Ruling upholds human rights

[Yvonne Yazzie]

From: First Peoples Human Rights Coalition <firstpeop...@earthlink.net>
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2007 16:21:59 -0400
Subject: Ruling upholds human rights

Article 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, an
international treaty ratified by the United States, provides that persons
belonging to ethnic, religious, or linguistic minorities "shall not be
denied the right, in community with the other members of their group, to
enjoy their own culture, to profess and practise their own religion, or to
use their own language."

Indigenous peoples may numerically be a 'minority', so the rights of
minorities apply to us.  However, it is important to emphasize that we have
the legal status of 'peoples' and the right to self-determination under
international law. And it is the obligation of the federal government under
international law to respect and protect Article 27 rights.

Instead, the United States Forest Service, an agency of the federal
government, approved a corporate plan of action that could undermine the
rights of members of more than a dozen American Indian nations.  

However, a United States Court of Appeals reversed the Forest Service's
decision.  The Court's recent ruling supports the ability of Indigenous
people in the United States to exercise their essential and inherent human
rights to practice their own beliefways.  "This ruling upholds human rights
that we have been denied for too long."
[Press release at: <http://www.savethepeaks.org/>]

From the article below: "Tribes all over the country can benefit from this
decision and utilize it to protect sacred and religiously significant sites.
This is a tremendous step forward in preserving Native American cultural and
religious beliefs."

From the appeals court decision:  'The record in this case establishes the
religious importance of the Peaks to the . tribes who live around it. From
time immemorial, they have relied on the Peaks, and the purity of the Peaks'
water, as an integral part of their religious beliefs. The Forest Service
and the Snowbowl now propose to put treated sewage effluent on the Peaks. To
get some sense of equivalence, it may be useful to imagine the effect on
Christian beliefs and practices - and the imposition that Christians would
experience - if the government were to require that baptisms be carried out
with "reclaimed water."' (page 2871, para. 14)

Court ruling at:

<http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/64C37FB597BF2F848825729C005
8BFE8/$file/0615371.pdf?openelement>

= = = = =     = = = = =
The DAILY TIMES
FARMINGTON NEW MEXICO
03/16/2007
<http://www.daily-times.com/ci_5448965>

Court upholds traditional native beliefs in ski decision
By Lindsay Whitehurst
The Daily Times

An appeals court sided with the Navajo Nation, Hopi Tribe and others this
week, ruling that traditional religious beliefs supersede a ski resort's
right to expand using snow made from treated sewage effluent.

Resort officials vowed to "vigorous(ly) pursue further judicial review,"
calling the litigants "radical groups who hold utter contempt for the
public's rights" in a statement.

The court ruled that the U.S. Forest Service's decision to allow the Arizona
Snowbowl, located in the San Francisco Peaks near Flagstaff, to expand and
use artificial snow violated the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

"It's one of the most sacred mountains that there is," Navajo Nation
President Joe Shirley Jr. spokesman George Hardeen said about the peaks.
"All Navajo medicine men make a pilgrimage to those mountains ... to gather
herbs and minerals for their medicine bundles."

Since the tribes sued the U.S. Forest Service, the decision on whether to
appeal is up to them and the U.S. Justice Department.

The problem, Hardeen said, was both the use of the sewage and the expansion
of the 777-acre resort further into sacred lands.

But Eric Borowsky, general partner with Arizona Snowbowl, framed the issue
as a fight over access to public lands.

"Unfortunately, once again, the ... process has been abused and the
taxpayers of our country held for ransom by a small group of activists who
believe that they personally own our nation's public lands," he said. "The
ramification of this ruling, if left unchallenged, will be devastating to
the taxpayer's access and use of its lands."

He criticized other tribes' use of natural features for economic
development, and said the sewage effluent used is the same quality as
"reclaimed water" used to irrigate golf courses and is added back into the
water supply.

But in the ruling, which overturns a Jan. 11 decision by U.S. District Court
Judge Paul Rosenblatt, said the case was the kind for which the religious
freedom act was passed.

"If (the tribes) do not have a valid RFRA claim in this case," Judge William
Fletcher wrote for the court, "we are unable to see how any Native American
plaintiff can ever have a successful RFRA claim based on beliefs and
practices they hold sacred."

This is the first case where the law was successfully used in an appeal,
Navajo Nation attorney Howard Shanker said.

"Essentially, Native Americans have had no recourse challenging government
land use decisions, which oftentimes impact sacred sites and culturally
significant sites," he said in a press release. "So (the decision is)
extremely important. Tribes all over the country can benefit from this
decision and utilize it to protect sacred and religiously significant sites.
This is a tremendous step forward in preserving Native American cultural and
religious beliefs."

Lindsay Whitehurst: lwhit...@daily-times.com

- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
From: protecting...@yahoogroups.com
On Behalf Of bins...@peakpeak.com
-----------------------
* If you re-print, copy, archive or re-post this message, please retain this
credit.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
UBCIC's Protecting Knowledge Conference site:
http://www.ubcic.bc.ca/Resources/conferences/PK.htm

= = = = =  End of Forwarded Message  = = = = =