Statement on Agenda Item 4: Discussion on the six mandate areas of the Permanent Forum (economic and social development, culture, environment, education, health and human rights), with reference to the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development
On the report on "Impact of colonization and armed conflicts on Indigenous Peoples’ rights: the imperative of peacebuilding”
25th April 2025
Statement by Asia Indigenous Peoples’ Caucus
Presented by: Gam Angkang Shimray
Thank you Chair,
On behalf of the Asia Caucus, we congratulate the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (UNPFII) for this comprehensive and valuable study. However, with due respect, we would like to highlight certain limitations in its framing.
Frantz Fanon’s work was groundbreaking in exposing the psychological and structural violence imposed by external colonial powers. He rightly critiqued class betrayal and the failure of revolutionary leadership. However, his analysis did not account for pre-existing systems of internal colonialism—structures of domination imposed by dominant native groups that long predated external colonisation.
Neocolonialism is commonly understood as the continuation of foreign economic and political influence after formal decolonisation. Yet this framing is insufficient for explaining realities where dominant internal native groups have colonised Indigenous Peoples—especially in cases where internal processes of colonisation existed even before foreign colonial rule.
Internal colonialism not only predates but also outlasts external colonialism. What Indigenous Peoples are confronting today is not merely a residual legacy, but the reconfiguration of colonial logics by dominant groups and their elites who now wield state power. Colonialism did not begin with foreign powers, nor did it end with their departure. Thailand and Nepal, for example, were never colonised by external powers,India and Ryukyu (Japan) presents a case of dual colonialism in relation to its Indigenous Peoples. In some regions, indigenous groups who were previously uncontacted have been forcibly incorporated and colonised in the postcolonial period.
In many parts of Asia, indigenous systems of self-governance that existed before colonialism were already facing threat from internal colonisation, which were layered over and compounded by external colonialism and the legacies that followed withdrawal of foreign rule.
We recommend the following:
1. Expand the UN study to document global cases where internal colonialism predates, coincides and survives external colonialism, offering concrete policy guidance for dismantling such structures and restoring indigenous sovereignties.
2. Support Indigenous Peoples in rebuilding their systems of governance, recognising them as co-sovereigns and distinct political entities.
3. Operationalise Articles 3, 26, and 36 of the UNDRIP, upholding indigenous self-governance and territorial sovereignty beyond state-imposed boundaries.
4. Promote cross-border cooperation frameworks for indigenous governance of transboundary territories.
5. Urge states to review and reform internal administrative boundaries that divide indigenous territories, ensuring the implementation of the principle of territorial integrity of Indigenous Peoples within and across nation-states.
6. Integrate indigenous territorial realities into UN systems—especially in data, peacebuilding, development, and humanitarian initiatives—to avoid relying on state-centric boundaries that erase indigenous geographies.
