Deusdedit Ruhangariyo
ICT
Around the World: U’wa Indigenous victory: Court rules against Colombian government; Aboriginal legal service challenges Tasmania centre’s exclusive action plan; and Indigenous services Canada warns staff of difficult budget cuts.
COLOMBIA: Court rules against Colombian government
On December 20, 2024, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights delivered a groundbreaking decision against the Colombian government, finding it responsible for extensive human rights violations against the U’wa Indigenous people. The comprehensive ruling, spanning over 200 pages, identified violations across multiple fundamental rights including environmental access, freedom of expression and assembly, Indigenous self-determination, collective property, political participation, information access, cultural participation, children’s rights, and judicial protection, Mongabay reported on July 11.
The U’wa Nation, situated across five eastern Colombian departments – Arauca, Santander, Casanare, Northern Santander and Boyacá – has steadfastly defended its ancestral territory and culture since the early 1990s, confronting tourism projects and natural resource extraction, particularly oil and gas operations.
This landmark victory represents the culmination of a nearly three-decade legal battle. The U’wa people are the first Colombian Indigenous group to successfully sue their government in this international court, setting a crucial precedent for other Indigenous communities across Colombia and the region.
The court mandated that the Colombian government complete several critical tasks within two years: formally title the territory, clarify colonial titles, conduct participatory processes for current extractive projects, and ensure that projects within or adjacent to U’wa reservation lands do not impact their cultural rights.
U’wa lawyer Juan Gabriel Jerez Tegria emphasized the decision’s significance: “For us, this decision means that our demands and our rights were acknowledged. This means that there is a precedent that allows [us] to make more just and direct complaints to the Colombian government in the face of human rights violations and infringements in our Indigenous communities.”
The conflict’s roots trace back to the 1990s when multiple oil companies, including Occidental Petroleum Corporation, began arriving in U’wa territory where the Samoré oil block was located – projected to become one of Colombia’s most promising oil developments.
However, the U’wa people’s spiritual connection to their land fundamentally opposes such exploitation. As spokesperson Heber Tegria Uncaria explained: “But for the U’wa Indigenous people, land is sacred and it is our mother, according to Mongabay. Oil is the blood of our Mother Earth and it cannot be exploited.” He added that this marked the beginning of their resistance process to prevent their territory from “being desecrated and exploited.”
After exhausting national legal avenues—including appeals to the Ombudsman’s Office, various courts, and Colombia’s highest courts—the U’wa people brought their case to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in 1997. Despite Colombia’s Constitutional Court ruling in March 1997 that extractive activities in U’wa territory were illegal and that their right to prior consultation had been violated, implementation never occurred.
Juliana Bravo, director of the Amazon Program at EarthRights International, noted: “There is a decision, but it is not being complied with, as projects continue to be done without consent and without the due judicial guarantees.”
The extractive pressure intensified over the years. In 1998, the Occidental Petroleum Corporation began exploration in the Gibraltar area, and by 2000, Colombian authorities declared the area an “oil reserve” without Indigenous consultation. Though OXY abandoned the Samoré block in 2002-2003, state-owned Ecopetrol inherited it, dividing it into the Sirirí and Catleya blocks.
Despite continued U’wa opposition, the Colombian government and Ecopetrol proceeded with projects. In 2008, Colombia granted the GKT-081 coal mining concession overlapping U’wa territory, followed by additional coal concessions in 2009. The Gibraltar-Bucaramanga gas pipeline became operational in April 2012, and in 2012, the National Environmental Licensing Authority granted Ecopetrol an exploratory drilling license in Magallanes, within U’wa ancestral territory.
Additional conflicts emerged with Colombia’s National Natural Parks System, as U’wa territory overlaps with El Cocuy National Park. The court’s decision requires Colombian government involvement of the U’wa people in the park’s administration and conservation, respecting their worldview.
Following the ruling, the National Agency for Legal Defense of the State acknowledged the decision and committed to compliance, expressing “solidarity and empathy for the U’wa Indigenous people.”
However, months after the ruling, implementation remains pending. The court established a one-year deadline for a public acknowledgment of international responsibility, yet no timeline has been provided.
