Self-Determination, the Chittagong and Bangladesh
One of the human rights problems confronting developing nations, although in this respect these nations may be no different from others, is how best to protect indigenous peoples. In many parts of Latin America the national push for economic growth has led to hardship for many Indian groups, just as the same dialectic played itself out in North America during the last century. This problem of how to promote the overall national good while also protecting the internationally recognised rights of groups within the nation arises in the 1980s with particular saliency in Bangladesh.
KeywordsCentral Government Indigenous People International Labour Organisation Local Autonomy Armed Resistance
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 3.See the report of the 2nd General Assembly of the World Council of Indigenous Peoples held at Kruna, Samiland, in Sweden, 24–27 August 1977. See also Roxanne Dunbar Ortiz, Indians of the Americas and Human Rights and Self-Determination (London: Zed Books, 1984) pp. 52–4.Google Scholar
- 4.See generally Yoram Dienstein, ‘Collective Human Rights of People and Minorities’, 25, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, part 1, 4th series (January 1976) pp. 102–05.Google Scholar
- 7.See League of Nations, Official Journal, Special Supplement, (1920) p. 9. Also see Rosalyn Higgins, The Development of International Law Through the Political Organs of the United Nations (London and New York: Oxford University Press, 1963).Google Scholar
- 8.1970 P. C. I. J. Ser. B. No. 17, 21. See also John Howard Clinebell and James Thomson, ‘Sovereignty and Self-determination: The Right of Native Americans under International Law’, Buffalo Law Review, 2, 47 (Autumn 1978) p. 707.Google Scholar
- 14.See Amnesty International, ‘Unlawful Killing in Chittagong Hill Tracts’ (London: AI, 1986) pp. 3–7. Also see The Chittagong Hill Tracts: Militarization, Oppression and the Hill Tribes’, Survival International Review, no. 43.Google Scholar
- 24.See Simon Winchester Reports, The Sunday Times (London) 14 October 1984, p. 6.Google Scholar