Guarantees of the Rights of the Abazin Indigenous Small-Numbered People
When one people disappears, humanity loses more than just a group of individuals. It loses an entire layer of civilization. A language disappears. Legends disappear. Names disappear. Ways of describing reality disappear. Knowledge disappears—knowledge that was sometimes formed over centuries. That is why the issue of Indigenous peoples is not a discussion about ethnographic exoticism. It is a question of the survival of human diversity. And the smaller a people is, the more vulnerable it often becomes. A large people can almost always make its voice heard by those in power. It has more representatives in political elites, more deputies, more experts, more public organizations, more voices in the media, and greater political influence. If a language, territory, or rights are threatened, a large people has more tools available to defend itself. It can raise the issue at the regional level, the federal level, through parliament, through the media, through the courts, and through strong civil society institutions. But when it comes to a small-numbered people, the situation is different. If your population consists of only several hundred, several thousand, or even several tens of thousands of people, your voice is objectively weaker. You may have no influential deputies. You may have no federal lobbying network. You may have no association of your own, no experts who can spend years defending the interests of your people in the legal sphere. In such circumstances, a simple reality emerges: the smaller the people, the harder it is to defend itself independently. That is precisely why international law developed special mechanisms for the protection of Indigenous peoples. Formal equality does not always mean real justice. When a small people is left one-on-one with the system, it often loses simply because of the structure of the state itself.
Recognizing the importance of this issue, international organizations have adopted numerous instruments aimed at preserving and protecting Indigenous peoples around the world.
These include, for example: the 1989 ILO Convention No. 169 concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries; the United Nations General Assembly Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities, adopted on December 18, 1992; and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples of September 13, 2007.
When the Soviet Union collapsed, Russia and its new President Boris Yeltsin sought to build a legal, liberal, and democratic state. They adopted many international practices related to the protection of human rights. However, when the time came to adopt international legal norms protecting the rights of Indigenous peoples, Russia under Yeltsin declined to do so, since this would have required recognizing certain rights for larger peoples such as the Tatars, Bashkirs, Yakuts, Circassians, Chechens, and others. Instead, they developed their own concept, which ostensibly concerned Indigenous rights but was considered less politically sensitive. They introduced a new term unique to Russia: Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples. These are Indigenous peoples of Russia whose population numbers fewer than 50,000 persons.
At almost the same time, in 1990, the Association of the Peoples of the North of the USSR was established, which later evolved into the Association of Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples of the North, Siberia, and the Far East. From the very beginning, during a period when the country was weakened, this organization became a highly influential force and successfully lobbied for its interests at the highest federal level. Leaders of the Association occupied important federal positions. Its current President since 2013, Grigory Ledkov, serves as a deputy in the State Duma of the Russian Federation.
This Association participated in drafting Russia’s first laws concerning Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples. However, Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples living in the European part of Russia did not become part of this Association and have still not created a similar organization of their own, including the Abazins, Shapsugs, Izhorians, and others.
According to Article 69 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, “The Russian Federation shall guarantee the rights of Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples in accordance with universally recognized principles and norms of international law and international treaties of the Russian Federation.”
Federal Law No. 82-FZ of April 30, 1999, “On Guarantees of the Rights of Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples of the Russian Federation,” establishes the legal foundations for guaranteeing the unique socio-economic and cultural development of Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples, protecting their ancestral habitats, traditional ways of life, economic activities, and crafts. The law guarantees the rights of Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples, their associations, and individuals belonging to such peoples to protect their ancestral environment, traditional way of life, economic activities, and crafts, as well as the right to exercise territorial public self-government.
The law also provided the first legal definition of an Indigenous Small-Numbered People of the Russian Federation. According to Article 1 of Law No. 82-FZ, Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples are defined as “peoples living in the territories traditionally inhabited by their ancestors, preserving traditional ways of life, economic activities and crafts, numbering fewer than 50,000 persons within the Russian Federation, and identifying themselves as distinct ethnic communities.
