Search Climate Insights Directory

Natural Justice condemns the recurrence of xenophobic violence in South Africa, specifically citing attacks in the KwaZulu-Natal Province and other cities that resulted in deaths, injuries, and displacement.

Natural Justice submits that the World Bank's Draft Environmental and Social Framework (ESF) fails to align with modern human rights standards, specifically criticizing the 'opt-out clause' in ESS7. This clause allows borrowers to waive ESS7 protections for indigenous peoples if they claim identifying such groups would risk 'ethnic tension' or 'civil strife,' or if it conflicts with national constitutions. Natural Justice contends this nullifies essential protections like Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC), promotes a regressive view of indigenous identity, and sets a dangerous precedent for other international financial institutions.

The document outlines a pilot project by Natural Justice and partners to implement biocultural community protocols (BCPs) in four countries to safeguard community rights against extractive industries. It details specific regional efforts—addressing infrastructure and oil/gas/coal in Kenya, diamond mining in Zimbabwe, lithium mining in Argentina, and various mining forms in India—while identifying BCPs as tools for internal consensus and external rights assertion. The report highlights successes in community mobilization and challenges such as political will, safety threats, and the difficulty of defining 'community' in non-homogenous groups.

The document explores how communities that face difficulties engaging with extractive companies use 'community-company engagements'—including dialogues, negotiations, and agreements—to formalize their participation, define the scope of impact assessments, establish conflict resolution mechanisms, and prepare for future socio-economic negotiations.

The Berne Declaration and Natural Justice argue that the proposed Implementing Act contains significant gaps in monitoring user compliance, particularly when users and commercializers are different entities or operate outside the EU. They criticize the draft's allowance for subjective confidentiality claims and call for greater transparency in the register of collections and recognized best practices, alongside clear remedial steps for providers when compliance fails.

The Ogiek Bio-Cultural Community Protocol (BCP) serves as a community-determined framework to protect the rights and traditional knowledge of the Ogiek, an indigenous hunter-gatherer group in Kenya. It documents their unique relationship with the Mau Forest Complex, detailing their eco-climatic zoning system, traditional medicinal knowledge, and sustainable honey-harvesting practices. The protocol outlines the challenges the community faces, including forced evictions, forest degradation from logging and charcoal burning, and cultural erosion. It establishes a community agreement based on national and international law, demanding Free Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) for development projects and equitable Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) for the use of their resources. The document also defines a traditional governance structure led by a Council of Elders and proposes a land management system divided into biodiversity conservation, rehabilitation, and settlement zones.

The document provides a practitioner-focused guide to securing community land rights in Africa, detailing case studies on resolving land conflicts, strengthening local governance, and resisting forced resettlement. It emphasizes the importance of community self-definition, the use of Biocultural Community Protocols, and the necessity of multi-pronged advocacy strategies involving legal education, media engagement, and the building of alliances between grassroots movements and sympathetic government actors.

This report reviews the laws and policies of Mozambique regarding the recognition of the rights of local communities and indigenous peoples, specifically examining how natural resource extraction, large-scale agriculture, and infrastructure projects impact these rights.

The document analyzes the evolution of community-company engagements in the mining, oil, and gas sectors, emphasizing the need for community-driven processes to ensure fair outcomes. It categorizes types of agreements—ranging from Joint Venture Agreements to Consultation and Negotiation Agreements—and evaluates the risks associated with government-led processes. Through case studies in Papua New Guinea, Indonesia, and Ghana, the paper highlights the importance of self-identification of affected communities and the role of international human rights frameworks, such as the UN Guiding Principles and FPIC, in protecting community rights.

The report examines the tension between Mozambique's progressive legal frameworks, such as the 1997 Land Law, and a state tendency toward recentralization and the prioritization of extractive industries. While laws recognize customary land rights (DUAT), implementation is often hindered by bureaucratic hurdles, flawed community consultation processes, and legislation that gives mining operations priority over other land uses. The document highlights the failure of community-based natural resource management (CBNRM) initiatives like Tchuma Tchato due to lack of genuine power devolution and the negative social impacts of large-scale resettlement projects, such as those led by Vale in Tete Province.

