Indigenous People's Right to Self-Determination in International Law - A study of autonomy and self-government in the context of indigenous self-determination
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis examines the right to self-determination for indigenous peoples and whether such a right exists within international customary law and what the scope of such a right entail. Furthermore, the essay investigates what measures states have taken to implement such a right with a focus on the autonomous and self-governance aspects. This is done by examining different domestic self-government systems and conducting a comparative study. This study encompasses two different self-government systems based on ethnicity; ethnoterritorial autonomy in the First Nations reserves in Canada and autonomy of a people in the Sami Parliament of Norway. The method used is the legal dogmatic method and the comparative method. With a special focus on the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and especially articles 3 and 4, this thesis has examined various international instruments and literature on indigenous rights. Through reviewing these instruments, codifications and legal literature on the subject, an examination to ascertain de lege lata is made. The comparative study is based on a limited sample by describing and comparing two different domestic systems within the aims of the thesis. In order to provide needed historical context, a legal development perspective will be applied as well as a comparative and international perspective due to the nature of the thesis. The concluding analysis of the research establishes that there is support to determine that indigenous peoples’ right to self-determination exists in customary international law. The content of such a right seems to include only an internal right to self-determination of which an application often results in autonomous functions and self-government systems. When reviewing at the domestic level, different state measures can be observed, such as autonomy based on belonging to the people and autonomy limited to ethnicity in specific regional areas. The full extent of the internal aspect of customary law is something to examine further but when studying domestic state measures, it can be concluded that various forms of autonomy and self-governments are included.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".