In implementation of this federal law, two executive acts were adopted: Government Resolution of the Russian Federation No. 255 of March 24, 2000, “On the Unified List of Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples of the Russian Federation,” and Government Order No. 631-r of May 8, 2009, “On Approval of the List of Places of Traditional Residence and Traditional Economic Activities of Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples of the Russian Federation and the List of Types of Traditional Economic Activities of Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples of the Russian Federation.”
Under the first Government Resolution No. 255 of March 24, 2000, a total of 47 ethnic groups in Russia were recognized as Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples.
However, under the second Government Order No. 631-r of May 8, 2009, only 41 ethnic groups were considered as such, since six peoples and the territories of their traditional residence were, for unknown reasons, omitted.
These were: the Abazins (Karachay-Cherkess Republic), the Besermyans (Udmurt Republic, 2,036 people), the Nagaybaks (Chelyabinsk Region, 7,652 people), the Seto (Pskov Region, 214 people), the Shapsugs (Krasnodar Territory, 3,227 people), and the Izhorians (Leningrad Region, 210 people).
As a result, Government Order No. 631-r of May 8, 2009 primarily included peoples living in the North, Siberia, and the Far East.
Because these six peoples are officially recognized as Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples but were not included in Order No. 631-r and therefore excluded from the list of territories of traditional residence of Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples, we have been deprived of a significant number of rights, benefits, and additional federal funding opportunities.
Had we been included, our republic, for example the Karachay-Cherkess Republic, would have been eligible to participate in special federal programs and receive additional funding for numerous projects, including infrastructure development.
For example, the federal program “Implementation of the State Nationalities Policy Strategy through 2025” specifically provided funding for Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples included in the official register.
Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples of the North, Siberia, and the Far East enjoy a substantial number of special benefits at both federal and regional levels. They are exempt from paying land tax within their territories and are eligible for earlier retirement. At the local level, they receive special subsidies for maintaining traditional subsistence activities, have separate housing improvement queues, and no land development or construction can occur on their traditional territories without their consent.
For example, the list of state support measures for Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples of the North implemented in 2020 in the Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug–Yugra provided a broad range of additional benefits. According to this list, support was provided for the protection of ancestral habitats, preservation and development of traditional ways of life, economic activities, and crafts of Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples of the North. This support included subsidies for regulated hunting products, development of land plots within territories of traditional nature use, and territories designated for the use of wildlife and aquatic biological resources.
The program also provided compensation for part of the cost of purchasing reindeer, with subsidies covering 70% of the purchase price, up to 10,000 rubles per animal. Young professionals from Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples working in areas of traditional residence and economic activity were eligible for one-time financial assistance for household establishment, amounting to 100,000 rubles.
In the sphere of social protection, beneficiaries could receive compensation for children’s clothing expenses and reimbursement of travel costs to and from inpatient medical treatment, up to 20,000 rubles per person annually.
Educational support included tuition compensation and other forms of financial assistance. Cultural support included grants in the form of subsidies from the budget of the Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug–Yugra awarded on a competitive basis to support projects aimed at preserving, developing, and promoting folklore, traditions, languages, and traditional crafts of Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples of the North in the region.
In addition, a dedicated state program titled “Sustainable Development of Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples of the North” was established and successfully implemented in the Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug–Yugra under Government Resolution No. 350-p of October 5, 2018.
I first encountered the problem that the law on guarantees of the rights of Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples did not function properly for the Abazins in 2014 while working as a lawyer. At that time, Abazins living in the rural settlement of Grushka, which administratively объединяет the villages of Maloabazinsk, Abaza-Khabl, and Tapanta, approached our public organization.
They wished to establish, pursuant to Article 12 of Federal Law No. 82-FZ of April 30, 1999, “On Guarantees of the Rights of Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples of the Russian Federation,” a community of the Indigenous Small-Numbered Abazin people in the settlement of Grushka.
The significance of this was that such a form of public organization may only be established in Russia by representatives of Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples within their traditional areas of residence and activity.
Part 1 of Article 12 states:
“Persons belonging to small-numbered peoples shall have the right, on a voluntary basis, to establish communities of small-numbered peoples and other associations of small-numbered peoples in accordance with their national, historical, and cultural traditions for the purposes of socio-economic and cultural development of small-numbered peoples, protection of their ancestral habitats, traditional ways of life, economic activities, and crafts.”
