and it can be downloaded from our website, the tool draws on both international and regional standards and on a wide array of constitutional practices throughout the world. And I should acknowledge the beautiful artwork that we have been able to use for this publication. It is from a painting called Ancestors by Sarita King, a Aboriginal woman artist from Australia. And the original painting is hanging on the wall of our office at the Australian National University. It was written in English and will be soon available in Spanish, French and Tagalog of the Philippines and translations to many more languages is certainly an area we wish to invest in and also invite other organizations and governments to do so. All our publications including IPCAT are published under the common creative license and are freely available for users and also free to be translated. But let us know if you plan to translate the tool because we would love to know. And we hope that that will reach far and wide and grow beautiful for groups and communities in assessing their constitutional and legal frameworks from Indigenous peoples perspectives and in designing efficacy around those findings as well. And we will certainly appreciate any thoughts from our commentators, from any other users and readers about on how to further improve our tool. Thank you all very much and I'll hand over the screen to Amanda Katsperil. Thank you very much Lena for the lovely overview and introduction to today's event and also for joining us at such a late hour in Australia. I want to welcome everyone from a very different time zone in California where we're just beginning the day and thank you for joining us for this event assessing Indigenous peoples rights and constitutions. As Lena shared, we are focusing on our new relatively new Indigenous peoples rights and constitutions assessment tool which is from our side much more than a publication but really a methodology and approach to looking at Indigenous peoples rights and constitutions and also to taking a rights-based approach to constitution building itself with the assumption that constitutions are a very important site for protecting and promoting the rights of a variety of groups but certainly not least Indigenous peoples. Thank you for having us today. As Lena said, we are joining your event and we very much appreciate that you have included us and given us this opportunity to share the methodology with you. With that I am going to share my screen now so I hope it works and also if can you see the screen Lena? Okay excellent. So I will try to also stick to the time. I know we have other speakers who will really hopefully help me. I would like to go over today the tools development methodology and you know potential ways that it might be applied around the Asia-Pacific region where I particularly focus a lot of my work but also beyond that of course globally. This is a tool that in theory belongs to ideas global program and should be able to be applied equally across all different countries. When we look at the examples that are included in the tool you'll see that they do come from all regions of the world. So I'll just touch briefly on why we develop the Indigenous peoples constitution assessment tool. I think we are looking at global trends around democracy so there's increased focus on on democratic participation, accommodating diversity, Indigenous peoples recognition in constitutions. I think this is obviously a huge issue in Australia as Lena mentioned but around the world there's sort of a growing movement for recognition and how that might translate into different forms of rights. Also an idea just looking in constitution building we realize a lot of issues are coming up around autonomy arrangements and self-determination decentralization and pushes for federalism from a rights-based standpoint so we thought it would be good to also again enable Indigenous peoples to look at these issues and see if in fact the way that their rights are protected in a constitution is leading to robust enforcement and implementation of those rights. Of course natural resource management and development is also a huge issue in light of climate change and an issue very close to Indigenous peoples rights and finally there's been an increased focus globally on how to change fundamental laws and structures including constitutions and other institutions for the purpose of conflict mitigation and management and essentially to build peace and promote nation building. The IPCA itself recognizes the import of constitutions as I said is a document for protecting and promoting Indigenous rights. They really came out of personally also my work but with Lena of course on international Indigenous peoples rights and international standards and realizing sometimes that the capacity of the international system to truly intervene on behalf of Indigenous peoples can of course be limited but if rights are also protected in a domestic constitution that gives you really a platform to approach courts and other institutions at the national level for better implementation of Indigenous peoples rights so while recognizing the incredibly important role that international standards play we also thought it's important to think about how these standards can be translated into constitutional provisions. The Indigenous peoples rights in constitutions assessment tool methodology and structure is based on international ideas constitutional assessment for women's equality importantly the women's equality assessment very much takes a substantive equality approach to constitution building but equality itself is the main theme and when we look to adapt that methodology for Indigenous peoples rights what we realize is that Indigenous peoples rights go way beyond equality of course that's part of it but there are many other issues that are touched upon that are animated by other principles for example self-determination so even though the methodology is similar the actual content of the tool is quite different and the IPCAT again takes a very rights-based approach that is a slightly distinct from the constitution assessment for women's equality. I'm honored to say that I've been working on this tool for god that's kind of scary but almost six years now we published it last year for Indigenous peoples day but of course with COVID it was difficult to organize any real events around it so this is our first attempt to truly promote the tool within the UN system and amongst Indigenous communities that we might not have current contact with. Before the tool was put out we thought it was very important to ensure that Indigenous peoples themselves had reviewed it as well as other experts that are working on these issues globally so we had a number of expert reviews of the tool which was individual reviews as well as organizational piloting in Nepal and in Mindanao in the Philippines hence our two speakers today who get too shortly. So why assess the constitution? An idea we talk about the constitution being existing really at the intersection of legal, political, and social aspects of society so it's important that constitutions can reflect the values of a country but also its aspirations and where it might be going. How can you