Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • OAS Commission Again Sides With Shoshone Indians

    Uploaded by

    Martin Edwin Andersen
    31 views1 page
    Insight on the News Jan. 18, 2003 The Organization of American States (OAS) human-rights commission yesterday reaffirmed an earlier decision in favor of land-rights claims by Utah's Western Shoshone Indian tribe, rejecting an 11th-hour attempt by the federal government to derail the Native Americans' legal arguments. It marked the first time that the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) found that treatment of Native Americans by the U.S. government violated international human-rights law. The IACHR did not require that any lands claimed by the Western Shoshone be returned to them, but it did call on the United States to establish a fair legal process to determine the merits of the land claims. "This is a very reasonable result that respects the fundamental human rights of the Indians but does not place any undue burden on the United States," said Steve Tullberg, Washington director of the Indian Law Resource Center, one of the groups representing the Western Shoshone. At issue was a 30-year-old dispute between two elderly Western Shoshone sisters, Carrie and Mary Dann, over the right to graze their livestock on traditional Indian lands. In September, 40 heavily armed federal agents backed by a helicopter seized 227 of the Danns' cattle and sold them at a public auction. On Dec. 17, two government agents served the Danns with a notice of claiming their unauthorized use of "federal lands" and ordered them to remove their livestock -- some 250 cattle and 1,000 horses -- from the premises.

    Original Title

    OAS Commission Again Sides With Shoshone Indians


    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Insight on the News Jan. 18, 2003 The Organization of American States (OAS) human-rights commission yesterday reaffirmed an earlier decision in favor of land-rights claims by Utah's Western Shoshone Indian tribe, rejecting an 11th-hour attempt by the federal government to derail the Native Americans' legal arguments. It marked the first time that the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) found that treatment of Native Americans by the U.S. government violated international human-rights law. The IACHR did not require that any lands claimed by the Western Shoshone be returned to them, but it did call on the United States to establish a fair legal process to determine the merits of the land claims. "This is a very reasonable result that respects the fundamental human rights of the Indians but does not place any undue burden on the United States," said Steve Tullberg, Washington director of the Indian Law Resource Center, one of the groups representing the Western Shoshone. At issue was a 30-year-old dispute between two elderly Western Shoshone sisters, Carrie and Mary Dann, over the right to graze their livestock on traditional Indian lands. In September, 40 heavily armed federal agents backed by a helicopter seized 227 of the Danns' cattle and sold them at a public auction. On Dec. 17, two government agents served the Danns with a notice of claiming their unauthorized use of "federal lands" and ordered them to remove their livestock -- some 250 cattle and 1,000 horses -- from the premises.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    31 views1 page

    OAS Commission Again Sides With Shoshone Indians

    Uploaded by

    Martin Edwin Andersen
    Insight on the News Jan. 18, 2003 The Organization of American States (OAS) human-rights commission yesterday reaffirmed an earlier decision in favor of land-rights claims by Utah's Western Shoshone Indian tribe, rejecting an 11th-hour attempt by the federal government to derail the Native Americans' legal arguments. It marked the first time that the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) found that treatment of Native Americans by the U.S. government violated international human-rights law. The IACHR did not require that any lands claimed by the Western Shoshone be returned to them, but it did call on the United States to establish a fair legal process to determine the merits of the land claims. "This is a very reasonable result that respects the fundamental human rights of the Indians but does not place any undue burden on the United States," said Steve Tullberg, Washington director of the Indian Law Resource Center, one of the groups representing the Western Shoshone. At issue was a 30-year-old dispute between two elderly Western Shoshone sisters, Carrie and Mary Dann, over the right to graze their livestock on traditional Indian lands. In September, 40 heavily armed federal agents backed by a helicopter seized 227 of the Danns' cattle and sold them at a public auction. On Dec. 17, two government agents served the Danns with a notice of claiming their unauthorized use of "federal lands" and ordered them to remove their livestock -- some 250 cattle and 1,000 horses -- from the premises.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 1