We, as lawyers, assisted the applicants in preparing the necessary documentation for submission to the Ministry of Justice of the Karachay-Cherkess Republic. However, on December 31, 2014, we received Notification No. 09104-3950 refusing state registration of the legal entity (attached).
One of the principal reasons cited for the refusal was that:
“The Karachay-Cherkess Republic is not designated as a region of traditional residence and traditional economic activity of Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples of the Russian Federation.”
During subsequent negotiations, we were able to convince officials of the Ministry of Justice of the Karachay-Cherkess Republic that the Abazins are indeed an Indigenous Small-Numbered People, and the community was eventually registered.
After that, in the spring of 2015, we prepared an appeal to the Government of the Russian Federation in order to draw attention to the legal contradiction between Government Resolution No. 255 of March 24, 2000, “On the Unified List of Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples of the Russian Federation,” where the Abazins are included, and Government Order No. 631-r of May 8, 2009, “On Approval of the List of Places of Traditional Residence and Traditional Economic Activities of Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples of the Russian Federation and the List of Types of Traditional Economic Activities of Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples of the Russian Federation,” where the Abazins are absent.
Despite the fact that a Government Resolution has greater legal force than a Government Order, this contradiction was not resolved.
On July 7, 2015, we received a response from the Federal Agency for Ethnic Affairs of the Russian Federation stating that we, as ordinary citizens, had no right to address the Government with such proposals and that, in order to resolve the issue, the matter had to be raised by “the highest executive authority of the Karachay-Cherkess Republic... after which the issue would be considered by the federal executive authorities” (response attached).
This response from the Federal Agency for Ethnic Affairs appears far from comprehensive. If an error or contradiction exists in the legal acts of the Government of Russia, it should not matter who first reports that error or in what form. What matters is correcting the mistake as quickly as possible.
Afterward, we approached the republican authorities and informed them that, according to the response from the Federal Agency for Ethnic Affairs, their assistance was necessary. The regional authorities decided to support the initiative and began submitting appeals to higher federal bodies.
On July 16, 2015, Resolution No. 129 of the People's Assembly (Parliament) of the Karachay-Cherkess Republic was adopted. In this resolution, parliamentarians prepared an appeal to the Minister of the Russian Federation for North Caucasus Affairs, L. V. Kuznetsov, regarding the inclusion of the Karachay-Cherkess Republic in the List of Places of Traditional Residence and Traditional Economic Activities of Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples of the Russian Federation.
The text of the appeal stated:
“Dear Lev Vladimirovich,
Pursuant to Part 2 of Article 5 of Federal Law No. 82-FZ of April 30, 1999, ‘On Guarantees of the Rights of Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples of the Russian Federation,’ the People's Assembly of the Karachay-Cherkess Republic hereby submits for your consideration the necessity of including in the ‘List of Places of Traditional Residence and Traditional Economic Activities of Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples of the Russian Federation,’ approved by Government Order No. 631-r of May 8, 2009, the following places of traditional residence and traditional economic activity of the Indigenous Small-Numbered Abazin people within the territory of the Karachay-Cherkess Republic.”
On August 13, 2015, an appeal from the Ministry for North Caucasus Affairs was sent to I. V. Barinov of the Federal Agency for Ethnic Affairs, signed by Acting Minister O. Kh. Baysultanov. The appeal was based on Resolution No. 219 of the People's Assembly of the Karachay-Cherkess Republic dated July 16, 2015, and referred to Paragraph 2 of Presidential Decree No. 168 of March 31, 2015, “On the Federal Agency for Ethnic Affairs,” which establishes that regulatory authority in the sphere of state nationality policy falls within the competence of the Federal Agency for Ethnic Affairs. The appeal also referred to Paragraph 5.1 of the Regulations on the Federal Agency for Ethnic Affairs, approved by Government Resolution No. 368 of April 18, 2015, which grants the Agency authority to submit draft regulatory acts to the Government of the Russian Federation in the sphere of state nationality policy.
