90
CULTURAL RIGHTS
3
HRC Concluding Observations on Canada, UN doc. CCPR/C/79/Add.105, 1999, para. 8;
Mexico, UN doc. CCPR/C/79/Add.109, 1999, para. 19; Norway, UN doc. CCPR/C/79/
Add.112, 1999, paras 10, 17; Australia, CCPR/CO/69/Aus, 2000, para. 9; CESCR General
Comment No.15, on The Right to Water (ICESCR Arts 11, 12), UN doc. E/C.12/2002/11, at
para. 7; CESCR Concluding Observations on the Russian Federation, UN doc.
E/C.12/1/Add.94, 2003, paras 11, 39. See also, Apirana Mahuika et al v. New Zealand.
(Communication No 547/1993) CCPR/C/70/D/547/1993, (2000) para. 9.2.
4
The CESCR held a Day of Discussion on 27 November 2000, during which members
stated that traditional knowledge and intellectual and cultural heritage, both as individual
and collective rights, could be addressed in relation to Article 15(1)(c). See CESCR,
Report on the 22nd, 23rd and 24th Sessions, UN doc. E/C.12/2000/21, paras 578–635.
5
HRC General Comment No.24, on Issues Relating to Reservations Made upon
Ratification or Accession to the Covenant or the Optional Protocols thereto, or in
Relation to Declarations under Article 41 of the Covenant UN doc. HRI/GEN/1/REV7,
2004. (1994), para. 8. See also Anaya, S.J., ‘Indigenous rights norms in contemporary
international law’, 8 Arizona Journal of Intellectual and Comparative Law 1, 15 (1991) and
Prott, L.V., ‘Cultural rights as peoples’ rights in international law’, in J. Crawford (ed.), The
Rights of Peoples, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1988, p. 93.
6
See CERD Concluding Observations on Botswana, UN doc. A/57/18, 2002; Suriname. UN
doc. CERD/C/64/CO/9/Rev.2; CERD General Recommendation No. XXIII on the Rights of
Indigenous Peoples, UN doc. CERD/C/51/Misc.13/Rev.4, 1997.
7
With regard to indigenous peoples’ rights, this jurisprudence is summarized (in English,
Spanish and French) in ‘A Guide to Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Under ICERD: A Briefing
on Indigenous Peoples’ Rights and the UN Human Rights Committee’; ‘A Guide to
Indigenous Peoples’ Rights in the Inter-American Human Rights System’; and ‘A Guide to
Indigenous Peoples’ Rights’ in the ILO. All are available at: www.forestpeoples.org
8
Bernard Ominayak, Chief of the Lubicon Lake Band v. Canada, Report of the HRC, 45 UN
GAOR Supp. (No. 43), UN doc. A/45/40 , vol. 2, 1990, 1. See also Kitok v. Sweden, Report of
the HRC, 43 UN GAOR Supp. (No. 40) UN doc. A/43/40; Lovelace v. Canada (No. 24/1977),
Report of the HRC, 36 UN GAOR Supp. (No. 40) 166, UN doc. A/36/40, 1981. I. Lansman et
al. v. Finland (Communication No. 511/1992); Apirana Mahuika et al v. New Zealand,
Communication No. 547/1993, UN doc. CCPR/C/70/D/547/1993, 2000; J. Lansman et al. v.
Finland, Communication No. 671/1995, UN doc. CCPR/C/58/D/671/ 1995; and HRC General
Comment No.23 on the Rights of Minorities, UN doc. CCPR/C/21/ Rev.1/Add.5, 1994.
Although not decided under Article 27, see also Hopu v. France, Communication No.
549/1993: France. 29/12/97, UN doc. CCPR/C/60/D/549/1993/Rev.1, 1997.
9
Among others, see HRC Concluding Observations on Chile, UN doc. CCPR/C/
79/Add.104, 1999, para. 22; HRC Concluding Observations on Australia UN doc. CCPR/
CO/69/AUS, 2000, paras. 10 and 11; and Bernard Ominayak, Chief of the Lubicon Lake
Band v. Canada, op. cit.