bring these ideas of social and cultural rights together with ideas of broader justice and restructuring political power? We do see constitutions as a transformative tool for changing the relationships between groups and also between governments but there is a risk that constitutions can freeze certain rights or identities and entrench the status quo which can of course dangerous so I don't want to say it's all good but I think that overall we do see that constitutions even if they protect Indigenous rights in a sort of less than perfect form can provide a very important base then for advocacy for reform and improvement. The Ipka importantly does not intend to judge a constitution we're not trying to give a constitution a grade and say this one is great at protecting Indigenous rights and this one is not but rather it's really about assessing hence the name and to help people set an informed and evidence-based advocacy agenda. The idea is that constitutions can often be very overwhelming to approach for everybody and we wanted to really increase ownership and understanding of constitutional text amongst communities so the idea is to make a user-friendly methodology that allows people to approach the constitution in sort of small pieces while still taking a holistic understanding of how constitutions can promote Indigenous rights. Importantly I should say the tool can of course be used in times of constitutional reform or change but it is also relevant at any point of time in a country's constitutional history especially for Indigenous groups that are looking to push the social contract as Lynna said and sort of redefine their place in society. When looking at the tool it's important to note that not all constitutions contain all types of provisions or in the same way so not having a provision is not necessarily a bad thing and then this is not about grading a constitution so just because certain issues not reflected in the constitution that might just provide more opportunities for reform or again sometimes things are included in constitution in a sort of negative way or more limiting way and that can actually be a barrier to Indigenous rights so we have to look beyond whether or not the provision is just there and really look at the details of how it's drafted if it's not there is there a reason and what are some of the ways that international standards and practices in other countries might help us to think of solutions in terms of institutional design and also design of the constitution. I'll just really quickly go through the IPCAT methodology I appreciate that Lynna showed you the front page I do really encourage you to take a look at the tool it's free for download and we are also happy to look into printing it and developing it in different languages as Lynna mentioned so please feel free to follow up after if you are interested but I'll just try to give a brief overview of what the tool actually looks like so the IPCAT again is helpful to identify strengths weaknesses and gaps between international standards best practices and the constitutional text of someone's country and it's really about setting an evidence-based informed advocacy agenda and I don't want this to be taken purely as a civil society initiative I think it's really important and that's why we're very lucky that one of our speakers is representing the government perspective and one the civil society perspective today because the tool is really targeting both those groups and while I don't think about advocacy necessarily as only a civil society activity government officials can also be champions to advocate certain agendas within their normal realm of work I'm certainly roaming I think we'll reflect on this in his work in the BTA so it is important that also government actors are empowered to really understand what the constitution says about indigenous rights and especially if they're going to in some way represent indigenous people's interests to have an informed advocacy agenda that can be grounded in realistic and feasible provisions and practices so the IPCAT can be applied in a number of ways and I think the hopefully our speakers will also reflect on this it's possible to do as an individual or a group assessment as an individual assessment the tool can be used by any expert or interested party that wants to look at the constitution there's no requirement for any legal expertise per se we have been trying to really work with the tool in the form of group assessments you know again drawing on the benefits of participation but recognizing that there's a lot that can come out of dialogue and discussion around the tool and its questions that maybe gets lost when it's just an individual in a room the materials that you might need when you're looking at the indigenous people's constitution assessment tool is of course the constitution of your country but it's important to have access to other laws and does that's for research as well so again oftentimes constitutions might say as shall be described in law and it's important to check whether those laws actually came in fruition but also whether they're in line with the constitution so the tool while it focuses on constitutions is not meant to stop there you don't need to go through the whole tool every section every question if you're interested particularly in land rights for example or in representation in parliament or legislative bodies through quotas and other mechanisms then you can skip to that question and really just look at that the tool is meant to be broken down into different parts in that way importantly the methodology does not provide the answers but it's really providing a structured approach to textual analysis and that needs to root the results of the tool in a specific context so the answers will really come out of out of the participatory exercise or the assessment itself really basic overview the tool again is a representative rights-based approach to constitution building it's divided into eight thematic sections and under each of those sections are divided 33 total questions that are divided amongst these sections and we'll look at that in a moment each question includes a brief explanation of the issue it's looking at and then a table which includes international standards and good practice example provisions from constitutions around the world it's important to note that in doing this research you know indigenous people's rights and constitutions is really an emerging field Latin America has quite a lot more practice with this than other parts of the world just being a bit ahead on these concepts and probably because it was so pressing from such an early point of state building in Latin America but Asia Africa now really exploring how to protect indigenous peoples not only in constitutions but in legislation and since there are limited examples currently of constitutional provisions we did draw upon court decisions and legislation in developing the tool in order to ensure we are capturing the nuances of how indigenous rights are being practiced and promoted the good practice also includes sample language for evidence-based advocacy so again we'll go over that in a moment but essentially the idea is that the examples can you can actually