支持之外:回顾《联合国土著人民权利宣言》发表18周年

IF 8.5 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Sophie Pitt
{"title":"支持之外:回顾《联合国土著人民权利宣言》发表18周年","authors":"Sophie Pitt","doi":"10.5694/mja2.70029","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) stands as the most comprehensive international charter for Indigenous rights.<span><sup>1</sup></span> The 18th anniversary of the adoption of UNDRIP by the United Nations (UN) General Assembly (13 September 2007) provides an opportunity for reflection and a renewed commitment to its application to realise health equity.</p><p>UNDRIP affirms the collective and individual rights of Indigenous Peoples, including the fundamental right to self-determination (Article 3).<span><sup>1</sup></span> This is not just a political ideal; but the foundation on which health equity must be built. Article 24 states that “Indigenous Peoples have the right to their traditional medicines and to maintain their health practices” and “Indigenous individuals have an equal right to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health.”<span><sup>1</sup></span> Critically, UNDRIP must be read holistically, recognising that health is not merely an individual right, but an inherent collective and community right that cannot be separated from self-determination.</p><p>Self-determination shifts the power dynamics from colonial control to Indigenous agency and leadership. Self-determination recognises that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples, as bearers of vast cultural knowledge and custodians of Country, are best placed to define their own health priorities, design their own services, and lead initiatives that genuinely address the complex determinants of their wellbeing. Top-down approaches have proven to be inadequate, disempowering communities via colonial domination.<span><sup>2</sup></span> Self-determination, however, enables communities to reclaim sovereignty, to make decisions about their lives, lands and institutions, including their health care systems, thereby promoting health and healing. Genuine wellbeing is directly linked to self-determination.</p><p>Australia's adoption and endorsement of UNDRIP was laborious. Initially, Australia was one of four nations that refused to endorse UNDRIP, citing concerns over provisions related to self-determination, land rights and the status of customary law, and co-led efforts to weaken its original text.<span><sup>3</sup></span> Although formal endorsement came on 3 April 2009, indicating a commitment to upholding Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander rights, a critical paradox remains: Australia has not incorporated or implemented UNDRIP directly into domestic law. This stands in stark contrast to the nation's commitments made in multilateral forums to democratic principles and human rights, creating dissonance between international posture and domestic action, particularly regarding the right of Indigenous Peoples to self-determination.</p><p>Despite a lack of legal integration, the implementation of UNDRIP in Australia has been a subject of significant interest and discussion, driven by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander scholars, activists and community leaders. A pledge made during Australia's successful 2017 bid for a seat on the UN Human Rights Council promised to “support the declaration on the rights of Indigenous Peoples in both word and deed, including the promotion of the declaration's principles through national engagement.”<span><sup>4</sup></span> Yet, there has since been a lack of tangible policy changes. As the UN Special Rapporteur on the rights of Indigenous Peoples noted in 2017, it is “woefully inadequate that, despite having enjoyed over two decades of economic growth, Australia has not been able to improve the social disadvantage of its Indigenous population,” citing the clear insufficiency of existing measures and the distressing rates of Indigenous incarceration.<span><sup>5</sup></span> The 2020 Australian Human Rights Commission report further highlighted the absence of an audit of existing laws for UNDRIP compliance and the lack of a negotiated national action plan with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples.<span><sup>6</sup></span> Formal incorporation of UNDRIP into Australian law and policy is imperative as it will recognise that implementation is not programmatic but constitutional, and collective rights must be placed at the centre of public policy.<span><sup>7</sup></span></p><p>Over the past 18 years, we have witnessed important shifts in the discourse and, in some areas, the practise of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health in Australia. There is a growing recognition of the critical role of Indigenous-led health organisations. Concepts such as cultural safety and co-design have gained traction, reflecting an emerging understanding that genuine partnership and respect for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander ways of knowing, being and doing are vital. These concepts are now being embedded in national accreditation standards, practice standards and health strategies, signalling a broader acceptance of these principals as essential for equitable health care.<span><sup>9-11</sup></span></p><p>As we look to the next 18 years, the health and medical community in Australia has a responsibility to actively push for the full implementation of UNDRIP, which requires dedicated actions to move beyond endorsement to measurable outcomes (Box).</p><p>The 18th anniversary of UNDRIP is a historical marker but serves as a powerful call to action. It reminds us that health is inextricably linked to human rights, self-determination and cultural integrity.</p><p>No relevant disclosures.</p><p>Commissioned; not externally peer reviewed.</p><p>Pitt S: Conceptualization, investigation, writing – original draft, writing – review and editing.</p>","PeriodicalId":18214,"journal":{"name":"Medical Journal of Australia","volume":"223 6","pages":"302-303"},"PeriodicalIF":8.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.5694/mja2.70029","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Beyond endorsement: reflecting on the 18th anniversary of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples\",\"authors\":\"Sophie Pitt\",\"doi\":\"10.5694/mja2.70029\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) stands as the most comprehensive international charter for Indigenous rights.