Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Intellectual property rights and sovereign claims; water, diamonds and rights in the Central Kalahari Game Reserve

2013; Taylor & Francis; Volume: 3; Issue: 2 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1080/2201473x.2013.781928

2201-473X

Lindsay Weiss,

Archaeology and Rock Art Studies

Abstract This article explores the history of claims to intellectual cultural property as they relate to claims to sovereignty in settler societies by Indigenous groups. The recent Southern African legal victory for San communities to return to their traditional settlements in the Central Kalahari Game Reserve marks an important precedent in which human rights claims constrain and direct the impact of corporate social responsibility (CSR) discourse. In the context of CSR, and the growth of public–private partnerships, the legal assertion of cultural property and cultural rights marks an important and substantive mode for asserting political autonomy and sovereignty in settler states. Notes R. K. Hitchcock, M. Sapingnoli, and W. A. Babchuk, ‘What about Our Rights? Settlements, Subsistence and Livelihood Security among the Central Kalahari San and Bakgalagadi’, The International Journal of Human Rights 15, no. 1 (2011): 62–88. Decision, cited in, ibid., 71. M. Dowie, Conservation Refugees: The Hundred-Year Conflict Between Global Conservation and Native Peoples (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2009). Court transcripts cited in M. Sapingnoli, ‘Indigeneity and the Expert: Negotiating Identity in the Case of the Central Kalahari Game Reserve’, in Law and Anthropology, ed. M. Freeman and D. Napier (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009), 247–268 (250). Hitchcock, Sapingnoli, and Babchuk, ‘What about Our Rights?’ 69. J. Solway, ‘Human Rights and NGO “Wrongs”: Conflict Diamonds, Culture Wars and the “Bushman Question”’, Africa: The Journal of the International African Institute 79, no. 3 (2009): 321–46. K. Good, ‘(Un)Civil Society in Botswana’, in Nordiska Afrikainstitutet, Discussion Paper 23, Uppsala, 2003, 17. Dowie, Conservation Refugees, 141–52. Ibid.; Hitchcock, Sapingnoli, and Babchuk, ‘What about Our Rights?’; Sapingnoli, ‘Indigeneity and the Expert’; J. Solway, ‘Human Rights and NGO “Wrongs”’. R.J. Coombe, Intellectual Properties, Human Rights and Heritage: The Work of ‘Culture’ in an Age of Informational Capital. Stanford Collaboratory on Cultural Heritage and Human Rights, December 9, 2011. C. Coumans, ‘Occupying Spaces Created by Conflict: Anthropologists, Development NGOs, Responsible Investment, and Mining’, Current Anthropology 52, no. 3 (2011): 29–43. S. Vaidhyanathan, Copyrights and Copywrongs: The Rise of Intellectual Property and How It Threatens Creativity (New York: New York University Press, 2001), 37. Ibid., 40. M. Foucault, M. Bertani, A. Fontana, F. Ewald, and D. Macey, Society Must Be Defended: Lectures at the Collège de France, 1975–76, 1st ed. (New York: Picador, 2003), 35; Q. Skinner, ‘A Third Concept of Liberty’, London Review of Books 24 (2002): 16–18 (18). Vaidhyanathan, Copyrights and Copywrongs 48. Wheaton v. Peters, Copyright Act of 1842, Stowe v. Thomas; cited in ibid., 43–50. R. Coombe, ‘Response to “Can Culture Be Copyrighted?”’ Current Anthropology 39 (1998): 207–8. R.A. Williams, The American Indian in Western Legal Thought: The Discourses of Conquest (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990), 169. J. Tully, Strange Multiplicity: Constitutionalism in an Age of Diversity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995), 74. J. Locke, Two Treatises of Government. Cambridge Texts in the History of Political Thought (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988), 285–302. J. Tully, Strange Multiplicity, 77. H.S. Maine, Ancient Law. (London: J.M. Dent & Sons, E.P. Dutton, 1917), 160. Ibid., 167. C.A. Reich, ‘The New Property’, in Contemporary Property Rights Issues, ed. J.W. Ely (New York: Garland Publishers, 1997), 384. S.B. Brush and D. Stabinsky, Valuing Local Knowledge: Indigenous People and Intellectual Property Rights (Washington, DC: Island Press, 1996); T.C. Greaves, Intellectual Property Rights for Indigenous Peoples: A Sourcebook (Oklahoma City, OK: Society for Applied Anthropology, 1994). M.F. Brown, Who Owns Native Culture (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2003), 63. Ibid., 243. T. Greaves, ‘Tribal Rights’, in Valuing Local Knowledge: Indigenous People and Intellectual Property Rights, ed. S. Brush and D. Stabinsky (Washington, DC: Island Press, 1996), 25–40. M. Strathern, ‘Response to “Can Culture Be Copyrighted”’, Current Anthropology 39 (1997): 193–222 (217). D. Chakrabarty, Provincializing Europe: Postcolonial Thought and Historical Difference. Princeton Studies in Culture/Power/History (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2000); P. Chatterjee, The Nation and Its Fragments: Colonial and Postcolonial Histories. Princeton Studies in Culture/Power/History (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1993); W. Kymlicka, Liberalism, Community, and Culture (New York: Clarendon Press, 1991); C. Taylor and A. Gutmann, Multiculturalism, Examining the