borrow wording from the examples when you're advocating for improvement of provisions in your own country so you could say I really like how they did this in Chile for example and you're pulling direct wording it's all there for you in the tool and you don't have to do the research yourself but finally each question ends with a format or a template for users to record their findings and views on how to improve and strengthen that's the action planning so we'll get to that also in a moment. The ICAC covers a broad scope of issues as called for by indigenous peoples rights but it's important to note that most constitutions do not address every issue in the assessment even constitutions that are considered extremely progressive from an indigenous peoples standpoint do not include all of these issues so there's always scope again for greater inclusion of these issues are also for you think other rights like a basic right to equality that might be included in the constitution to push and expand on specific mention of indigenous peoples and their rights. As I mentioned before some issues may be addressed through legislation or law outside of the constitution there's some issues that might not be relevant to different country context so again this is why the tool is meant to be sort of adaptable. There also might be issues coming up in countries that are not reflected in the assessment tool so for example in the Philippines we had quite a lot of discussions around militaries right to enter indigenous peoples land and this became when I started to look at it it's not an issue that's addressed very directly in a lot of constitutions so we didn't end up including a separate question on it but it doesn't mean that it's not a very important issue that affects a lot of communities around the world. The eight sections of the are recognition and citizenship right to equality and anti-discrimination foundations for indigenous peoples rights autonomy agreement making and self-government consultation political participation and representation land territories and natural resource rights right to culture and social and economic development and finally protecting and promoting indigenous peoples rights which kind of recognizes that you can have very robust rights in the other seven categories but if there aren't mechanisms for implementing those rights be they courts or special commissions it will be very difficult to ensure that they are meaningful in practice. This is just an example to show you how certain questions fit under a section so this is section one on recognition and citizenship and then you see that you have a few questions that fall under that general heading so that's kind of what the tool looks like in all sections the sections have slightly different numbers of questions depending on the scope of issue that they're looking at. As I mentioned each question is also accompanied by an explanation so here you have this question number 22 does the constitution recognize indigenous languages and associated language rights and then this is only a subset of the explanation but this kind of walks you through an introduction to what indigenous language rights really mean and look like and why they're important. Then the tool includes the international standards as relevant mostly from UNDRIP and ILO 169 though it also pulls from ICCPR and other conventions where relevant. Again this is basically it's a direct quote as a lawyer of course I love words I think words are very important but the tool is also structured around recognition of that and the fact that these specific words that are used both in the international standards and in constitutions are very important so that's why we've included the actual text from the constitutions and the treaties and not just reference the article number so people can really read them and see what kind of words they might want to see reflected in their own constitution. After the international examples and standards there's national examples so these are again under the area of language rights just for an example but you see one from Finland one from Colombia and again it has an article number from the constitution the actual text which has been translated into English if needed and a sort of summary of what the provision is really saying and and doing. Following that you have the findings and action section as I mentioned all the questions are meant to be yes no questions and but you're not supposed to stop at yes no answers so the idea is also to note down specific things again about the wording or if there's any contradictory provisions in the constitution that you want to go back and look at and the finding section is followed by an action section I'll get into this in a moment in more detail but I think it's really important to note that actions can be very simple things that you might be doing the finding section if we take the example of language rights and you might see in the constitution that it says that language rights should be developed through law and you might not know off the top of your head whether they have been developed by law if there is a law on that topic in your country so the action could be as simple as going out to research that and then to read the law and see how it aligns with national standards so international standards so you can shape the actions they can be as big as running a radio campaign and as small again as doing some personal research I'm going to skip this because it's just basically about words again which I've already shared so the finding section again the questions are meant to be yes and no but often there'll be more than one provision that's relevant to answering the question so it's important not to just stop at one article or one section of the constitution but to really read through the constitution and see are there other provisions that might be relevant so if you're looking at representation in parliament for example you might want to look at the section on elections but also the role of parliament in society right might be important so it's important to look beyond again the very specific provisions the findings and responses should consider whether of course whether the constitution includes provisions relevant to the issue and if no then you want to go to the action section and maybe start developing a plan for advocating for inclusion of those issues if yes you want to list the specific provisions and then look at whether they could be improved or enhanced and again looking if the phrasing is consistent with international standards we find the actions to be the most critical section so these actions should be based on findings but it's really the way that the tool takes shape and supports real advocacy on the ground or the promotion of indigenous peoples rights agenda within a government institution for example um some examples of findings again if the provision doesn't exist you might want to advocate for reform to the constitution which is difficult so it's also possible to focus more on a policy or legislative level um if the provision does exist but the wording is problematic maybe um you could have an action plan for how it could be improved citing other examples from around the world or maybe