<span><sup>1</sup></span> The 18th anniversary of the adoption of UNDRIP by the United Nations (UN) General Assembly (13 September 2007) provides an opportunity for reflection and a renewed commitment to its application to realise health equity.</p><p>UNDRIP affirms the collective and individual rights of Indigenous Peoples, including the fundamental right to self-determination (Article 3).<span><sup>1</sup></span> This is not just a political ideal; but the foundation on which health equity must be built. Article 24 states that “Indigenous Peoples have the right to their traditional medicines and to maintain their health practices” and “Indigenous individuals have an equal right to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health.”<span><sup>1</sup></span> Critically, UNDRIP must be read holistically, recognising that health is not merely an individual right, but an inherent collective and community right that cannot be separated from self-determination.</p><p>Self-determination shifts the power dynamics from colonial control to Indigenous agency and leadership. Self-determination recognises that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples, as bearers of vast cultural knowledge and custodians of Country, are best placed to define their own health priorities, design their own services, and lead initiatives that genuinely address the complex determinants of their wellbeing. Top-down approaches have proven to be inadequate, disempowering communities via colonial domination.<span><sup>2</sup></span> Self-determination, however, enables communities to reclaim sovereignty, to make decisions about their lives, lands and institutions, including their health care systems, thereby promoting health and healing. Genuine wellbeing is directly linked to self-determination.</p><p>Australia's adoption and endorsement of UNDRIP was laborious. Initially, Australia was one of four nations that refused to endorse UNDRIP, citing concerns over provisions related to self-determination, land rights and the status of customary law, and co-led efforts to weaken its original text.<span><sup>3</sup></span> Although formal endorsement came on 3 April 2009, indicating a commitment to upholding Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander rights, a critical paradox remains: Australia has not incorporated or implemented UNDRIP directly into domestic law. This stands in stark contrast to the nation's commitments made in multilateral forums to democratic principles and human rights, creating dissonance between international posture and domestic action, particularly regarding the right of Indigenous Peoples to self-determination.</p><p>Despite a lack of legal integration, the implementation of UNDRIP in Australia has been a subject of significant interest and discussion, driven by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander scholars, activists and community leaders. A pledge made during Australia's successful 2017 bid for a seat on the UN Human Rights Council promised to “support the declaration on the rights of Indigenous Peoples in both word and deed, including the promotion of the declaration's principles through national engagement.”<span><sup>4</sup></span> Yet, there has since been a lack of tangible policy changes. As the UN Special Rapporteur on the rights of Indigenous Peoples noted in 2017, it is “woefully inadequate that, despite having enjoyed over two decades of economic growth, Australia has not been able to improve the social disadvantage of its Indigenous population,” citing the clear insufficiency of existing measures and the distressing rates of Indigenous incarceration.<span><sup>5</sup></span> The 2020 Australian Human Rights Commission report further highlighted the absence of an audit of existing laws for UNDRIP compliance and the lack of a negotiated national action plan with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples.<span><sup>6</sup></span> Formal incorporation of UNDRIP into Australian law and policy is imperative as it will recognise that implementation is not programmatic but constitutional, and collective rights must be placed at the centre of public policy.<span><sup>7</sup></span></p><p>Over the past 18 years, we have witnessed important shifts in the discourse and, in some areas, the practise of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health in Australia. There is a growing recognition of the critical role of Indigenous-led health organisations. Concepts such as cultural safety and co-design have gained traction, reflecting an emerging understanding that genuine partnership and respect for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander ways of knowing, being and doing are vital. These concepts are now being embedded in national accreditation standards, practice standards and health strategies, signalling a broader acceptance of these principals as essential for equitable health care.<span><sup>9-11</sup></span></p><p>As we look to the next 18 years, the health and medical community in Australia has a responsibility to actively push for the full implementation of UNDRIP, which requires dedicated actions to move beyond endorsement to measurable outcomes (Box).</p><p>The 18th anniversary of UNDRIP is a historical marker but serves as a powerful call to action. It reminds us that health is inextricably linked to human rights, self-determination and cultural integrity.</p><p>No relevant disclosures.</p><p>Commissioned; not externally peer reviewed.</p><p>Pitt S: Conceptualization, investigation, writing – original draft, writing – review and editing.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18214,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical Journal of Australia\",\"volume\":\"223 6\",\"pages\":\"302-303\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.5694/mja2.70029\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical Journal of Australia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.5694/mja2.70029\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Journal of Australia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.5694/mja2.70029","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

