Establishing indigeneity in African pluralities using PRO169 parameters and a case study for measuring their inclusivity

The concept of the indigenous person or group in Africa is a contentious one. The current argument is that there exist no indigenous people in Africa because all Africans are indigenous. The obverse considers those Africans who have not been touched by colonialism and lost their traditional cultures commensurate with attachments to the lands or a distinguishable traditional lifestyle to be indigenous. This paper argues in favor of the latter. People who live in the global telos and do not participate in a distinct traditional culture that has been attached to the land for centuries are not indigenous. It is argued that this cultural divergence between modern and traditional is the major identifying point to settle the indigenous-non indigenous African debate. Finally, the paper looks at inclusive development and provides a new political analysis model for quantifying inclusivity so as to measure the inclusivity of indigenous peoples.

The Equality of Sub-Surface Minerals

Sub-surface minerals are in most cases considered to be the proprietary right of a country should those minerals be found within its borders. PRO169 (Indigenous Peoples’ Rights, International Labour Organization) has recorded instances where the private land of indigenous peoples has been pilfered by a government – often through the sale of a contract to a private company, and without the consent of the people living on that land. Other times, indigenous peoples, the government they find themselves living in, and the company that bought mining rights engage in consultation. But these practices are far from transparent, equitable, or fair as indigenous peoples are often unskilled in contractual law and do not have the same legal resources as the company or government does. This paper argues that the sub-surface minerals found within the territory of indigenous tribes should be legally allocated as theirs.