Purpose This study is to examine how developing countries can effectively implement a human rights due diligence (HRDD) framework that meets international investment law obligations while addressing domestic socio-economic realities. This study investigates the evolution of HRDD from a soft legal framework to explicit legal obligations in investment treaties and national laws, focusing on the ASEAN experience. This paper aims to understand the determinants of success or failure of different HRDD implementation approaches and to provide evidence-based recommendations for developing countries, particularly Vietnam, facing similar challenges in balancing investment protection with human rights considerations. Design/methodology/approach This study uses a qualitative comparative approach combining doctrinal legal analysis with empirical case studies. This study examines international investment treaties, national legislation and investment dispute settlements from 2011 to 2024. Four ASEAN countries (Singapore, Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia) were selected based on their different HRDD implementation approaches, stages of development and global value chain integration strategies. This study uses a multi-level governance framework that analyzes international legal obligations, domestic policy frameworks and corporate implementation practices. Findings HRDD has evolved from a voluntary corporate social responsibility obligation to a mandatory legal requirement in investment treaties and national legislation. ASEAN countries demonstrate diverse implementation strategies: Singapore integrates HRDD into an ESG framework; Thailand develops a comprehensive National Action Plan; Malaysia focuses on a sector-specific approach (palm oil); and Indonesia uses state-owned enterprises as an implementation model. Investment dispute resolution increasingly recognizes the need for HRDD, reflecting a shift toward balancing investor protection with human rights. Research limitations/implications This study focuses on the ASEAN region, which may limit generalizability to other developing regions with different institutional contexts. The time horizon (2011–2024) captures recent developments but may not reflect long-term implementation outcomes. The limited availability of comprehensive data on corporate HRDD practices, particularly from SMEs, limits the depth of analysis. This study mainly looks at the formal legal framework rather than the effectiveness of implementation on the ground. Practical implications This study provides actionable guidance for developing countries implementing the HRDD framework. Key recommendations include developing a step-by-step legal framework rather than a comprehensive system at once, integrating HRDD into existing regulatory mechanisms, leveraging financial regulators and stock exchanges, developing sector-specific approaches for high-risk sectors, collaborating with industry associations, using state-owned enterprises as implementation models and establishing multi-stakeholder monitoring systems. Social implications Integrating HRDD into international investment law represents a fundamental shift toward protecting vulnerable communities affected by business activities. Effective implementation can prevent human rights abuses, improve labor conditions, protect indigenous community rights and ensure environmental protection. Research demonstrates that market-based approaches can complement regulatory frameworks, potentially creating positive change even in contexts of weak domestic enforcement. Originality/value To the best of the author’s knowledge, this study provides the first systematic comparative analysis of HRDD implementation across multiple ASEAN countries within the framework of international investment law. This study develops an innovative theoretical framework that connects domestic HRDD implementation with international investment obligations, filling a significant gap in existing scholarship. This study offers new insights into how developing countries can adapt international standards to local contexts while maintaining compliance with global standards. The evidence-based recommendations are particularly valuable for Vietnam and other developing countries.

ABSTRACT This article presents the development of a five‐phase Indigenous Data Governance (IDGov) Framework in Australia, focusing on partnerships between the Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisation (ACCHO) sector and non‐Indigenous health entities. While the Indigenous Data Sovereignty (IDSov) movement has gained significant momentum over the past decade in Australia and other Anglo‐colonised nation‐states and beyond, the practical implementation of IDSov through community‐led governance remains underdeveloped in the literature. This paper addresses that gap by offering definitional and conceptual clarity, alongside examples that center Indigenous leadership in operationalising data governance. We introduce a phased model of IDGov, mapping a progression from the absence of governance through partial and shared arrangements to Indigenous‐majority and fully Indigenous‐led governance structures. The model is illustrated through a case study involving a complex data‐sharing agreement between one Indigenous and three non‐Indigenous organisations within the Victorian health system. Roles and responsibilities across each phase are articulated to support practical implementation. While grounded in the health sector, the framework is adaptable to other domains such as education, justice, and land governance, where IDSov is increasingly critical. This work offers a pathway for operationalising IDSov and transforming data relations to reflect and uphold Indigenous rights, worldviews, and decision‐making authority.