On September 15, 2015, a response from the Federal Agency for Ethnic Affairs was sent to A. I. Ivanov, Chairman of the People's Assembly of the Karachay-Cherkess Republic, with a copy sent to the Ministry for North Caucasus Affairs.
The Agency reported that it had reviewed Resolution No. 219 of the People's Assembly dated July 16, 2015. The response stated:
“In order to implement your proposal to amend the List of Places of Traditional Residence and Traditional Economic Activities of Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples, approved by Government Order No. 631-r of May 8, 2009, in the part concerning the inclusion of the territory of the Karachay-Cherkess Republic, it is necessary for the state authorities of the Karachay-Cherkess Republic to submit the corresponding initiative directly to the Government of the Russian Federation.”
Subsequently, the Head of the Karachay-Cherkess Republic, R. B. Temrezov, addressed a formal appeal to Prime Minister D. A. Medvedev:
“Dear Dmitry Anatolyevich,
The Karachay-Cherkess Republic is a place of traditional compact residence of the Abazins, a people included in the Unified List of Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples of the Russian Federation.
For the purpose of preserving the Abazin people as a distinct ethnocultural community, protecting their ancestral habitat, and preserving their unique culture, traditions, and language, I respectfully request that you consider the inclusion in the ‘List of Places of Traditional Residence and Traditional Economic Activities of Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples of the Russian Federation,’ approved by Government Order No. 631-r of May 8, 2009, of the following places of traditional residence and traditional economic activity of the Indigenous Small-Numbered Abazin people within the territory of the Karachay-Cherkess Republic:
Abaza District: Inzhich-Chukun Rural Settlement, Kara-Pago Rural Settlement, Kubina Rural Settlement, Psyzh Rural Settlement, Elburgan Rural Settlement;
Adyge-Khabl Municipal District: Grushka Rural Settlement, Apsua Rural Settlement (Aul Apsua), Ersakon Rural Settlement (Aul Novo-Kuvinsk), Staro-Kuvinsk Rural Settlement;
Malokarachay Municipal District: Krasnovostochnoe Rural Settlement;
Ust-Dzheguta Municipal District: Koidan Rural Settlement.”
On December 11, 2015, D. Yu. Suyunov received a response from the Federal Agency for Ethnic Affairs stating that, pursuant to instructions from Deputy Prime Minister A. G. Khloponin, the Agency was considering amendments to the List of Places of Traditional Residence of Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples.
The Agency also requested information regarding the anticipated financial and economic consequences of the proposed amendments, including calculations of additional federal and regional budget expenditures that might be required based on the number of Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples residing in the relevant territories
On April 29, 2016, the Federal Agency for Ethnic Affairs informed the authorities of the Karachay-Cherkess Republic of the results of its review of R. B. Temrezov’s appeal to D. A. Medvedev:
“The proposal to amend the List of Places has been reviewed with the participation of relevant committees of the State Duma and the Federation Council of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation, the academic community, the Civic Chamber of the Russian Federation, as well as the Government of the Karachay-Cherkess Republic.
As a result of the review, particular attention was given to factors related to the legal, financial-economic, and ethnopolitical consequences of resolving this issue.
At present, the List of Places includes municipalities located in constituent entities of the Russian Federation where Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples of the North, Siberia, and the Far East of the Russian Federation reside compactly (or maintain a nomadic lifestyle).
This is due to the fact that peoples living in these territories maintain traditional ways of life and traditional economic activities under the difficult natural and climatic conditions of the Far North, Siberia, and the Far East of the Russian Federation, and therefore special support measures are provided for them.
The inclusion of municipalities of the Karachay-Cherkess Republic in the List of Places would entail corresponding obligations for federal, regional, and local authorities to ensure the guarantees and rights established by legislation for Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples of the Russian Federation.
At the same time, the Government of the Karachay-Cherkess Republic has not provided the necessary information concerning the financial and economic consequences of the proposed amendments, including potential expenditures from the federal and regional budgets, or confirmation that such expenditures would not arise.
In light of the above, and in the absence of sufficient justification regarding all financial and economic consequences, information on additional federal and regional budget expenditures, as well as taking into account possible ethnopolitical risks associated with unresolved land issues existing in the region, the proposal cannot be supported.”