《联合国土著人民权利宣言》是关于土著人民权利的最全面的国际宪章联合国大会通过《联合国发展战略纲要》18周年(2007年9月13日)提供了一个反思的机会,并重新承诺将其应用于实现卫生公平。开发方案确认土著人民的集体和个人权利,包括自决的基本权利(第3条)这不仅仅是一种政治理想;但必须建立卫生公平的基础。第24条规定,“土著人民有权使用自己的传统医药和保持自己的保健方法”,"土著人个人享有可达到的最高身心健康标准的平等权利。" 1至关重要的是,必须从整体上解读《方案》,认识到健康不仅是个人权利,而且是一项固有的集体和社区权利,与自决不可分割。自决将权力动态从殖民控制转向土著机构和领导。自决认识到,土著和托雷斯海峡岛民作为丰富文化知识的承载者和国家的守护者,最适合确定自己的保健优先事项,设计自己的服务,并领导真正解决其福祉的复杂决定因素的倡议。事实证明,自上而下的方法是不够的,通过殖民统治剥夺了社区的权力然而,自决使社区能够收回主权,对其生活、土地和机构(包括其卫生保健系统)作出决定,从而促进健康和康复。真正的幸福与自我决定直接相关。澳大利亚艰难地通过和核可了开发方案。最初,澳大利亚是拒绝核可开发计划署的四个国家之一,理由是对有关自决、土地权和习惯法地位的规定感到关切,并共同领导了削弱其原始案文的努力尽管澳大利亚于2009年4月3日正式批准,表明承诺维护土著居民和托雷斯海峡岛民的权利,但一个关键的矛盾仍然存在:澳大利亚没有将发展方案直接纳入或执行国内法。这与该国在多边论坛上对民主原则和人权所作的承诺形成鲜明对比,造成国际姿态与国内行动之间的不协调,特别是在土著人民自决权利方面。尽管缺乏法律一体化,但在土著和托雷斯海峡岛民学者、活动人士和社区领袖的推动下,在澳大利亚实施方案一直是一个引起极大兴趣和讨论的主题。澳大利亚在2017年成功争取联合国人权理事会席位期间作出承诺,承诺“以言行支持土著人民权利宣言,包括通过国家参与促进宣言的原则”。然而,自那以来一直缺乏切实的政策变化。正如联合国土著人民权利问题特别报告员2017年所指出的那样,“尽管经历了20多年的经济增长,澳大利亚仍未能改善其土著人口的社会劣势,这是严重不足的”,理由是现有措施明显不足,土著人口的监禁率令人担忧2020年澳大利亚人权委员会的报告进一步强调,没有对现有法律对开发计划署执行情况的审计,也没有与土著和托雷斯海峡岛民协商制定国家行动计划。6将开发计划署正式纳入澳大利亚法律和政策是必要的,因为它将认识到执行工作不是方案性的,而是宪法性的,集体权利必须置于公共政策的中心。7 .在过去18年里,我们目睹了澳大利亚土著居民和托雷斯海峡岛民保健的论述以及在某些地区的做法发生了重大变化。人们日益认识到土著领导的卫生组织的关键作用。文化安全和共同设计等概念得到了关注,反映出一种新兴的理解,即真正的伙伴关系和尊重土著居民和托雷斯海峡岛民的认识、存在和行动方式至关重要。这些概念现在正被纳入国家认证标准、做法标准和卫生战略,这表明人们更广泛地接受这些原则,认为它们对公平的卫生保健至关重要。 9-11展望未来18年,澳大利亚的卫生和医疗界有责任积极推动全面执行战略规划,这需要采取专门行动,从核准走向可衡量的成果(方框)。联合国发展方案18周年是一个历史性的里程碑,但也是一个强有力的行动呼吁。它提醒我们,健康与人权、自决和文化完整有着不可分割的联系。无相关披露。没有外部同行评审。构思,调查,写作-原稿,写作-审查和编辑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Beyond endorsement: reflecting on the 18th anniversary of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) stands as the most comprehensive international charter for Indigenous rights.1 The 18th anniversary of the adoption of UNDRIP by the United Nations (UN) General Assembly (13 September 2007) provides an opportunity for reflection and a renewed commitment to its application to realise health equity.