Bravo emphasized the ongoing challenge: “For us, this is a step forward, and it’s a victory from the judicial point of view. However, we are also clear that we need to keep demanding that the government comply with what the Inter-American Court of Human Rights orders. It is a victory that, for now, is on paper,” Heber Tegria concluded, according to Mongabay.
The U’wa people and supporting organizations will monitor compliance before the international court’s deadlines, ensuring this historic victory translates into concrete protection for Indigenous rights.
AUSTRALIA: Aboriginal legal service challenges Tasmania centre’s plan
The Tasmanian Aboriginal Legal Service has raised significant concerns about the cultural inclusivity of an action plan released by the Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre, arguing that no single organization should represent all Aboriginal people in Tasmania, the National Indigenous Times reported on July 10.
The recently released Nukara Action Plan outlines seven priority activities designed “to enable the progressive transfer of responsibilities to the Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre” to represent and work on behalf of Aboriginal people throughout Tasmania. The plan’s priority areas include enabling the transfer of lawful authority, establishing robust governance, accountability and data sovereignty, and providing access to culturally safe legal support.
However, Tasmanian Aboriginal Legal Service chief executive officer Jake Smith has expressed strong concerns about the plan’s development process and scope, particularly its exclusion of Aboriginal communities across Tasmania.
“The plan appears to have been developed in isolation without engagement from the many Aboriginal community organizations and service providers across the State,” Smith said. “(Tasmanian Aboriginal Legal Service) urges the (Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre) and the Tasmanian Government to consider the voices of all Aboriginal people in Tasmania, who are connected and supported by the many Aboriginal Community-Controlled Organizations – not just the (Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre).”
Smith emphasized that while he doesn’t disagree with all elements of the plan, he believes “there are a number of points that appear to be inaccurate and not inclusive.” His primary concern centers on the plan’s sixth outcome, which aims to “support development of a plan to transition statewide legal supports and advocacy to the Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre.”
“In particular, the proposal to transition statewide legal supports to the Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre has been put forward without any engagement with (Tasmanian Aboriginal Legal Service) – who currently deliver this vital service,” the Palawa man said.
The Tasmanian Aboriginal Legal Service operates as an Aboriginal Community-Controlled Organization governed by a board of directors comprised of representatives from five Aboriginal community groups across the state. These include the Circular Head Aboriginal Corporation, Melaythenner Teeackana Warrana Aboriginal Corporation, Flinders Island Aboriginal Association Inc, South East Tasmania Aboriginal Corporation, and the TAC, along with others.
The organization provides culturally safe legal assistance to Aboriginal people from all communities across Tasmania, demonstrating the collaborative approach Smith advocates for.
Smith firmly believes that the Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre should not serve as the sole representative voice for Aboriginal communities throughout Tasmania. “No single organisation can speak for all Aboriginal people in this state – nor should they be expected to,” he said. “A diversity of voices strengthens our community’s ability to create meaningful, inclusive change.”
Since its establishment in 2020, the Tasmanian Aboriginal Legal Service has demonstrated significant impact in providing culturally safe legal assistance to more people than any previous Aboriginal legal service provider in Tasmania. The organization employs Aboriginal staff from many community groups across the state in each of its Hobart, Launceston, and Burnie offices, having supported more than 8,000 clients across various matters in the last 12 months alone.
The Nukara Action Plan includes other priority areas such as establishing the Palawa Children’s Future Project: State 2, building the Aboriginal workforce’s capacity and capability, establishing Aboriginal child-safe practices, and embedding transformational change throughout relevant systems.
Smith expressed disappointment with the Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre’s approach to developing and releasing the plan. “We are disappointed that the (Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre) has released a plan under the guise of being inclusive and representative of all Aboriginal people, without broadly consulting communities, organisations, service providers and individuals this plan would impact,” he said.
Despite these concerns, Smith emphasized the Tasmanian Aboriginal Legal Service’s willingness to collaborate constructively with the Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre for the benefit of Tasmania’s Aboriginal communities. “We welcome the opportunity to engage in open dialogue and collaboration with the (Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre) and work towards outcomes that benefit all Aboriginal people in Tasmania,” he said.
The Tasmanian Aboriginal Legal Service has recently applied to join the Coalition of Peaks alongside the Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre as part of its commitment to the national Closing the Gap agenda, demonstrating its dedication to working collaboratively within existing frameworks.