you would want to have a court case um Shankar I think can reflect on the power of this of going before the Supreme Court and asking for an interpretation of certain provisions which has some risks but can be very beneficial and of course the provision might exist and be well worded but you still know that there's problems and actual implementation so again the action might be related to really pushing for better implementation of a good provision that's just sitting on paper um we talk about smart planning I'm going to probably skip this too in the interest of time but um questions to guide action planning can include looking again whether specific language changes are needed um is there a possibility of addressing through something short of constitutional change and what further research and advocacy might be required it's important when you're thinking about actions just not to be too general or too broad because then it's very hard to have follow-up so the idea with the smart action planning is really to have a specific time-bound plan for how you want to address these issues um I'll conclude now basically but just to say that um you know after the IPCAT is over and you've done the assessment what really matters of course is how the findings are used um how the actions are implemented um it's important to sort of prioritize a lot of times there's going to be many issues many sort of quote-unquote shortcomings that you might identify that you want to work on but it's important to identify matters that might require immediate attention um and also prioritize constitutional provisions that might require implementation because that's a good place to start and build trust with the government before pushing for reform um it's also the IPCAT can be a tool for educating people government civil society and media on how the constitution promotes and protects indigenous peoples rights so um with the Kawe in uh the women's equality assessment that we worked on in Myanmar we're now breaking down small briefs that look at certain issues and draw really draw on the assessment on the women's equality assessment but also um on the context in Myanmar to reflect on how women are um situated in society there but we we basically have used those briefs as a way to summarize the findings and bring them forward um to different actors within the Myanmar economy um target audience will obviously depend on who you are right if you are a government actor um your target audience might be other government actors that you're trying to um understand or support indigenous peoples rights and issues um so key political decision makers if you are also civil society is important so um targeting political party leaders or elected members if they're specialized commissions maybe looking at what those are and the procedures in your country to approach them um it's also good to think about how uh civil society and the media can help to kind of share these messages and bring them to the attention of the general public um of course international actors in the un system which is why we're here today um and then the general public citizens and non-citizens it might be very important to also explain to them indigenous peoples right especially um as you see for example in Chile now um these moments when this kind of pierces through into the public consciousness and everyone's sort of talking and thinking about constitutional reform and indigenous peoples rights um it's good to have a strategy for how you're going to address the public on these issues to ensure support um let's skip this post assessment communications and just um thank you all again for your time uh and for listening to me I'm sorry if that was very fast but the tool is again online and available um at any time if you'd like to look at it and I myself am available by email or phone um to discuss the tool in the way it might be might be applied um in your country or your work um so with that I think I will conclude my section of the presentation though I will be here through Q&A to answer questions as well on the tool and some of our experiences in implementing it for now I would like to turn over to our speakers um Romeo Salida from the Philippines and advocate Shankar Limbu um from Nepal um I both countries are very close to my heart and we've been working um with both on the development of this tool for many years now um but I do want to acknowledge that Shankar um was my first boss um ever out of law school and I was lucky enough to do a fellowship um with him and his organization the Lawyers Association for the Human Rights of Nepalese Indigenous Peoples um in 2011 to 2012 um when there was an active constitution writing process going on in Nepal um Shankar has provided excellent leadership to the Indigenous Peoples Movement in Nepal for many years um not only by bringing critical cases in front of the Supreme Court um but also serving in the international community on MRIP um formally uh and really actually um doing community trainings and educating people on complicated legal concepts to ensure that communities can engage on these concepts from around Nepal um so it's a true honor to have him here with us today um and it was great to work with him on this tool um since he's essentially my origin story to being part of this um movement at all and uh Romi Saliga is um as Lena mentioned a member of the Bangsamoro Transition Authority so um for those of you that don't know uh the Philippines in 2019 passed uh the Bangsamoro Organic Law which essentially was meant to um put action behind the constitutional commitment to greater autonomy for the Bangsamoro region which is in the southern part of the Philippines um and the idea actually was of course to increase as usual with um decentralization to increase autonomy and participation decision making but there's a number of provisions on Indigenous Peoples' Rights um some which are very progressive actually most of which are very progressive um but figuring out how these interact with the national framework for Indigenous Peoples' Rights and also for Romi I think representing um Indigenous Peoples within the BTA um what their issues are and really pushing for attention um I saw recently that he is sponsoring different bills um so really pushing for you know um the furthering of the Indigenous Peoples' Agenda within within Mindanao so uh with that I will turn it over um just to say again that they they reflect two different perspectives so Shankar of course is coming more from the civil society perspective um as a as a lawyer and advocate and Romi um though he has a background in that area as well um is really now speaking more from the government side so I really appreciate in the remarks that both of them can kind of bring out with those distinctions might be and how the tool might be useful or limited um as Linda said um for each of your respective sectors so I think uh we'll start with Shankar if that's all right and um I will just meet myself Shankar uh the floor is yours uh thank you very much Amanda uh thank you very much for providing this opportunity to international uh idea this is a very relevant program to expose about the relevant tools relating to the constitutions and how the constitutions can be