UNDRIP affirms the collective and individual rights of Indigenous Peoples, including the fundamental right to self-determination (Article 3).1 This is not just a political ideal; but the foundation on which health equity must be built. Article 24 states that “Indigenous Peoples have the right to their traditional medicines and to maintain their health practices” and “Indigenous individuals have an equal right to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health.”1 Critically, UNDRIP must be read holistically, recognising that health is not merely an individual right, but an inherent collective and community right that cannot be separated from self-determination.

Self-determination shifts the power dynamics from colonial control to Indigenous agency and leadership. Self-determination recognises that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples, as bearers of vast cultural knowledge and custodians of Country, are best placed to define their own health priorities, design their own services, and lead initiatives that genuinely address the complex determinants of their wellbeing. Top-down approaches have proven to be inadequate, disempowering communities via colonial domination.2 Self-determination, however, enables communities to reclaim sovereignty, to make decisions about their lives, lands and institutions, including their health care systems, thereby promoting health and healing. Genuine wellbeing is directly linked to self-determination.

Australia's adoption and endorsement of UNDRIP was laborious. Initially, Australia was one of four nations that refused to endorse UNDRIP, citing concerns over provisions related to self-determination, land rights and the status of customary law, and co-led efforts to weaken its original text.3 Although formal endorsement came on 3 April 2009, indicating a commitment to upholding Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander rights, a critical paradox remains: Australia has not incorporated or implemented UNDRIP directly into domestic law. This stands in stark contrast to the nation's commitments made in multilateral forums to democratic principles and human rights, creating dissonance between international posture and domestic action, particularly regarding the right of Indigenous Peoples to self-determination.

Despite a lack of legal integration, the implementation of UNDRIP in Australia has been a subject of significant interest and discussion, driven by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander scholars, activists and community leaders. A pledge made during Australia's successful 2017 bid for a seat on the UN Human Rights Council promised to “support the declaration on the rights of Indigenous Peoples in both word and deed, including the promotion of the declaration's principles through national engagement.”4 Yet, there has since been a lack of tangible policy changes. As the UN Special Rapporteur on the rights of Indigenous Peoples noted in 2017, it is “woefully inadequate that, despite having enjoyed over two decades of economic growth, Australia has not been able to improve the social disadvantage of its Indigenous population,” citing the clear insufficiency of existing measures and the distressing rates of Indigenous incarceration.5 The 2020 Australian Human Rights Commission report further highlighted the absence of an audit of existing laws for UNDRIP compliance and the lack of a negotiated national action plan with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples.6 Formal incorporation of UNDRIP into Australian law and policy is imperative as it will recognise that implementation is not programmatic but constitutional, and collective rights must be placed at the centre of public policy.7

Over the past 18 years, we have witnessed important shifts in the discourse and, in some areas, the practise of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health in Australia. There is a growing recognition of the critical role of Indigenous-led health organisations. Concepts such as cultural safety and co-design have gained traction, reflecting an emerging understanding that genuine partnership and respect for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander ways of knowing, being and doing are vital. These concepts are now being embedded in national accreditation standards, practice standards and health strategies, signalling a broader acceptance of these principals as essential for equitable health care.9-11

As we look to the next 18 years, the health and medical community in Australia has a responsibility to actively push for the full implementation of UNDRIP, which requires dedicated actions to move beyond endorsement to measurable outcomes (Box).

The 18th anniversary of UNDRIP is a historical marker but serves as a powerful call to action. It reminds us that health is inextricably linked to human rights, self-determination and cultural integrity.

No relevant disclosures.

Commissioned; not externally peer reviewed.

Pitt S: Conceptualization, investigation, writing – original draft, writing – review and editing.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Medical Journal of Australia
Medical Journal of Australia 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
5.30%
发文量
410
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Medical Journal of Australia (MJA) stands as Australia's foremost general medical journal, leading the dissemination of high-quality research and commentary to shape health policy and influence medical practices within the country. Under the leadership of Professor Virginia Barbour, the expert editorial team at MJA is dedicated to providing authors with a constructive and collaborative peer-review and publication process. Established in 1914, the MJA has evolved into a modern journal that upholds its founding values, maintaining a commitment to supporting the medical profession by delivering high-quality and pertinent information essential to medical practice.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信