“We believe our membership will strengthen the impact that can be achieved and the outcomes for our people – particularly in the areas of law and justice, and the related areas,” Smith said. “Tasmania has a long way to go to Close the Gap and we are here to support and improve outcomes for our people.”
The controversy highlights broader questions about representation, consultation, and governance within Aboriginal communities, particularly regarding which organizations should hold authority to speak on behalf of diverse Aboriginal populations across Tasmania.
The Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre did not respond to questions posed by National Indigenous Times regarding these concerns.
CANADA: Indigenous Services Canada warns staff of budget cuts
Indigenous Services Canada’s top officials have alerted staff that meeting Prime Minister Mark Carney’s ambitious budget reduction targets will present significant challenges and inevitably impact both employment and operations across the department, CBC News reported on July 10.
In an internal email obtained by CBC Indigenous, deputy ministers informed employees about the government initiative “to bring forward ambitious savings proposals” requiring spending reductions of up to 15 percent over the next three years.
“This will involve difficult decisions that will impact our programs and activities, as well as our workforce,” wrote deputy minister Gina Wilson and associate deputy minister Michelle Kovacevic on July 8.
The deputies indicated they would develop these proposals over the coming weeks, with plans to present them in spring 2026. However, the deliberations and decisions will remain subject to cabinet confidence until then, maintaining secrecy around the process.
“We recognize this news may be difficult to hear, and that uncertainty can create stress,” the email acknowledged.
Prime Minister Carney has consistently promoted the “spend less, invest more” mantra as he pledges to control government spending. The public service expanded dramatically under the Trudeau government, growing from approximately 257,000 people in 2015 to nearly 358,000 in 2025, according to Treasury Board Secretariat data.
Indigenous Services Canada reached an estimated $27.7 billion in spending last fiscal year and already forecasts budget reductions. The deputies’ email confirms that ISC, like other departments, was directed to target “programs and activities that are underperforming, not core to the federal mandate, duplicative, or misaligned with government priorities.”
Labour organizations have already sounded alarms regarding the proposed cuts. The Public Service Alliance of Canada national president Sharon DeSousa stated that the cuts “look and feel like austerity and will hurt everyone in Canada who depends on vital public services.”
“Cutting jobs means cutting services. Full stop,” DeSousa said in a statement.
Wilson and Kovacevic’s message leaves unclear whether Indigenous Services Canada will experience program cuts and job losses. The department oversees the Indian Act and provides vital services including health care, education, infrastructure, drinking water, and child and family services.
Indigenous Services Canada’s budget is already scheduled to decrease over the next three years as program funding allocated by the Trudeau government expires or “sunsets.” The department projects spending $25.3 billion this year, $21.4 billion in 2026-27, and $20.1 billion in 2027-28.
This trajectory positions Indigenous Services Canada for more than $5 billion in potential budget reductions beyond the new 15 percent target.
Indigenous Services Minister Mandy Gull-Masty was unavailable for comment, with her office referring inquiries to the department.
In a statement, Indigenous Services Canada clarified that the 15 percent target would not include the $5-billion planned spending reduction. “(Indigenous Services Canada) remains committed to reconciliation and effective service for Indigenous Peoples,” the statement said.
The day after announcing the spending review, Indigenous Services Canada’s deputy ministers revealed a proposed internal restructuring in another internal email obtained by CBC Indigenous. The restructuring has been under development since February 2025 and is labeled a “Sustainability Review Strategy.”
While the reorganization appears unrelated to the cuts, the timing of consecutive major announcements raises questions about how both initiatives will function simultaneously.
According to the July 9 email, the restructured Indigenous Services Canada would include at least five new sectors. The most significant change would create a “Regional Delivery Sector” consolidating the First Nations and Inuit Health Branch with (Indigenous Services Canada’s) regional operations.
The deputies confirmed that a Jordan’s Principle team will remain operational to address the backlog and improve children’s services quality.
“We believe that the changes announced today, along with a new focus on accountability, digital tools, litigation management, and governance, will help us better support and equip Indigenous Peoples to deliver their own services,” they wrote.