assessed um and I once again that it's good to see you and and you said you just addressed me as a boss now you are my expert that's the turnover okay uh the constitution is not only the supreme law it is the source of rights powers and resources of the nations however this is not always the case in the context of indigenous peoples in many cases constitution is the source of discrimination exclusion and institutionalizes the structural violence against indigenous peoples it is also the political documents that replace the collective will of the people however the challenges indigenous peoples are not recognized as the peoples in many constitutions in the world even many constitutions in the world recognize the indigenous peoples their rights which are good to read but not realized on the ground that results multiple forms of injustices including racism assimilation discrimination exclusion and dispositions from land territories and natural resources and many more so that's why the constitutions has like dark site and a bright site as well so now I come to the uh just saying about the constitution 2015 of Nepal and the constitution making process that amenda briefly touched upon we were very lucky to having amenda at that time that was a very crucial time for us because we needed so many informations and experts and also the connecting with the different organizations in the constitution making process to know about the norms and values of the constitutions and also the constitution I mean the conventionally we all know about that constitutions and constitution making process it's it's captured by the elite in many countries so but that's not the case right now that what we have experience it's a participatory process and it's also the the it's it's the domain is now not only to the light uh for the light but it's a domain of the people and the ground so that is very crucial so the discrimination dispossession historical injustices that might be the source is the constitution which I mentioned about it that was also the case in Nepal where I'm from so we had like 10 years of armed conflict led by the Maoist party and 7 000 peoples lost their lives lots of human rights violations and still the the impact we have been patient now from the both sides uh these the human rights violations were occurred but the army and the and the the Maoist fighters site as well the majority victims were indigenous peoples for two reasons the Maoists raised the indigenous peoples issues uh such as like historical injustices and structural violence and racism based on the Hindu caste system that and then so that the the the strategy of the Maoist enticed the indigenous peoples in the large number of indigenous peoples they joined in a Maoist force and the the second one uh the Maoist fight in the indigenous areas so there was a peace uh occurred in 2006 concluded with having a kind of national consensus promulgating new constitutions through the constitutional assembly so meaning to say that the constitution is also the tool for the conflict management as well in the context of Nepal and also the when we talk about the conflict then it's that's impacts to the indigenous peoples obviously because they are so vulnerable and then also the constitution making process directly it's a concerns of indigenous peoples and everywhere so but the what happened is the first constituent assembly there was overwhelming representation of indigenous peoples but when we talk about the representation of indigenous peoples the the representation was not meaningful meaning to say that they were not accountable to the indigenous peoples but they were accountable to their respective political parties so we had like very slim space to raise the indigenous peoples issues I know that I still remember Amanda and I we were just like struggling to know about that the what kinds of good practices the the around the world then what could be the best to you know the approach in the constitution makes making process the how the indigenous peoples can intervene in effectively so I guess that was the very beginning to emerge these two so the indigenous I mean the Amanda conceived probably that that's the tool see I did not mention about about it but I guess when I when the tool came up as a book form then I realized I recalled about that whole process again come back to the constitution making process the first constituent assembly was dissolved because the indigenous peoples were so organized and so effective and there were issues were raised in the constitution making process the dominant group the Hindu high caste group who dominated the country for the 250 years they did not want it to give a power seared to the indigenous peoples and other excluded groups like Dalit and other Madesis so meaning to say that the constitution making process it's also a process bringing all excluded groups in our countries in our experience I guess that when I read about the tools it has been reflected very well that how these excluded groups can be included in the constitution making process which is very very crucial and the first CA was dissolved and then this there was a second CA so the second CA was structurally formed systematically exclude the indigenous peoples and other marginalized group and so that the constitution making process ironically taken away again by the elite groups so I have to raised about it and then I when I gone through these tools that is marvelously explained about that how this process can be taken away and how the excluded group can still be very active and then can be careful about this whole process so they can be the part of the constitution making process so the new constitution was promulgated in 2015 and then what happened is there was a kind of a big argument between the excluded groups including indigenous peoples and the dominant group because the dominant group I mean the mainstreaming political parties were representing the dominant groups so they were saying that the new constitution is the best constitution of the world and then so indigenous peoples were and indigenous peoples movements and indigenous peoples leaders are quite reluctant so what's happening how to assess about the constitution so we use these tools timely manner that the draft form it was provided by Amanda and that used to analyzed about the constitutions and what happened that that we came to know that this the new constitutions there are 11 provisions out of like 300 articles there are 11 provisions against indigenous peoples 23 provisions which is discriminates and then 49 provisions that exclude the indigenous peoples and five provisions that establishes the supremacy of the caste again so that we came to know that this constitution is the racist constitution so that on that ground indigenous peoples started taking the movement and the government says that the constitution is not written in the in the stone or so it can be changed over a time so they have to you know step back from their position so that's why these kinds of tools is very helpful I guess this is very important this tool when I read gone through it it has like two part one is like procedural part I have already talked about it and another is a substantive part it's the content