Tribal Governance

Indigenous peoples are the original inhabitants of a geographic space that was subsequently taken from them by outside peoples either by conquest, occupation, settlement, or some combination of all three. The social and political organizational structure of some indigenous peoples has historically been referred to as “tribal,” a problematic term not only for its inconsistent usage but also for the negative connotation often associated with it. The term tribe is linked to outdated anthropological assumptions (particularly of the nineteenth century) about the inferiority and political simplicity of non-European peoples. It has historically had a pejorative connotation and has been used to refer to political communities of indigenous peoples throughout the world, which are presumably smaller, less-technologically developed, more “natural,” and more static, with less-formal governing structures and with more emphasis on common ancestral heritage than European-style states. In more recent times, however, tribal organization has also been recognized as more dynamic, more heterogeneous, and less parochial than previously characterized by colonizing Europeans. Tribal governance is the myriad of ways in which these communities of indigenous peoples have been, and continue to be, governed, autonomously and via external management.

The extent and basic nature of tribal governance varies from place to place. Despite the vast diversity of tribes in the world, tribal governance typically includes the defining and implementing of the following elements: (a) jurisdictional divisions between tribes and other political entities, such as colonial states; (b) citizenship internal to the tribe, as well as within the colonial state, which can and often are practiced simultaneously; (c) policy decisions over particular fields of tribal jurisdiction, such as policing and land zoning; (d) services delivered to tribal members; (e) financing of the tribe, including taxation; (f) intergovernmental relations between tribes and other governments, such as provincial, state, federal, and municipal governments; (g) legal and constitutional relations within the tribe and in relation to other recognized legal entities, such as state governments, courts, and electoral commissions; (h) the historical and cultural context that informs governance practices.

In almost all cases, tribal governance is still subject to the limits and management placed upon it by the political and legal apparatus of a colonial state. In some cases, however, tribal governance is also a legally recognized part of the colonial state governance system, as is the case in India, the United States, and many African countries.

Representatives of tribal governing bodies participate in many international forums, such as the World Council of Indigenous Peoples and the United Nations (UN) Permanent Forum on Indigenous Populations. However, the recognition of tribal governance in international law remains uncertain. Although the inherent rights of self-determination and self-government, as well as historical rights found within particular treaties and agreements, have been affirmed by the UN Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, the power to interpret and implement remains largely within the framework of the traditional sovereign-state system. The draft declaration has not been ratified and, as such, little international law remains that recognizes tribal governance.