^nd May 2017 it was publically announced in El Tiempo that the constitutional court of Colombia had declared that the Atrato River Basin was a “subject of rights” (i.e. a juristic person) and merited special constitutional protection (ABColombia 2017). The court called on the state to protect and revive the river and its tributaries. The state has been given 6 months to eradicate illegal mining and to begin to decontaminate the river (of mercury) and reforest areas affected by illegal mining (44,000ha). The court also ordered the national government to exercise legal guardianship and representation of the rights of the river together with the indigenous ethnic communities, mostly Emberas, that live in the Atrato river basin in Choco. Hopefully the legislation will allow the Emberas to secure standing and protection for some of their jaikatuma or spirit mountains (JusticiayPas 2009) and help to defend the ten Sitios Sagrados Naturales (or SNS) in Choco (CRIC undated ; OIA undated).

The African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR) resolved (8-22 May 2017) to “protect Sacred Natural Sites and Territories”. This was in response to a submission (29 March 2016) from ABN and GF for “a call for legal recognition of SNS and territories and their customary governance systems”. The call, however, was predicated on “Earth Jurisprudence” (Cullinan 2015) under the aegis of a pantheistic/panentheistic worldview (Berry 1996, Harding 2007, Lovelock 1979) rather than the animistic worldview that is common among most indigenous people who protect SNS (Studley 2014)

Careperro: a sacred spirit mountain (or Jaikatuma in Emberan) and SNS, near Murindo, Colombia
[Permission from Producciones El Retorno]

Although the semantics are different, most of the indigenous people who live closest to SNS (Studley 2014) accept other-than-human personhood, experience culturally specific legal relationships with enspirited entities predicated on contractual reciprocity, and regularly invoke their numina, thus empowering them to exercise spiritual governance over their SNS.

Currently many SNS’s in the homelands of indigenous people are rendered “invisible” in the eyes of organisations such as IUCN and Indigenous and Community Conserved Areas (ICCAs) because they are owned and governed by other-than-human persons. By recognizing SNS’s as juristic persons with standing predicated on spiritual governance by OTHP hopefully the “scales will fall from the eyes” of the conservation community leading to their international recognition and local protection.

For the last 100 years, courts in India have recognized that idols, deities and temples are juristic persons and within the last ten years this has expanded to include mother earth, “nature”, rivers and ecosystems. Given that a legal precedent has been established, surely it is time to re-coin and update Stone (1975) as it appears to be “absurd to grant legal personality” to temples, idols, deities, rivers, mountains, forests, meadows, and air but not animals or enspirited SNS in their totality!

The post Declaring Sacred Natural Sites as juristic persons first appeared on Sacred Natural Sites.

Next month in Hawaii conservationists of all sorts and from all over the globe will meet again for the 6^th World Conservation Congress in Hawaii. Sacred Natural Sites will again be on the agenda and native Hawaiians and park staff will be there to represent the work that they have been doing on sacred natural sites and protected areas. These are some of the foremost events:

• Book Launch: Asian Sacred Natural Sites: Philosophy and Practice in Protected Areas and Conservation. A co-publication of Sacred Natural Sites Initiative and Biodiversity Network Japan. Saturday the 3rd of September, 13:00 – 14:00, Room 318A.
• Session: From Rhetoric to Reality: exploring laws, customary governance and no-go area policies for the protection of sacred natural sites. Sunday the 4th of September, 11:00 – 13:00, Room 315
• Poster: Sacred Natural Sites in Brazil: A Collaborative Research. Saturday
  

  Verschuuren & Furuta (eds) 2016. Asian Sacred Natural Sites: Philosophy and Practice in Protected Areas and Conservation. Routledge, London.

  the 3rd September 2016, 13:00 – 13:30, Screen 2

Other important session on cultural and spiritual significance of nature that will surely build on work involving sacred natural sites are those organised by the IUCN Specialist group on Culture and Spiritual Values of Protected Areas:

• Workshop: Cultural and spiritual significance of nature in the governance and management of protected and conserved areas and World Heritage Sites. Monday, the 5th of September, 8:30 – 10:30 am in Room 315. The session ID number is #WCC_10211.
• Protected Planet Pavilion: Cultural, spiritual and sacred importance of nature in Protected and Conserved Areas. Friday 2 September from 12:00 to 13:00, protected Planet Pavilion

Still looking for more ways to engage with sacred natural sites? See how they play a role in some of the thematic journey that have been organised to help lead people with a specific interest through the congress. Try the journey on conservation and spirituality with a high level segment involving representatives of the worlds main religions or the “Nature Culture” Journey that will advance effective conservation practice through integration of nature and culture.

The post Sacred Natural Sites at the IUCN World Conservation Congress in Hawaii first appeared on Sacred Natural Sites.

The theme of the contest is historical, natural (not built) sacred sites: sacred groves and hills, water bodies, trees, stones and other natural objects where our ancestors used to pray, heal, sacrifice, commune and perform other rituals.