that has been very well elaborated and Amanda has mentioned about it how it worked I mean now I would like to you know this is the relevant this is the side event of the MREP and this tool can be very helpful for MREP directly and indirectly why because this tool provides a pragmatic tools for assessment of the constitution of respective countries and then I agree with Amanda's now the conventional thought about thinking about the constitution and constitutional matters that has been sifted a lot now the ordinary people they should have like the capacity or they should able to understand the constitution to analyze the constitution this is the right tool so I guess that I've been participating in lots of UN meetings and forads so the many interventions are very good but not technically probably that helpful to the specific to support to the specific mandate of the UN for us or mechanisms such as MREP so these tools if it is has been widely used by the indigenous peoples and ordinary what we call in a legal term is a layman they can understand and they can realize about the the constitution and they can come up with a very good intervention so that can be helpful for the MREP I guess that I would encourage to use and to at least read these tools and use it because these these all the another good point about this tool what I found is it uses the demystified languages very simple plain languages layman can understand about it what we say often when we talk about the constitution constitution is a living document so it can be changed if we have to rectify about the constitution if there is gaps and laps we can identify and that if we have to rectify if we have to amend it this will be very very helpful and I should stop here thank you very much thank you so much Shankar those are excellent remarks and a really good balance to learn a bit about Nepal and also some ideas about how the tool might be useful to different actors so thank you very much for your continual support and yes the tool is very much I should have said this in the development design for Nepal actually originally it was created in Nepal both Atlanta and myself were working there and thought that it would be very relevant to the process of course and then it was expanded to be globally relevant but it was Nepal that truly inspired us to undertake this work and just looking at the extent to which indigenous people's issues were were relevant and being discussed in the constitution making process so with that I'd like to hand it over to Roni Saliga yes thank you Amanda and good evening to our participants virtually and of course to my co-presenter thank you also for inviting me to this webinar Amanda just to give a little context Amanda I think the situation of the indigenous peoples here in in the Bangsamoro is quiet distinct compared to others because like while we have the constitution of the the country the Philippines but we have also the little constitution which is the Bangsamoro organic law that many of the provisions that recognizes the rights of indigenous peoples the Philippines constitution some of these are already devolved to the autonomous Bangsamoro government so that's why some there is a problem usually in claiming this to the national government because the national government keep on saying that you can claim this in the regional government that was the the issues of the indigenous peoples even before and so sad because in the crafting of the constitution even the armed law before depart the indigenous peoples did not have any participation there's that is also the reason why during our assessment I think we see some deficiency in the law itself as far as the protection of the rights of the indigenous peoples is concerned so the tool actually helped us revisit and I just come to see that in the Philippines constitution the same provisions that applies for our Bangsamoro also applies to us you see this is the now this is the great some level of confusion because like on the identity the same identity are claiming by the but there are like for us we have the different situation compared to the others so somewhat a minority within a minority indigenous people so that's the situation and we did with this tool actually I appreciate the tool when we do it in I think that was February or 2019 when you have the assessment because like what I said in constitution making usually we need the participation indigenous peoples participation is vital you cannot do any legislations like what we are doing we we can maybe frame the best pass the best legislations but without the indigenous peoples participation it is still useless you see so we really need because ownership we need to ensure that the indigenous peoples claim ownership oversets uh legislative measures that we pass in the congress because I mean in the the parliament so the the the tool in itself provided the opportunity for the indigenous peoples because they seldom use what they seldom participate especially if it is a government initiated because sometimes discrimination is there or the process in itself is not suited for them so we with this tool I think they can do whatever they want and they can at least with their own understanding they can help uh participate on analyzing what uh are these provisions really responded or to the to the issues you know so so that that one thing and especially now also that we are drafting our own our own laws I think that the tool is very very relevant because we managed to get what they really want to be included you know in the the provisions that recognize their economic cultural and political rights you see they have their representation and there are provisions actually like on the issue of identity we manage with the participation we we manage to make a more uh clarity clear definition as to differentiate the non-moral from the indigenous peoples because the indigenous peoples that's applied to everybody now for the minority ones so that's that's the term the non-moral indigenous peoples and the very good thing is the people are stand stand stand to this uh to this definition so they because they really appreciate it because it comes it comes from them so another another one that I appreciate with this tool also is it uh created consensus among the leaders especially in prioritizing among the issues which one they think is to be included no to be included in the the legislation in the ip code that we have drafted so that thing that thing is very important and at least we managed to some issues that were not so clear in the bol we managed to make it really articulated clear in the ip code though maybe not all the issues are included but the substantive uh some substantive issues were were really articulated in that law so later maybe you can you can see that because I think part of the inspiration in crafting that law is the input that we get in our workshop on the ip cut workshop secondly that I think very much important also in in this uh in the tool it creates some feeling of uh how do I call it for the ip really to claim that this law is not for the bang samoro government not for anybody else but it's for them so that that that one and I think the most important part also with the with the bang samoro organic