This response is particularly noteworthy because the Head of the Karachay-Cherkess Republic was denied inclusion of Abazin settlements in the List on highly specific grounds that were not based directly on legal norms.
Representatives of the Federal Agency for Ethnic Affairs argued that other peoples had been included because they maintained traditional ways of life under difficult natural and climatic conditions. However, this assertion has no basis in legislation. Neither Federal Law No. 82-FZ “On Guarantees of the Rights of Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples of the Russian Federation,” nor Government Resolution No. 255 of March 24, 2000, nor Government Order No. 631-r of May 8, 2009 contains any provision establishing distinctions among Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples based on the climatic conditions in which they live.
The primary purpose of the law is clearly stated in the preamble to Federal Law No. 82-FZ:
“This Federal Law, in accordance with the Constitution of the Russian Federation, universally recognized principles and norms of international law, and international treaties of the Russian Federation, establishes the legal foundations for guarantees of the distinctive socio-economic and cultural development of Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples of the Russian Federation, protection of their ancestral habitat, traditional ways of life, economic activities, and crafts.”
In other words, according to the law, it is irrelevant under what natural or climatic conditions a particular Indigenous Small-Numbered People resides. What matters is preserving and developing the unique culture, traditional economic activities, language, and territories of traditional economic activity of all Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples within the country.
The second reason cited by the Federal Agency for Ethnic Affairs concerned the lack of information regarding the financial and economic consequences of the proposed amendments, which would impose additional obligations on federal, regional, and municipal authorities.
This explanation may appear more logical and legally defensible. However, it remains unclear who was responsible for preparing such an informational document. The document would necessarily involve identifying additional obligations toward an Indigenous Small-Numbered People, something that would naturally be viewed as burdensome by government authorities at every level.
The Federal Agency for Ethnic Affairs itself was the federal body that should have assisted in preparing such an assessment.
Indeed, Article 1 of Government Resolution No. 368 of April 18, 2015, “On the Federal Agency for Ethnic Affairs,” establishes that the Federal Agency for Ethnic Affairs (FADN of Russia) is the federal executive authority responsible for implementing measures aimed at strengthening the unity of the multinational people of the Russian Federation (the Russian nation), ensuring interethnic harmony, promoting the ethnocultural development of the peoples of the Russian Federation, and protecting the rights of national minorities and Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples of the Russian Federation.
Abazin public organizations that had traditionally raised concerns that the law on guarantees of the rights of Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples was not functioning properly also approached our legal team for assistance in preparing additional appeals to the Government of the Russian Federation.
As a result, in December 2016, we drafted and submitted an appeal to the Government of the Russian Federation on behalf of the Chairman of the Regional National-Cultural Autonomy of Abazins of the Karachay-Cherkess Republic “Adgylara,” requesting the inclusion of the Abazins in Government Order No. 631-r of May 8, 2009.
In its response dated December 12, 2016, the Federal Agency for Ethnic Affairs once again refused to address the substance of the issue, stating that:
“An appeal by the authorized state authorities of the constituent entity of the Russian Federation with the corresponding initiative must be submitted directly to the Government of the Russian Federation.”
This response was also unusual because both the Head of the Republic and the Parliament had already submitted such appeals to the Government of the Russian Federation and had likewise been denied.
Unsatisfied with this outcome, we once again submitted an appeal to the Federal Agency for Ethnic Affairs requesting clarification as to the legal basis for such responses and asking what specific regulations governed their refusal to provide a substantive answer.
We asked: under which legal provision is the procedure for including a people in Government Order No. 631-r of May 8, 2009 defined?
On March 20, 2017, we received a response stating:
“There is no special regulatory legal act governing the procedure and form of appeals by state authorities of constituent entities of the Russian Federation to the Government of the Russian Federation concerning the possible inclusion of individual settlements in the List of Places of Traditional Residence and Traditional Economic Activities of Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples of the Russian Federation approved by Government Order No. 631-r of May 8, 2009.”
I can continue with the section beginning in 2017, including the creation of the working group by the Head of the Karachay-Cherkess Republic, the petition campaign, and the creation of the new federal register of Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples.
