We use cookies to improve our website. See our privacy notice.

I understand

Indigenous Peoples have the Right to Decide

Free Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) is the inherent right Indigenous communities have to decide “yes” or “no” to mining, forestry, oil, gas, water, or other proposed external activities that would affect their lands, territories, and/or natural resources.

Knowledge is Power

Learning about international and national standards helps communities to defend their lands.

Explore:

Consultation
Rights Framework
Governance
Industry
Free, Prior and Informed Consent
Decision Making
Pimatisiwin
Indigenous Allyship
Media Reports

Featured:

Guide to Free Prior and Informed Consent
Manual

2010 - Multilingual - Moderate

Guide to Free Prior and Informed Consent

Oxfam Australia, Christina Hill, Michael Simon et al.

Consultation | FPIC | Informed Decision Making | Consultation | Decision Making | Inherent Rights | Self-Determination

Guide to Free Prior and Informed Consent

This guide is an introduction to Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC). It provides basic information about the right to FPIC and how this right can help people to have a say about development projects, such as dams, mines and, logging and other large infrastructure projects, which affect them in some way.

Rights in Action: Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) for Indigenous Peoples
Video & Podcast

2013 - English - Simple

Rights in Action: Free, Prior and Informed C...

Asia Indigenous Peoples' Pact

FPIC | Rights and Legal Framework | Community Engagement | Consultation | Land Access | Land Stewardship | Self-Determination | Traditional Knowledge | UNDRIP

Rights in Action: Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) for Indigenous Peoples

This community-friendly animation video explains the concepts and mechanisms of Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) through a story of interaction between indigenous peoples and people requesting their consent for new development. FPIC is a continual process that involves mutual respect and meaningful participation of indigenous peoples in decision-making on matters affecting them.

FPIC in Canada: Towards a New Relationship with Indigenous Peoples
Essay

2016 - English - Technical

FPIC in Canada: Towards a New Relationship w...

Torys LLP

FPIC | Indigenous Governance | Rights and Legal Framework | Canadian Law | UNDRIP

FPIC in Canada: Towards a New Relationship with Indigenous Peoples

A review of all legal implications of FPIC including Canadian, international, etc. What the current state of aboriginal affairs is in Canada and how we can implement FPIC moving forward.

From Our Blog:

Genocide in the Far North: Canada 1950

The following article was originally published in June 2018 in Dr. Hassmann's blog Rights & Rightlessness: Rhoda Hassmann on Human Right. You can find the original publication here. On June 11, 2018, Gloria Galloway published an article in the Globe and Mail (p. A9) entitled “Ahiarmiut ready for apology after several relocations.” According to Galloway, the Ahiarmiut are a small group of Inuit whom the Canadian government relocated about 100 km. from their original home in 1950, on the grounds that they were becoming too dependent on trade with federal employees at a radio tower near their home. They were “dropped on an island without food, shelter or tools.” To survive, they ate bark and whatever else they could get their hands on until winter came. Many died. In 1957, they were relocated again; this time they were given tents at their new location, as well as a “starvation box” that might feed them for a week. Some died again. There were three subsequent relocations. Through their lawyer, Steve Cooper, survivors and their descendants have been asking for compensation, an apology, and a memorial since 2007. According to Galloway, the government has finally agreed to settle, in part to bring ...

Exercising Indigenous Rights Increases Risk of Criminalization, Incarceration, and Death

There is much to celebrate since the 2007 signing of the Declaration of the rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) (1). The internationalization of Indigenous rights has certainly not been without consequence. The signing of the Declaration, the development of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (2), and an increasing corporate attention to the issues and practice of Free Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) have confirmed the minimum standards of consultation and consent for proposed development on Indigenous lands. Indigenous communities have gained visibility and political profile both within Nation States and internationally. Indigenous communities globally are increasing their communication and collaboration with one another. The internationalization of Indigenous rights has contributed to increased Indigenous efforts to exercise rights to consultation and to decision making power regarding access to and development of Indigenous lands and resources. To what end? Corporate and state responses have not reflected the hopes of the Declaration. In 2017, 10 years after the signing of the Declaration, there is documented evidence of increased criminalization of, violence against, and deaths of Indigenous leaders, activists and allies. It was reported that in 2016, 281 people were killed while defending Indigenous lands and environmental rights in relation ...

The Promise of Indigenous Youth

This article was originally created in October 2012 in the blog series "The Rise of the Fourth World" published by the Centre for Governance Innovation. Access the original post. Canadian social policies directed towards Aboriginal (First Nation, Metis and Inuit) populations have largely been developed outside of a historical, cultural framework, providing a long standing demonstration of the role of policy as a centralized mechanism of social control. Little attention has been given to the specific cultures of diverse Aboriginal communities in the design and administration of policies which are administered across Canada. Aboriginal peoples have, historically, been collectively addressed in federal policies as “the Indian Problem,” rather than recognized and addressed, as they expected, as sovereign peoples with distinct cultures. Indigenous peoples endured formidable hardships. Their populations were decimated by the introduction of old world diseases such as small pox, typhus and influenza. The demographically weakened and political marginalized Canadian Aboriginal population was further affected by national social policy. The government introduced a series of political and administrative measures designed to undercut Indigenous cultural survival, including the criminalization of spiritual and cultural practices, forced re-location, the implementation of assimilation policies which interfered with local governance, and punitive forms of ...