law because before we managed to articulate that the recognition of the rights in the bang samoro should not go beyond the constitution and it should observe international should be in accordance with the UN DRIP with the UDSR the United Declaration of Human Rights and the national laws which is the IPRA so meaning to say that the law is already a advantage for for the indigenous peoples because them all the minimum all the minimum standards are in place but they need to just know what are still lacking you know what are still lacking which I think through to the workshop we did and some subsequent activities we did they managed to identify what other issues that need to be articulated and be cleared in the IP law so I think that's that one that one is very much important also for us so if I may sum up so ownership through this tool and I think the participation of course of the indigenous peoples and articulating some issues that were not clear in the bang samoro organic law or in the in the Philippine constitution to make it more relevant in the case of the indigenous peoples in the bang samoro because really they have a unique situation here you know so the tool really is very shall I call it very appropriate especially for indigenous peoples who seldom participate in like government initiated or some other initiated because you know IPs are so quiet shy because of the sometimes they are discriminated if they are group with or some some groups are calling it calling active conducting activities for themselves so at least with this tool they can manage to really share and articulate participate to ensure that their issues should be tackled or included in the discussion so I think that's what all can I share Amanda. Excellent thank you Romi that's a lot right on time so I really appreciate it and thank you for reflecting on the different ways that the tool was able to help and creating consensus on priorities and really helping I think what you said is is really key we recognize again that of course indigenous including indigenous peoples rights in constitutions is is very important but then pushing for implementation of those rights and making sure that they're real on the ground and is a whole another thing and also the framing of the rights themselves should be done in a way that respects self-determination which is why it's critical that indigenous peoples are included in the original conversations around legal reform and also then are able to effectively participate and I think that's really was our hope and certainly my hope with the tool is that it would be really a tool for communities to be able to engage in more constructive evidence-based advocacy so that they're not entering into antagonistic relationships with the government but actually constructive relationships where very much as you're saying the suggested definitions and terms for legal reform are actually coming from the communities themselves and then being adopted by the government so I think that that sounds like the right order anything and if the tool can enable that then that's that's very important to us so I want to thank both the speakers for their excellent perspectives and we have about half an hour left for the event so I'd like to turn it over for any questions now I don't see any yet in the chat box but if anyone has questions feel free to direct them at any of us as panelists and we'd be happy to address from from our perspective so I'd like to just open the floor are there questions um so Fiona says Romi really nice to capture the capacity of the tool to empower indigenous peoples to own the laws and their reform and do I see the tool as a means for providing a platform for conversation or engagement between indigenous people to cross regions for example through cross regional advocacy um thank you so much for that question I think it's excellent and yes definitely um you know what we're really hoping is that over time we'll be able to run this tool in in more and more places and sort of have a body of comparative knowledge not only what's in the tool already but really how these things are working in practice so these conversations today with Shankar and Romi are already an example of that you know to really understand the nuances of indigenous peoples rights we have to um examine how these things are unfolding in practice and I think a lot can be gained from dialogue and discussion because often um the law itself can look quite good on paper I mean I think the Philippines is an excellent example of the um indigenous people rights at the national piece of legislation is written almost exactly off of the UN drip so it follows every provision it's very progressive and includes a lot of excellent rights um but there wasn't as much thought that meant to maybe how those were going to be actually implemented in practice it was just the sort of drive to be admitted to international standards which is important but then balancing that with feasibility with local context and making sure that it works is is critical so um I think hopefully through cross regional dialogues also cross country cross border um bringing indigenous groups together to kind of share what is their assessment of their constitutions and are they facing some of the same challenges um so that they can brainstorm on how to overcome those together um both using the international system but also domestic systems hopefully for implementation of constitutions um all right are there any other other questions or I don't know if the panelists have questions for each other um I could ask Abanda from a question from to both Romeo and Shankar about the about implementing or using the tool if you do encounter any challenges of applying to tool and if you did if if any if you find any any parts any way of also fit more challenging than the other what may have helped in in your case or or if you would have any other advice on us on how to how to make sure that is as user-friendly as possible thank you very much uh Linaji it's very relevant and then important questions that you raised it that how we can make it more uh users friendly or how the outreach of the tool that can be uh made one thing that as I said that this is the uh the tool is in the demystified languages of many legal terms and is still there but that has been explained explained very well in a simple language so people can understand it but still uh there is a challenge of language barrier because of the you know the the English which is not the first language of many indigenous peoples very few have like they can understand English so if that can be translated into another languages and another uh what I found is this tool is not only uh it's a very useful for indigenous people but those other bodies and authorities or leaders who is working in indigenous sectors or working for indigenous peoples it's also very important for them also because that we we have I mean there are good constitutions having like a positive a progressive constitution as Amanda turned about it that having a good provision about the indigenous peoples that reflects about the aspirations of the indigenous peoples and also uh but again that uh that is not the sufficient so that has to be translated into the