09:00 30.06.2026
Indigenous Peoples in the International Arena: Who Belongs to the Group and How to Protect Their Rights
© RIA Novosti / Ilya Pitalev
“Indigenous peoples” is a concept that dates back a long time. In Europe, the term began to be used widely in the 16th century. However, there is still no universally accepted definition, and each country has its own understanding of who qualifies as indigenous. In some countries, the term refers to ethnic groups that originally inhabited a particular territory, while in others it is used to describe vulnerable communities. In some cases, the “indigenous peoples” term is not used at all.
This is an important matter in international law, since before you start protecting indigenous peoples you need to understand who falls within this category. This article by Dmitry Ryakhovsky, Senior Adviser in the Foreign Ministry’s Department for Multilateral Human Rights Cooperation, examines how different countries understand the term “indigenous peoples” and how the international community seeks to protect the rights of indigenous populations.
The Origins of the Definition and Related Terms
In Europe, the modern understanding of indigenous peoples is closely linked to the Age of Discovery and European colonial expansion. The term “indigenous peoples” initially appeared in legal and theological documents in the 16thcentury. It was used to describe peoples who lived in the territories before they were colonized by Europeans. Over time, the term came to refer to the descendants of peoples who had lived in these territories before colonial expansion, eventually becoming established in international legal discourse.
Notably, European academic literature contains several related concepts as well.
Young mothers living in the Eskimo village of Kotzebue, Alaska
© RIA Novosti / Valeriy Shustov
The term "aboriginal" is derived from the Latin ab origine ("from the beginning" or "from the original source") and has traditionally been used to refer to the earliest inhabitants of a particular territory.
Another term, “autochthonous peoples” (from the Ancient Greek αὐτός - “self” and иχθών-“earth”), refers to peoples originating from a specific territory and has been used to describe a country’s earliest inhabitants or first settlers. At its core, it is similar to the Russian word tuzemets, meaning “a person originating from the local land.”
The term “indigenous peoples,” derived from the Latin indu (“within”) and genus (“born”) refers to people native to a particular area who have inherited both their ancestral lands and their traditional way of life.
Although these terms are broadly similar in meaning, they are not exact synonyms. Each emerged within a particular historical context and carries a different degree of political significance.
An American Indian farmer heads to the market in La Paz, the Republic of Bolivia
© RIA Novosti / Fedotov
Why the Status of Indigenous Peoples Remains Contested
The principal reason for disputes over the status of indigenous peoples lies in different national approaches. Each state has its own criteria for determining which peoples should be regarded as indigenous.
In many Asian countries, for example, researchers emphasize centuries of migration and population mixing. As a result, the traditional Western understanding of indigenous peoples is often considered inapplicable, since it is not always possible to determine with certainty which ethnic group originally inhabited the territory in question. The Indian subcontinent is frequently cited as an example, where centuries of migration have made it virtually impossible to identify the first ethnic communities to settle the region.
In Africa, the concept of indigenous peoples is often applied to communities whose traditional way of life is under threat. These include, for example, the San (Bushmen) of the Kalahari Desert, the Mbuti (Pygmies) of the tropical forests of Central Africa, and the Maasai nomadic cattle herders.
Young men of the Masai tribe in the Masai Mara village, Kenya
© RIA Novosti / Fayed El-Geziry
There is likewise no uniform approach across Latin America. In Peru, the term “community” is used instead of “indigenous people.” Ecuador recognizes “Indian nationalities,” each of which encompasses several related peoples, whereas Uruguay officially denies the existence of indigenous peoples altogether.
It can therefore be concluded that the concept of indigenous peoples varies across countries, reflecting each state’s historical experience and national specifics.
How International Law Protects Indigenous Peoples
At the international level, there is likewise no universally accepted definition of indigenous peoples, despite repeated attempts to develop one.
As Erica-Irene Daes, Chair of the UN Working Group on Indigenous Populations under the Sub-Commission on the Protection and Promotion of Human Rights, observed, it is extremely difficult to come up with a definition that is both accurate and universally applicable across all regions of the world. In her view, definitions that are too broad become vague, while those that are too narrow exclude many communities that are equally in need of protection.
Instead of relying on a rigid definition, international practice generally takes into account a number of identifying characteristics such as historical ties to a particular territory, cultural distinctiveness, continuity across generations, and the preservation of a traditional way of life. Self-identification - that is, a community’s recognition of itself as belonging to a particular people - is also regarded as an important consideration.
American Indian families exit church after a baptismal ceremony in the village of San Juan Chamula, Mexico
© RIA Novosti / Maria Plotnikova
Nevertheless, none of these characteristics can be regarded as decisive in itself, and international organizations have largely avoided adopting rigid definitions. Despite the absence of a common understanding, the international community has continued its efforts to establish mechanisms for protecting the rights of indigenous peoples.
The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples adopted in 2007 was one of the most significant documents in this regard. Importantly, the Declaration does not provide a universal definition of indigenous peoples. Instead, it sets out a list of rights that such communities should enjoy, including the right to preserve their cultural identity, the right to participate in decision-making on matters affecting their interests, and rights relating to lands, territories and natural resources.
A similar approach is used in International Labor Organization Convention No. 169. Rather than providing a strict definition, the Convention establishes a set of criteria for identifying the relevant population groups, including historical continuity, cultural distinctiveness and self-identification.
In addition, the protection of indigenous peoples’ rights is addressed through the work of various UN bodies and within the broader framework of international human rights agreements.
Accordingly, international law places greater emphasis on establishing effective mechanisms for protecting the rights of communities that exhibit the recognized characteristics of indigenous peoples than on developing a single universal definition.
A street of the Eskimo village of Kotzebue, Alaska
© RIA Novosti / Valeriy Shustov
In conclusion, the concept of “indigenous peoples” remains one of the most complex categories in contemporary international law. The differing historical experiences of countries, variations in domestic legislation, and regional diversity have made it impossible to develop a universally accepted definition.
Consequently, the modern international approach focuses not on finding an ideal legal definition but on protecting the rights of individuals and communities that preserve their cultural identity, traditions, and unique historical connection to their ancestral lands.