The deputies did not specify which sectors might be eliminated or how the restructuring could affect employment.
In its statement to CBC Indigenous, Indigenous Services Canada confirmed the new structure will be fully implemented by April 2026.
The simultaneous announcement of budget cuts and restructuring creates uncertainty for Indigenous Services Canada employees and raises concerns about the department’s ability to maintain essential services for Indigenous communities while implementing significant operational changes.
My final Thoughts
Three governments this week revealed the careful engineering behind Indigenous invisibility. Not through dramatic acts of violence, but through the quiet bureaucracy of exclusion – the kind that leaves fingerprints on budgets, not bodies.
In Colombia, the U’wa people discovered that winning takes longer than losing. Twenty-seven years to drag their government before an international court. Twenty-seven years to prove what they knew in 1990: that some things are too sacred to drill. The Inter-American Court of Human Rights handed down a 200-page judgment that could have been written in two words: “They’re right.” But between vindication and implementation lies the same canyon that has swallowed Indigenous rights for centuries. “It is a victory that, for now, is on paper,” said Heber Tegria Uncaria, and in those words lives the exhaustion of peoples who have learned to measure justice in decades, not verdicts.
The U’wa called oil “the blood of our Mother Earth.” Occidental Petroleum called it “opportunity.” For 27 years, these two truths fought in courtrooms while bulldozers worked in bamboo forests. The court finally ruled in favor of the earth’s blood. The bulldozers, presumably, are still waiting for the memo.
In Australia, the Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre discovered something worse than being ignored: being spoken for. Their Nukara Action Plan promised to represent all Aboriginal people in Tasmania – without asking any Aboriginal people in Tasmania. It was democracy in reverse, consultation in exile. Jake Smith, whose Tasmanian Aboriginal Legal Service has actually helped 8,000 Aboriginal clients, offered a revolutionary concept: “No single organisation can speak for all Aboriginal people in this state – nor should they be expected to.”
This should not be revolutionary. In any other context, we would call it Tuesday. But Indigenous governance exists in a parallel universe where being listened to is so rare that speaking for others becomes irresistible. The Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre’s plan reads like colonialism with better fonts – the same old assumption that Indigenous peoples need managing, just by different managers.
And in Canada, Indigenous Services Canada perfected the art of homicidal accounting. Deputy ministers warned staff that budget cuts would be “difficult” and would “impact our programs and activities.” They spoke like surgeons announcing amputations, clinical and clean. What they did not say: when you cut services to peoples whose survival depends on those services, the cuts tend to cut back.
Twenty-seven billion dollars flowing through Indigenous Services Canada last year, and somehow the money never quite reaches the communities that need it most. It gets caught in bureaucratic filters, administrative overhead, consultant fees. Like water through a broken dam – plenty of flow, but the fields downstream stay dry.
Prime Minister Mark Carney’s “spend less, invest more” sounds like wisdom until you realize that for Indigenous peoples, government spending isn’t investment – it’s life support. The machinery of survival that replaces what colonialism destroyed. Cut the machinery, and you don’t get efficiency. You get body counts.
But here’s what these three stories really reveal: Indigenous peoples have become fluent in the language of institutions that were designed to eliminate them. The U’wa navigated international courts. Tasmania’s Aboriginal communities built legal infrastructures. Canada’s Indigenous peoples survive bureaucracies that would crush most nations.
They have mastered the rules of games they never agreed to play, on fields they never chose, with referees who have never hidden their bias. And they keep winning anyway.
Not because the systems work, but because Indigenous peoples have learned to make broken systems work for them. They turn courtrooms into ceremony, legal briefs into prayers, budget meetings into acts of resistance.
The U’wa waited 27 years for justice and will wait longer for implementation. Tasmania’s Aboriginal peoples will keep building the representation they deserve while others debate who deserve to represent them. And Canada’s Indigenous communities will keep surviving cuts that are designed to make survival impossible.
Because Indigenous peoples have always known something that governments are just learning that survival is not a policy position. It is practice.
And the practice continues – in Colombian rainforests, on Tasmanian islands, across Canadian territories – one judgment, one organization, one budget cut at a time.
The question is not whether Indigenous peoples will endure these latest tests.
The question is whether the rest of us will finally stop making them necessary.