The article highlights the problem of defining the concept of «indigenous people» in international and domestic (local) law. It is found that the current practice of defining them still retains some difficulties due to the lack of a clear, unified and formally fixed definition of these peoples at universal legal level. Particular attention is given to the study of existing approaches to their definition used at domestic (local) level. A proposal is made that there is a necessity to rethink concept of defining «indigenous people». Authors in the research understand the recognition of these ethnic communities as autonomous subjects of international and domestic (local) law. Based on the data analysis, it was concluded that the current practice of defining indigenous peoples are highly variable greatly depending on the features of each state. At the same time, it still reveals a certain coherence based on historical and cultural assumptions.

indigenous peoples, indigeneity, international law, domestic (local) law, legal doctrine, interpretation

Nikitin Fyodor Ivanovich – Postgraduate student, Department of International and European Law, Faculty of Law, Kazan (Volga Region) Federal University (18, Kremlyovskaya st., Kazan, 420008, Russian Federation), ORСID: 0000-0002-0211-1500, ResearcherID: ABD-6695-2021, e-mail: feodornikitine@yandex.ru

Nikitin F.I. Problema opredeleniya ponyatiya «korennoj narod» v mezhdunarodnom i vnutrigosudarstvennom prave [The problem of defining the concept of “indigenous peoples” in international and domestic law] Sibirskij yuridicheskij vestnik [Siberian Law Herald]. 2021, no 4(95), pp. 135–141.DOI 10.26516/2071-8136.2021.4.135. (in Russian).

341.234

OKZYZI

1. Ananidze F.R. Nekotorye problemy opredeleniya ponyatiya “korennoj narod” [Some problems of defining the concept of “indigenous people”]. Yurist-mezhdunarodnik [International lawyer], 2006, no 2, pp. 19-27. (in Russian).

2. Garipov R.Sh. Ponyatie «korennoj narod» i ih status v mezhdunarodnom i vnutrigosudarstvennom prave [The concept of “indigenous people” and their status in international and domestic law]. Mezhdunarodnoe pravo i mezhdunarodnye organizacii [International law and international or-ganizations], 2013, no 3, pp. 408-420. (in Russian).

3. Sokolovskij S.V. Korennye narody: mezhdu integraciej i sohraneniem kul’tur [Indigenous Peoples: Between Integration and Preservation of Cul-tures]. Etnicheskie kategorii i statistika. Debaty v Rossii i vo Francii [Ethnic categories and statistics. Debate in Russia and France]. Moscow, 2008, pp. 49-70. (in Russian).

4. Sokolovskij S.V. Politika priznaniya korennyh narodov v mezhdunarodnom prave i zakonodatel’stve Rossijskoj Federacii. Issledovaniya po pri-kladnoj i neotlozhnoj etnologii [The recognition policy of indigenous peoples in international law and the legislation of the Russian Federation. Re-search on Applied and Emergency Ethnology]. Moscow, IEA RAN Publ., 2016, vol. 250, 69 p. (in Russian).

5. Das J.K. Human Rights and Indigenous Peoples. New Delhi, A. P. H. Publishing Corporation, 2001, 454 p.

6. De Costa R. Self-Determination and State Definitions of Indigenous Peoples. Restoring Indigenous Self-Determination Theoretical and Practical Approaches. 2014, p. 12-18.

7. Gardiner-Garden J. Defining Aboriginality in Australia. Current Issues Brief No. 10 2002–03. Canberra: Department of the Parliamentary Library, Commonwealth of Australia, 2003. 32 p. Available at: https://www.aph.gov.au/binaries/library/pubs/cib/2002-03/03cib10.pdf. (date of access: 05.05.2020).

8. Harry D. Indigenous peoples and gene disputes. Chicago-Kent Law Review, 2009, vol. 84, no 1, pp. 147-196.

9. Rowse T. Self-Determination and Self-Transformation // Restoring Indigenous Self-Determination Theoretical and Practical Approaches, 2014, pp. 34-44.

10. Waldron J. Who was here first? Two essays on indigeneity and settlement. Quentin Baxter Memorial Lecture, Victoria University of Wellington. December 5, 2002. 57 p.