ground then meaning to say that there should be the another level of laws that has to be you know the the enacted to substantiate about the constitutional provisions but this tool will give exactly the right information that how that the constitution provisions will be translated into the law and that can be implemented in the ground so the people can feel about what is written in the constitution it's number one right so this is very useful for the lawmakers as well the parliamentarians as well right and also the lawyers themselves also it's not necessary that the all lawyers are the constitutional lawyers so they need the kinds of the knowledge special knowledge about the constitutional law that is not sufficient if you are even the constitutional lawyer you may not understand about the indigenous peoples you know the law or indigenous peoples concerns that you may have to face the challenge about it this tool will give you the correct and pragmatic information in your career as well in your legal field as well so this is also the very useful for lawyers as well that's what i've felt i mean i i i have a feeling even that amend us is that we after promulgation of the constitution we have filed the number of cases in the supreme court we got like very good jurisprudence and precedence from the supreme court but we use these tools that how to you know that to get like the references to substantiate or our logic or argument in the court right so that's why this is very helpful for practicing lawyers as well not only the lawmaker not only the leaders not only the indigenous peoples because what we have to think about it the the constitution is not only the only for certain people certainly like people certainly you know the the groups but it should be for all so that why what happened is when we use the questionnaires as a test on the ground i realized about it we translated into napali so the people are talking about and interpreting about the provisions of the constitution of uh napal referring to the un trip referring to the convention 169 referring to the provision of the the the bolivian constitution in relation to the land territories and natural resources in relation to autonomy right so that's why what i felt about it this tool would be helpful for nation building process as well in a broader sense in a practical manner right so i should stop here so maybe my suggestion would be it should be translated into the different indigenous languages and so preparing you know the thematic basis as well what amenda says about it maybe some people can use only one theme like land territories and natural resources maybe other people can use about like autonomy and self self-determination part or other can use about the free prior and informed consent so that that's why maybe more resources will be produced and it will be it will be a very helpful for the indigenous peoples and other stakeholders as well yes i agree with what my co-presenter had said really there are there are terminologies that usually do not have any equivalent to the ip language so that's why an expert maybe can help in articulating in explaining what does it mean and when we translate it in the provisions usually have the difficulty there because if we put it that way then look at the constitution it might end as illegal because it you cannot find it anywhere in the constitution so what we did use usually is is there any creative way or other way of explaining it without necessarily become illegal because it's or unconstitutional because there is no basis in the constitution so we did some like flexibility in the provisions so that it can still be accommodated you know because indigenous peoples practices really are sometimes if we look at it on the constitution of the country it's always unconstitutional because you cannot find it now well in the constitution in all the provisions so you need to some sort of articulation that it can still be find a ways in in the provisions that can still be accommodated or else we need to introduce it i think that's also good with with with us because we are legislating new laws so this new law sometimes we manage to incorporate some work some terminologies that are not in the constitution but uh we include it in the uh because at least we are we are empowered or we are authorized to as long as uh we lost uh Rami maybe he's coming back give him a moment to come into focus yeah all right um well i guess we'll wait for him and see if he can and join again um otherwise if there are no other questions from the audience i think we'll move towards concluding the event um but i'll just make sure there are no more questions i don't see any in the chat um so i think we've addressed most of them i just want to reiterate that um we remain as idea available to discuss this tool in more detail um especially shankarji i think your idea is about how to share this tool with amrit itself um i know this year's theme for indigenous peoples day is actually reimagining the social contract so in that way this tool i think will be very timely for discussions this year um around how constitutions are such an important site um for indigenous peoples rights i personally would just really like to thank um especially the participants for really engaging and taking this seriously to reflect on your experience with the tool it means a lot to me and um lana's uh support from the very beginning for us developing this tool and for really making indigenous peoples issues a priority for international idea which we really hadn't worked on before so i really want to thank her for that and um she's really created the space for that um within the institution globally so i'm very grateful to everyone who participated and for your support um again it's been six years coming this tool so there's many other people who also participated who weren't here today but i i do want to say that shankar and lana have definitely been there from the very beginning and romi um played a very important role in helping us bring this into the hands of governments and really proving that this can be useful not only for civil society and indigenous communities but also for government actors that are engaged in legal reform so thank you very much to everyone and um please again know that the tool is free and available we are exploring translations um please send requests um as shankar said of course translations are very important but the challenges there are so many indigenous languages it's a bit difficult for us to know which ones we should translate and of course also some you know we don't have translators on hand but if you are interested um particularly in like a section of the tool that we could help to translate into your local language then we are more than happy to explore those options as well so please do be in touch uh sehwaro to shankar and thank you very much to everyone who participated today thank you very much thank you amanda thank you linaji thank you everyone thank you for listening we thank you for comment thanks and i will say also thank you on behalf of romi because i'm sure that he would like to do that himself but not here um so thank you so much i look forward to being in touch with all of you separately and in the future