Politics of Recognition (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1994); Tully, Strange Multiplicity. D. Ivison, Postcolonial Liberalism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 15. J. Gray, Two Faces of Liberalism (Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 2000), 117. Ibid., 242. Precisely because ‘contemporary liberal orthodoxy is a species of legalism’ (ibid., 116), the debate over cultural rights should be opened up to include claims made according to deeply different regimes of value. In fact, the postcolonial concept of a pluralistic society based on modus vivendi would necessarily entail such considerations. Thus, for example, while Duncan Ivison's post-colonial liberalism is also loosely based on Gray's modus vivendi framework, it has the important addition that liberal understandings of justice should be open to debate and challenges brought forth from Indigenous claims (Ivison, Postcolonial Liberalism, 137); W.E. Connolly, The Ethos of Pluralisation (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1995), 184. C. Lury, Cultural Rights: Technology, Legality, and Personality. The International Library of Sociology (New York: Routledge, 1993); Cited in: R.J. Coombe, The Cultural Life of Intellectual Properties: Authorship, Appropriation, and the Law. Post-Contemporary Interventions (Durham: Duke University Press, 1998). Coombe, The Cultural Life of Intellectual Properties, 297 Ibid., 298. Ibid., 242. M.J. Radin, Reinterpreting Property (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997). Q. Skinner, Liberty Before Liberalism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998). Radin, Reinterpreting Property, 53. E.A. Povinelli, The Cunning of Recognition: Indigenous Alterities and the Making of Australian Multiculturalism. Politics, History, and Culture (Durham: Duke University Press, 2002). C.M. Rose, Property and Persuasion: Essays on the History, Theory, and Rhetoric of Ownership (San Francisco: Westview Press, 1994). Cited in B. Ziff and P.V. Rao, ‘Introduction to Cultural Appropriation: A Framework for Analysis’, in Borrowed Power: Essays on Cultural Appropriation, ed. B. Ziff and P.V. Rao (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1997), 16. A. Shachar, Multicultural Jurisdictions Cultural Differences and Women's Rights (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001). N.J. Newton, ‘Memory and Misrepresentation: Representing Crazy Horse in Tribal Court’, in Borrowed Power: Essays on Cultural Appropriation, ed. B. Ziff and P.V. Rao (New Brunswick: Rutgers, 1997), 207–9. Ibid., 197. M. Strathern, ‘What is Intellectual Property After?’ in Actor Network Theory and after, ed. J. Law and J. Hassard (Malden: Blackwell, 1999), 156–81. L. Meskell, ‘The Nature of Culture in Kruger National Park’, in Cosmopolitan Archaeologies, ed. L. Meskell (Durham: Duke University Press, 2009), 89–112; L. Meskell, ‘From Paris to Pontdrift: UNESCO Meetings, Mapungubwe and Mining. From Paris to Pontdrift: UNESCO Meetings, Mapungubwe and Mining’ (unpublished manuscript), 2011. N. Connolly, ‘Corporate Social Responsibility: An Honest Duplicity’, in Unpublished Paper. Institute of Commonwealth Studies, School of Advanced Study, 2012. D. Rogers, ‘The Materiality of the Corporation: Oil, Gas, and Corporate Social Technologies in the Remaking of a Russian Region’, American Ethnologist 39 (2012): 284–96. B. Latour, We Have Never Been Modern (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993), 15. Williams, American Indian in Western Legal Thought, 231. Ibid., 231. T. Jefferson, A Summary View of the Rights of British America (New York: Scholars’ Facsimiles and Reprints, 1943), 10. Williams, American Indian in Western Legal Thought, 268–9. W. Coffey and R. Tsosie, ‘Rethinking the Tribal Sovereignty Doctrine: Cultural Sovereignty and the Collective Future of Indian Nations’, Stanford Law and Policy Review 12 (2001): 196. On the “veil of ignorance”, see J. Rawls, A Theory of Justice (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press, 1971). Coffey and Tsosie, ‘Rethinking the Tribal Sovereignty Doctrine’, 204. H. Reynolds, ‘After Mabo, What About Aboriginal Sovereignty?’ Australian Humanities Review 1, 1996. http://www.lib.latrobe.edu.au/AHR/archive/Issue-April-1996/Reynolds.html (accessed August 8, 2012). Ibid., 149. J. Locke, Two Treatises of Government, 394. B. Latour, We Have Never Been Modern. W.R. Powers, ‘Response: “Can Culture Be Copyrighted?”’ Current Anthropology 39 (1998): 212. J. Erni, ‘Human Rights in the Neoliberal Imagination: Mapping the New Sovereignties’, Cultural Studies 23 (2009): 417–36; S. Saugestad, ‘Impact of International Mechanisms on Indigenous Rights in Botswana’, The International Journal of Human Rights 15 (2010): 37–61. E. Povinelli, Economies of Abandonment: Social Belonging and Endurance in Late Liberalism (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2011), 152. P. Cheah, Inhuman Conditions: On Cosmopolitanism and Human Rights (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2006). T.B. Hansen and F. Stepputat, Sovereign Bodies: Citizens, Migrants, and States in the Postcolonial World (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2005).