The contest’s grand prize is 1,000 euros, and there is also a youth prize of 200 euros – for those up to, and including, age 16; and a special ‘Ural Peoples’ prize of 300 euros. In addition, a number of special prizes will be handed out in the following categories: grove, sacred tree, stone, water body, offering, pain of the sacred grove, story, nature conservation and more. Images taken in other parts of the world are welcome too.

Photos can be uploaded until 31 October 2016 to the website here.

Winners will be honoured at an award ceremony in Tartu, Estonia, at the end of 2016.

The International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) considers sacred natural sites to be the oldest natural protection areas of humanity, and of Estonia. Many indigenous peoples have sacred natural sites that belong to a common heritage of humanity.

The photography contest is taking place for the ninth time and is organised by heritage organisations active in Estonia: the Hiite Maja Foundation, the union of the followers of the Estonian indigenous religion Maavalla koda, and the University of Tartu Centre of Sacred Natural Sites. The contest is sponsored by the Kindred Peoples Programme, the Estonian Folklore Archives, Wiedemanni Translation Bureau and many other organisations and enterprises.

Previous year’s grand prize winning photos:

• The Grand prize of 2012, The Tammealuse Grove in Virumaa, by Ain Raal
  The Grand prize of 2013, World Prayer in Mari El, by Sergei Tanõgin
  The Grand Prize of 2014, The Põhjatu Spring in Saaremaa, Pähkla village, by Jannno Loide
  The Grand Prize of 2015, The Oak of Tamme-Lauri in Urvaste, by Martin Mar.

More information can be found here

Press release: 1.07.2016
Information:Mana Kaasik; Phone: +372 56 93 212; kuva@hiis.ee

The post An International photography contest invites you to photograph sacred natural sites first appeared on Sacred Natural Sites.

There is a clear biological and cultural value to the groves. However, the groves are increasingly endangered because underneath them lays gold. The threat of illegal mining and that of the government leasing land to mining companies is very real. In many places sacred groves have already been destroyed.

It is the wish of the community that the groves will continue to exist and to be protected under biocultural community protocols (BCPs). BCPs are meant to enable local communities to claim rights to land and resources which consequently guarantees the well-being of the communities.

The Ghanian NGO CIKOD assists indigenous communities’ to mobilize their traditional knowledge and culture with ‘community organizational development tools’ which helps all the communities in the region to respond to threats. The tools help communities to get organised and put the Tingandem in the driving seat in a joint action against the invasion of mining companies in the region.

For more information on the case and a list of the community organizational development tools see the case on the website and watch this filmclip of a Tindaana explaining the value of the groves.

By: Rianne Doller

The post Community empowerment by mobilizing traditional governance to protect sacred groves in Ghana. first appeared on Sacred Natural Sites.

This book will look to the notion of a sacred site as defined by its indigenous custodians. As such, sacred sites can be natural or human-made, can be situated in any geographic location, can be closed or open to non-indigenous visitors, and can exist inside or outside of international or national designations such as protected areas or conservation zones. The primary interest of the volume is to provide a platform for indigenous custodians to explain how they view and treat the sacred through a written account that is available to a global audience.

Indigenous views about the sacred may differ from those held at the international level. At the international level, sacred sites are defined in different ways. This volume seeks to allow expression of indigenous views of the sacred in order to illuminate similarities and differences of indigenous ways from existing international perspectives in both definition and approach. Therefore, chapters should cover the following issues:
1. Description of the indigenous sacred site and its significance to its indigenous custodians,
2. Presentation of the indigenous governance and management system used by indigenous custodians over the sacred site, and
3. Discussion of the major concerns held by indigenous custodians about their management over the sacred site.

Indigenous Custodians and their supporters are explaining their points of view on the governace and management of sacred natural sites during the 2012 World Conservation Congress at Jeju Island, South korea. Photo: Bas Verschuuren.

Towards this purpose, the proposed volume seeks contributions that provide examples of indigenous sacred sites governance and management, with each example treated as a separate chapter. The goal is to highlight indigenous approaches and present concerns regarding sacred sites management. The preference is to encourage indigenous authors, particularly indigenous custodians of sacred sites, but all voices that further the goals of the proposed book are invited. We therefore welcome joint authorship, especially those involving indigenous custodians.

Authors are asked to first indicate expressions of interest by 1st of October 2016. Manuscripts of the papers will be submitted early 2017. The book will be compiled and edited by Jonathan Liljeblad (PhD, MD) Marcia Leuzinger (PhD) and Bas Verschuuren (Coordinator for the Sacred Natural Sites Initiative)

Enquiries and submissions should be directed to Jonathan Liljeblad at jonathanliljeblad@gmail.com

The full call for contributions can be downloaded here.

The post Indigenous custodians’ voices amplified in forthcoming publication! first appeared on Sacred Natural Sites.

The Calamian Tagbanwa are fishing people whose customary rules regulate fishing, including to define were fishing is allowed. Other areas can only be entered for cultural use when  permission of the spirits is obtained. Regrettable an influx of migrants and youngsters who do not adhere to the customary rules threaten these sacred areas. Their more modern ways of fishing are less sustainable and traditionally defined restricted areas and fishing regulations are not respected. The Calamian Tagbanwa believe these violations upset the spirits and the giant mythological octopus, Kunlalabyut, who live in the lakes.