    OAS Commission Again Sides With Shoshone Indians

    By Martin Edwin Andersen Insight on the News Jan. 18, 2003 The Organization of Ameri an !tates "OA!# h$man%rights ommission yesterday reaffirmed an ear&ier de ision in fa'or of &and%rights &aims (y )tah*s +estern !hoshone ,ndian tri(e, re-e ting an 11th%ho$r attem.t (y the federa& go'ernment to derai& the /ati'e Ameri ans* &ega& arg$ments. ,t mar0ed the first time that the ,nter%Ameri an 1ommission on 2$man 3ights ",A123# fo$nd that treatment of /ati'e Ameri ans (y the ).!. go'ernment 'io&ated internationa& h$man%rights &aw. The ,A123 did not re4$ire that any &ands &aimed (y the +estern !hoshone (e ret$rned to them, ($t it did a&& on the )nited !tates to esta(&ish a fair &ega& .ro ess to determine the merits of the &and &aims. 5This is a 'ery reasona(&e res$&t that res.e ts the f$ndamenta& h$man rights of the ,ndians ($t does not .&a e any $nd$e ($rden on the )nited !tates,5 said !te'e T$&&(erg, +ashington dire tor of the ,ndian 6aw 3eso$r e 1enter, one of the gro$.s re.resenting the +estern !hoshone. At iss$e was a 30%year%o&d dis.$te (etween two e&der&y +estern !hoshone sisters, 1arrie and Mary 7ann, o'er the right to graze their &i'esto 0 on traditiona& ,ndian &ands. ,n !e.tem(er, 80 hea'i&y armed federa& agents (a 0ed (y a he&i o.ter seized 229 of the 7anns* att&e and so&d them at a .$(&i a$ tion. On 7e . 19, two go'ernment agents ser'ed the 7anns with a noti e of &aiming their $na$thorized $se of 5federa& &ands5 and ordered them to remo'e their &i'esto 0 %% some 2:0 att&e and 1,000 horses %% from the .remises. The B$rea$ of 6and Management "B6M# &aimed that the 7anns* &i'esto 0 o'ergrazed the range, &o ated a(o$t ;0 mi&es so$theast of E&0o, /e'. The B6M a&so a&&eged that the 7anns owed grazing fees of a&most <3 mi&&ion %% re.resenting three de ades of a $m$&ated arrears. 2owe'er, the 7anns o$ntered that they ha'e a right to .ast$re their anima&s on the federa& &and $nder the terms of the 18;3 Treaty of 3$(y =a&&ey. The +estern !hoshone ha'e ref$sed to .ay fees for grazing their anima&s on &and they onsider .art of their (irthright. !ome 2; mi&&ion a res in /e'ada a&one are $nder dis.$te, range&and the ,ndians say they ne'er &ega&&y t$rned o'er to the federa& go'ernment. ,n ma0ing its .ro'isiona& r$&ing in O to(er, the ,A123 fo$nd that the )nited !tates $sed i&&egitimate means to gain ontro& of the Ameri an ,ndians* an estra& &ands. The federa& go'ernment, it said, 'io&ated the e4$a&%.rote tion, fair%tria& and right%to%.ri'ate%.ro.erty &a$ses of the Ameri an 7e &aration on the 3ights and 7$ties of Man. The rights (ody demanded that the ).!. go'ernment ret$rn the 7anns* onfis ated att&e and ha&t f$rther a tions against the sisters .ending re'iew of the ase. Offi ia&s at the !tate 7e.artment re.orted&y are 5'ery $.set5 with the OA! r$&ing, and ,ndian rights a ti'ists say they fear s$ h hosti&ity signa&s the federa& go'ernment*s ontin$ed intention to defy the ,A123.
    Martin Edwin Andersen is a re.orter for Insight.

    You might also like