In order to achieve the goal of including the Abazins in Government Order No. 631-r of May 8, 2009, we once again turned to local authorities for support.
As a result, by Order No. 147-r of the Head of the Karachay-Cherkess Republic dated July 20, 2017, a permanent “Working Group for the Implementation of the Provisions of the Law of the Karachay-Cherkess Republic No. 27-RZ of November 12, 2001, ‘On Guarantees of the Rights of the Indigenous Small-Numbered Abazin People in the Karachay-Cherkess Republic’” was established.
This working group held one meeting and never convened again.
In addition, we drafted a petition addressed to the Chairman of the Government of the Russian Federation, M. V. Mishustin, and collected more than one thousand signatures in support of it (61 signatures collected in person and 950 online).
On December 2, 2020, we submitted this petition to the Chairman of the Government of the Russian Federation.
At the same time, a new opportunity emerged to obtain rights already provided for by law through amendments introduced by Federal Laws No. 11-FZ of February 6, 2020, and No. 194-FZ of July 13, 2020.
According to Article 1 of the amended legislation, a new “Unified Register of Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples of the Russian Federation” was established.
Unlike Government Order No. 631-r of May 8, 2009, which concerns territories, the new register includes the representatives of Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples themselves, both as individual persons and as communities of Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples.
I became the first Abazin to successfully register in this register.
How can our six peoples gain inclusion in this Government Order and effectively defend their rights?
Perhaps the answer is not to reinvent the wheel, but to follow an existing model and establish an Association of Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples of the European Part of Russia. By uniting our efforts, it would be easier to defend our rights at the federal level.
However, is it truly worth it? Have the Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples of the North, Siberia, and the Far East actually achieved their goals?
I am convinced that the primary goal and dream of any Indigenous Small-Numbered People is ultimately to leave the category of “small-numbered” and become a thriving, numerous people while preserving its language and culture.
Additional benefits and legal protections are undoubtedly valuable. But do they actually preserve a people, even in places where the law functions as intended?
Research conducted by Pavel Sulyandziga, Dmitry Berezhkov, international Indigenous rights advocates, and analysts studying Indigenous peoples has highlighted a significant paradox: even where a stronger legal framework existed, it did not necessarily save the people themselves.
Consider the Ket people—one of the most vulnerable peoples of Siberia. Their language is considered one of the rarest and most endangered languages in the world. Formal Indigenous Small-Numbered People status did not stop the dramatic decline in the number of language speakers.
The Enets are one of the smallest Indigenous peoples of Russia. Their population is extremely small, and their language is in critical condition.
The Nivkhs are an ancient people of Sakhalin and the Amur region. Yet their language has entered a deep crisis.
The Yukaghirs possess a strong historical identity, but they continue to experience severe assimilation pressures and linguistic erosion.
The Evenks are among the most well-known Indigenous peoples of northern Russia. Yet in many regions the Evenki language has significantly weakened under the pressures of urbanization, the dominance of the Russian language, and changing lifestyles.
The Nenets represent one of the strongest examples of linguistic and cultural resilience. However, even among them, processes of urbanization, economic transformation, and cultural change have continued.
Thus, even within a stronger legal framework, the state system was not a magical solution.
Over the years, not a single Indigenous Small-Numbered People has increased its population sufficiently to leave the official list. On the contrary, many peoples have declined to only a few hundred individuals.
Humanity has already discovered methods for ensuring that a people does not lose its language, culture, and capacity for development.
Even when a people has completely lost its language, mechanisms already exist that can restore it and make it a living and meaningful part of society once again.
These mechanisms are not merely festivals organized for the sake of festivals and grants. They are not symbolic displays in national costumes by local activists seeking meetings with government officials.
They are real institutions and mechanisms that have already demonstrated success.
Examples include the Jewish people in Israel, who successfully revived a language that had ceased to function as a spoken everyday language; the Welsh in Wales; the Māori in New Zealand; the Basques in Spain; and other peoples around the world.
The principles are straightforward.
The first item on the list is compulsory education of children in kindergartens and schools entirely in the native language.
There are other important elements as well, but I will discuss them another time.