2021 Statelessness & Citizenship Review 3(1) Kenya (‘Endorois’) case, as it found the Government of Kenya guilty of evicting the Endorois people from their land to create a wildlife park. 84 The Commission has also consecrated the right of a people to dispose freely of wealth and natural resources as enshrined in art 21 of the Charter in the 2001 SERAC (on Behalf of) the Ogoni People v Nigeria case, in which the Commission decided that ‘with regard to a collective group, the resources belonging to it should be respected, as it has to use the same resources to satisfy its needs’. 85 More importantly, the Commission also used the SERAC (on Behalf of) the Ogoni People v Nigeria case to consecrate art 24 of the Charter related to the right of a people to a satisfactory environment. 86 Apart from the African human rights system, other regional human rights systems have enshrined the promotion and protection of collective rights and have been developing a case law in that regard. 87 For instance, in 2006, the InterAmerican Court consecrated the peoples’ collective right to property enshrined in the art 21 of the American Convention on Human Rights in the Sawhoyamaxa Indigenous Community v Paraguay case. 88 PEOPLES’ RIGHTS, NATIONALITY RIGHTS AND THE PREVENTION OF STATELESSNESS IN AFRICA The rationale for a correlation between the collective rights of people and communities on the one hand, and promoting the right to nationality with the view of eradicating statelessness in Africa on the other cannot be understated. This right, which can apply to both individuals and recognised groups, people and communities, can play an important role in the eradication of statelessness. In effect, collective peoples’ rights as embedded in art 1 of the ICESCR, art 27 of the ICCPR and arts 19–24 of the 1981 Banjul Charter provide a complementary framework to understand statelessness in Africa. The peoples’ rights perspective is significant in the African context because of mass deprivations of citizenship rights through structural discrimination, exclusion and mass expulsions usually target groups collectively. The right to nationality is, therefore, not only an individual right, but also a collective right of communities, minority groups or people. 84 85 86 87 88 See Centre for Minority Rights Development and Minority Rights Group International and Centre on Housing and Evictions (Intervening) (On Behalf of the Endorois Welfare Council) v Kenya, Communication No 276/2003, 46th ord sess (11–25 November 2009). See Ingange-wa-Ingange (n 13) 214; Social and Economic Rights Action Centre (SERAC) and the Centre for Economic and Social Rights v Nigeria (African Human Rights Commission, Comm No 155/96, 30th ord sess, (27 May 2002) [45]. Social and Economic Rights Action Centre (SERAC) and the Centre for Economic and Social Rights v Nigeria (n 85) [50]–[53]. Though it is important to note that the issue of peoples’ rights, indigenous rights, in particular, have also been advanced in the Americas. The Inter-American system, through the InterAmerican Commission and Court, has equally undertaken a few decisions guaranteeing the protection of indigenous people and collective rights in the region. For instance, the 2001 case of Mayagna (Sumo) Awas Tingni Community v Nicaragua (Judgment) (Inter-American Court of America, Series C No 79, 31 August 2001) and the 2006 case of Sawhoyamaxa Indigenous Community v Paraguay (Judgment) (Inter-American Court of America, Series C No 146, 29 March 2006). It is also worth noting that in 2016, the Organization of American States adopted the American Declaration on the Rights of the Indigenous Peoples, AG/RES.2888 (XLVIO/16) (signed and entered into force 15 June 2016). See Michael Talbot, ‘Collective Rights in the Inter-American and African Human Rights Systems’ (2018) 49(1) Georgetown Journal of International Law 163, 169��70. 48