Home The News North East News Executive director’s representation at awards event nixed

Executive director’s representation at awards event nixed

Written by Administrator

Monday, 29 March 2010

Executive director’s representation at awards event nixed By Gale Courey Toensing Story Published: Mar 26, 2010 AUGUSTA, Maine – Three of Gov. John Baldacci’s newly appointed state representatives on the Maine Indian Tribal-State Commission have told its executive director that he should not accept an invitation to speak about the Doctrine of Discovery and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples at a United Nations-related council award dinner as a representative of the commission. Diane Scully, speaking on behalf of two other state representatives, told MITSC Executive Director John Dieffenbacher-Krall that he “may participate” at the International Council on Environmental Law award dinner in New York in May “representing himself.” Scully is MITSC’s former executive director. Dieffenbacher-Krall has been invited to discuss what impact, if any, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples has had on the laws of various governments that rely on the Doctrine of Discovery to assert nation-state power over indigenous peoples and their lands. The Maine Senate and House of Representatives voted unanimously to support the Declaration in a joint resolution in 2008. The Doctrine was a racist principle of international law developed in a series of 15th century papal bulls and 16th century charters by European monarchs that gave white Christian Europeans the right to claim the lands and resources of non-Christian peoples and kill or enslave them if other Christian Europeans had not already done so. The Declaration, adopted by the U.N. General Assembly in 2007, defines the rights of the world’s 370 million indigenous peoples within a human rights framework. The U.S. was one of only four countries that voted against adopting the Declaration. Over the past few years, Dieffenbacher-Krall has gained a reputation as the initiator of a grassroots movement prompting Christian churches to repudiate the Doctrine and urging the U.S. to endorse the Declaration. As a result of his work, the national Episcopal Church passed such a resolution last summer, followed by similar resolutions by a Quaker Meeting and a Unitarian congregation. Tonya Gonnella Frichner, a lawyer, citizen of the Onondaga Nation, and the North American Representative to the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, recommended Dieffenbacher-Krall’s invitation. The council is a non-governmental organization with consultative status with the United Nations. Dieffenbacher-Krall wrote to the MITSC commissioners for approval to attend the council event and suggested convening a group of lawyers and experts with knowledge of Maine’s settlement act for a roundtable discussion of the issues as a MITSC initiative. “The discussion would help inform my May 13 remarks. Ultimately, the event organizers want to publish proceedings of the May 13 meeting. I would be asked to submit a paper examining the Maine Indian Claims Settlement Act and the Maine Implementing Act against the indigenous rights standards delineated in the Declaration.” But three of the four state representatives on MITSC nixed the idea. Among the reasons given is that “the topic is not a MITSC priority.” Scully said she and two other newly appointed state representatives on the commission “had a chance to review” Dieffenbacher-Krall’s request with Pat Ende, the governor’s legal counsel and the co-chairs of the legislature’s judiciary committee and the result of the consultation was, “we do not think John should indicate that he represents MITSC at the May 13 awards dinner or in writing a ‘paper examining the Maine Indian Claims Settlement Act and the Maine Implementing Act against the indigenous rights standards delineated in UNDRIP.’” Regarding the Maine legislature’s adoption of the Declaration, Scully said, “From our perspective, it has no effect. … it is merely an expression of a sentiment.” Regarding Dieffenbacher-Krall’s proposed paper, Scully said, “While MITSC is charged with continually reviewing the effectiveness of the act, nowhere do we see a charge to examine the validity or legitimacy of the act. Bodies or agencies created by statute do not usually have jurisdiction to question the validity of the very statute that created the body or agency. That question is for a higher body.” She did not suggest which higher body should address the question. Scully said the review group did not see the “expression of opinions on international law as within the scope of MITSC’s duties.” Given MITSC’s lack of working knowledge of this subject, we are concerned that this is a highly complicated question of international law that we are not equipped (or authorized) to address.” She said MITSC should not authorize “the expenditure of resources or public representation of MITSC on a topic that we know so little about and have not formally decided to pursue.” Dieffenbacher-Krall is considering attending the council event in his individual capacity, and not as the MITSC executive director. Penobscot Indian Nation Chief Kirk Francis said the state representatives had not consulted with the tribal governments on Dieffenbacher-Krall’s request and that their response symbolizes “where the problems lie” in tribal-state relations. MITSC’s mission is to continually review the effectiveness of the Maine Indian Claims Settlement Act and the social, economic and legal relationship between the state and the Maliseet, Passamaquoddy and Penobscot tribes. “So if MITSC is not willing to look at international policy on indigenous rights and they’re not willing to look at national policy on indigenous rights, then I’m not clear about what the benefit of that organization is,” Francis said. The state never considers that the federal government is the third signatory to the Settlement Act, he said. “We’re federally recognized tribes. The Doctrine and Declaration have an effect on federal Indian law, which has an effect on us. How can you effect change without studies and comparisons and reviews and discussion? They’re enclosed in the bubble of their little world here and what it tells me in the end is, ‘The Settlement Act is not working for you but it works perfectly for us, and that’s just the way it’s going to be.’” http://www.indiancountrytoday.com/national/northeast/89264292.html

 

< Prev		Next >