This guide, published by Natural Justice in December 2014, provides an overview of regional and international grievance and advocacy mechanisms available to indigenous peoples and local communities. It categorizes these tools into UN human rights systems, regional human rights systems, international and regional financial institutions, industry-specific standards, and other advocacy opportunities, detailing eligibility, processes, and potential barriers for each.

The report examines the legal landscape for indigenous peoples and local communities in South Africa, highlighting a tension between constitutional human rights and state-led developmental interests. While frameworks like the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act (NEMBA) provide for benefit-sharing in bioprospecting, other sectors—particularly mining and large-scale infrastructure—often prioritize national interests over community rights. The document notes that the lack of a permanent communal land tenure regime and the 1913 cut-off date for land restitution significantly hinder the self-determination of groups like the Khoi-San. It concludes that while co-management models in protected areas exist, they often fail to decentralize power effectively.

The report examines the legal landscape in Zimbabwe concerning the rights of local communities and indigenous peoples. It highlights a significant gap between progressive constitutional provisions and the actual implementation of laws, particularly in the mining and forestry sectors. While community-based natural resource management (CBNRM) programs like CAMPFIRE show some success in wildlife conservation, the report finds that local communities often face arbitrary evictions, lack of secure land tenure, and marginalization from decision-making processes in extractive industries. It recommends comprehensive legal reforms to align sectoral laws with the 2013 Constitution, establish a Land Commission, and formalize the recognition of Indigenous Community Conserved Areas (ICCAs).

The report argues that conservation initiatives frequently violate the rights of Indigenous Peoples and local communities, despite an increasing international legal consensus on their protections. It asserts that responsibility for upholding these rights extends beyond states to include international organisations, businesses, and NGOs. The authors analyse a vast array of international instruments and find that while normative trends are moving toward greater recognition of rights, enforcement and redress remain significant challenges. The document concludes by suggesting the creation of core standards, stakeholder guidance, and potentially a dedicated global grievance mechanism or 'Roundtable on Ethical Conservation' to ensure just conservation practices.

The document maps the extensive legal landscape of international 'hard' and 'soft' law relevant to conservation, identifying over 30 categories of rights. It highlights a normative trend toward increasing recognition of Indigenous and local community rights within the CBD and IUCN frameworks, arguing that these standards must be distilled into accessible guides to prevent human rights violations, such as forced evictions, during the establishment of protected areas.

The document examines the challenges Indigenous Peoples and local communities face when seeking redress for human rights violations linked to conservation, such as the eviction of the Endorois in Kenya. It categorizes redress mechanisms into state-based (national courts, NHRIs) and non-state-based (UN systems, regional human rights courts, financial institution accountability mechanisms, and corporate mechanisms). While state-based systems can issue binding decisions, they are often inaccessible due to discrimination and lack of recognition of collective rights. Non-state judicial mechanisms often have high procedural hurdles, such as the exhaustion of domestic remedies, while non-judicial mechanisms frequently lack enforcement power. The author suggests exploring a 'Roundtable for Ethical Conservation' as a specialized mechanism to ensure compliance with human rights standards.

A joint statement urging the United Nations Human Rights Council to increase its focus on the human rights impacts of international financial institutions (IFIs), including multilateral development banks like the World Bank.

The document outlines specific critiques and proposed amendments to the AfDB's IRM Operating Rules and Procedures (ORP). The signatories argue for greater independence of the mechanism from Bank management, enhanced public disclosure of complaint documents, the inclusion of all human rights violations in the IRM's scope, and the removal of restrictive barriers that prevent individuals and NGOs from filing complaints.

The paper examines the legal obligations of conservation actors regarding the rights of indigenous peoples, tribal peoples, and local communities. It argues that while states are the primary duty-bearers, international organizations, corporations, and NGOs also have responsibilities to respect human rights based on international customary law and 'social licenses'. The text specifically links these obligations to the implementation of Aichi Target 11 for biodiversity.

The document examines the legal obligations of conservation actors under international human rights law, arguing that while States are primary duty-bearers, international organizations, businesses, and NGOs also bear responsibilities to respect human rights based on customary law or social licenses to operate.