Luckily most youngsters still respect the teachings of the elders. A solution to ensure the maintenance of the sacred areas is to train the elders and communities to react to the threats posed to their lands. One aspect of that is to enable elders and communities to organise meetings where their traditional knowledge is taught to the next generation. In this way the younger generation is continuously engaged with the sacred knowledge and customary law.

For more information see the site description on the site or read the case study that Arlene Sampang prepared for the book: Sacred Natural Sites, conserving nature & culture, chapter 24.

By: Rianne Doller

The post The loss of cultural knowledge and the threat that brings to the sacred lands on Coron Island, Philipines first appeared on Sacred Natural Sites.

The Winti belief emphasizes protection of the ecosystem. This is partly out of fear for repercussions from spirits. For example it is forbidden to harvest certain plants and sacred areas can only be entered after elaborate explanations of the reasons of the visit to the spirits. Spirits have to be feared, respected and appeased. For example no Winti would ever assist in felling a Ceiba tree, a Parkia tree or a strangler fig because they do not want to disturb their supernatural inhabitants. 

A ritual herbal bath for happiness and good luck, Paramaribo

The main threats to the sacred groves are multinationals who are interested in hardwood, minerals, oil and other natural resources out of the groves. This poses a danger to the Winti because the state often owns the land and subsoil and Winti’s sacred places are not recognized by the state.

In new planning policies however Winti followers are slowly recognised as legitimate partners. Efforts for mapping Winti sacred places are under development. Also many Winti followers joined in a coalition with the Amazon Conservation Teamwho support Trio and Wayana Indians. Also Ndyuka maroons are assisted with mapping their territories. One small success already made is by an association of Maroon village leaders who now participate in decision making on exploitation of the land.

Winti belief and African healing traditions have travelled from Africa to Suriname and from Suriname to Netherlands in western Europe. Prof. Dr. Tinde van Andel at Wageningen University and Naturalis in the Netherlands, researches the medicinal and spiritual use of plans by Winti along this route and has published on the need for conservation of Winti sites in Suriname. See for more information the case study on the website.

by: Rianne Doller

The post Conservation experience: Mapping Winti practices and sacred groves for protection of the forests of Suriname. first appeared on Sacred Natural Sites.

“(…) After seating them, the Shimbang Shaman prays to them for the well being of the villagers and for saving Ganjeong.”

Photo: Bas Verschuuren, 2012

– Hong Sunyoung, expert and researcher

The Gureombi’s sacred sites, and with it the traditional rituals, are directly threatened by the construction of a navy base near Gangjeong village. Development of the base conflicts with the original lifestyle of the villagers and the fear is that presence of the base will permanently change the unique lifestyle of the villagers. This is both a danger for the environment and for the socio-cultural life of the villagers as the two are closely connected.

A difficulty in protecting  Gureombi sacred site, and many others, is that they are not registered and often only visited by the older generation. Destroying these holy natural sites will bring an end to an age old lifestyle and might destroy it forever.  Safe Jeju now is part of an international protest campaign aiming to stop development of the navy base. For more information about protests or threats to the site see the  ‘Save Jeju now’ website or read the online  case study that was developed after the SNS initiative visited the site and recorded the traditional ceremony in 2012 as part of a group of international sacred natural sites custodians.

By: Rianne Doller

The post Conservation experience: Invite the gods and goddesses for protection, Juju Island, South Korea first appeared on Sacred Natural Sites.

The report is based on a statement, by custodian communities from six African countries and provides a body of legal and policy support for the custodians’ statement, drawn both from the African Charter as well as from international and domestic law.

Sacred natural sites are the source of life. Sacred natural sites are where we come from, the heart of life. They are our roots and our inspiration. We cannot live without our sacred natural sites and we are responsible for protecting them. Source: Custodians’ Statement.

It reminds us that the African Charter commits member states to respect and maintain plural legal systems, and recommends that African countries should recognise a priori legal systems as part of their commitment to a proud African identity, to better navigate a development path where the integrity and heritage of the continent is maintained.
Key points of the report:

• Sacred natural sites play a critical role in protecting biodiversity, essential for building climate change resilience.
• Custodian communities, of sacred natural sites who maintain customary governance systems play an essential role in preserving the traditional values of Africa.
• Sacred natural sites are the bedrock of customary governance systems require legal protection.
• Plural legal systems include customary governance systems and form an essential component of respecting the essence of Africa,
• Sacred natural sites and territories should be recognised as no-go areas for mining and other destructive or extractive activities.

The report also calls for the recognition and protection of sacred natural sites from any form of destruction – including mining and land grabbing – as a prerequisite for realising African peoples’ inalienable rights enshrined in the Africa Charter, including the right to hold and practice traditional morals, values and culture. A discussion of global precedents, Africa’s plural legal systems and case studies from Benin, Ethiopia and Kenya are also included.

Source: adapted from Gaia Foundation.

The post A Call for Legal Recognition of Sacred Natural Sites in Africa first appeared on Sacred Natural Sites.