This article looks at the emergence of the concept of social value in Australian heritage practice in the 1990s and argues that contemporary practice should now draw on theoretical perspectives and creative modes of expression to better recognize the profound meanings of and connections to place for communities and cultural groups. In doing so, it points to inadequacies of current heritage practice, noting the narrow definition and limited application of the Australian concept of social value more than thirty years after it was first recognized and added to heritage assessment frameworks. The article argues that there is a need to reimagine the work of identifying, documenting, and assessing social value through a more sensitized form of heritage practice, one that recognizes an embodied, experiential engagement with place that is present for both the community and the heritage practitioner. The article draws extensively on the author’s experience with the concept of social value, recognizing that Australian frameworks and guidance have been influential in several other Western countries including the United States, the United Kingdom, and others. The article examines social value in Australian heritage practice by defining four lenses: a “distancing lens,” an “associative lens,” a “relationship lens,” and an “embodiment lens.” The distancing lens ignores the personal meanings that people may attribute to place, with the domination of history and aesthetics used as “objective measures” of heritage, and noting its continuing influence. When social value started to be recognized in heritage assessments in the early 1990s, the concept was initially framed as sentiment and then as association, focusing on demonstrable evidence of the use of a place by broadly defined communities/cultural groups and considering the social, cultural, and spiritual meanings that arise. In the early 2000s, the spatial “turn” in the humanities produced new ways of conceptualizing heritage, framed here as a relationship lens, where feelings of connection to place became framed in terms of agency, affect, and entanglement and where place was seen as an active agent in the processes of human place attachment. These theoretical perspectives, while engagingly framed, have not yet resulted in a shift in heritage practice. The social value framework established in the late 1980s and early 1990s had become institutionally embedded and effectively marginalized. Registers of significant heritage places continued to be dominated by the heritage values best able to be espoused by heritage professionals, not the “places of the heart” held dear by communities. The third lens, embodiment, is based on contemplating a deeper, more intimate relationship between people and place, and at this stage is largely atheoretical. In proposing this lens, the article contemplates what approaches might be used to engage with the idea of the indivisibility of people and place, a sense of mutual embodiment, within heritage practice. While this article does not engage specifically with Indigenous relationship to place and Country, it does acknowledge that Australian heritage practice has been profoundly influenced by the nature of colonial settlement and by the assertion of Indigenous rights (to culture, land, and knowledge). In conclusion, the article considers how recognition of the embodiment lens, even conceptually, may offer a powerful new perspective and encourage development of more integrated, holistic approaches to challenge the exclusionary model that is now so deeply embedded in heritage policy and practice.

Can indigenous rights be recognised without being empowered? This study examines how Dayak Customary Law Communities in Kalimantan navigate state recognition within Indonesia’s postcolonial and decentralised governance. Drawing on multi-sited qualitative research, it shows that recognition unfolds through fragmented sovereignties, overlapping authority among national, provincial, district, and village governments, and domesticated recognition, where indigenous governance adapts to bureaucratic norms. Using a decolonial perspective, the study argues that recognition reproduces state control through administrative legibility. It calls for co-governance, Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC), and RUU PPHMHA (Indigenous Peoples Bill) to ensure procedural and territorial safeguards.

ABSTRACT Through critical autoethnographic exploration, this paper examines Indigenous fatness through the entanglement of Land, body, and sovereignty. Guided by the Debwewin Journey methodology, this study employs Indigenous epistemologies to confront the ongoing, distinct, and interrelated colonial violences inflicted upon Indigenous Lands and bodies. The research critiques dominant discourses of fat Indigeneity, once revered in their sacredness, that medicalize, pathologize, and dehumanize fat Indigenous bodies under the colonial gaze. By foregrounding the inseparable relationship between body and Land, this study seeks to reclaim fat Indigenous bodies as vital and indispensable, located within the broader struggle for Indigenous sovereignties. This study integrates a systematic review of 48 texts, storywork, ceremony, and artistic introspection to explore three central inquiries: (1) How is Indigenous fatness conceptualized within existing mind knowledge? (2) How is Indigenous fatness understood within heart knowledge? (3) What truths emerge from the journey of connecting mind and heart knowledges? By examining colonial discourses alongside traditional Indigenous understandings, which link fatness to relationality, self-determination, and well-being, the study reveals through textual, ceremonial, and artistic reflections that fatness embodies the inseparable connection between bodies, Lands, and Indigenous sovereignties. Ultimately, the findings demonstrate that Indigenous nation-building is an integral pillar toward the restoration of sovereignty, decolonial healing, and fat liberation. In this context, Indigenous fatness is an act of resistance against colonialism and a fundamental assertion of Indigenous inherent rights to sovereignty.

Indigenous movement scholarship identifies two primary approaches to claiming indigeneity, strategic essentialism and decolonization, a binary that constrains Indigenous agency by suggesting that Indigenous actors must conform to settler expectations in the short term while postponing decolonization to a later stage. We broaden this perspective by looking at indigeneity from the perspective of constructed authenticity theory, which helps us reveal alternative agentic strategies for claiming identity. We examine how Indigenous leaders, animal rights activists, and policymakers debated Indigenous rights and identity by analyzing claims made during a Canadian summit on fur harvesting. Our findings reveal a clash between non-Indigenous authenticity claims, imposing rigid stereotypes, and Indigenous claims grounded in internal values and self-determination. Polarization persisted until Indigenous leaders reframed authenticity through historical and territorial connections, opening space for dialogue. Our study contributes to Indigenous movement scholarship by showing how different authenticity claims either reinforce settler constraints or foster Indigenous agency.

Land ownership and control disputes in Indonesia are complex legal issues, rooted in unequal land distribution, overlapping laws and regulations, and minimal recognition of the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities. From the colonial period to the reform era, agrarian policies in Indonesia have often created legal uncertainty, particularly regarding the designation of state forest areas and conservation that ignore community customary rights. Agrarian reform exists as a strategic instrument to address structural inequalities, resolve land disputes, and realize social justice as mandated by MPR Decree No. IX/MPR-RI/2001 and UUPA No. 5 of 1960. This study uses a normative method by examining various laws and regulations, doctrines, and legal theories related to agrarian matters and the resolution of tenurial conflicts. The results show that the effectiveness of agrarian reform in resolving tenurial conflicts is highly dependent on the harmonization of cross-sectoral regulations, the strengthening of state institutions such as the Agrarian Reform Task Force (GTRA) and the ATR/BPN, and the recognition of indigenous peoples' rights. The theoretical approach of national agrarian law, social justice, and a holistic legal system emphasizes that agrarian reform is not merely land redistribution, but also a process of legal renewal and agrarian governance that is just, participatory, and sustainable. Therefore, agrarian reform must be positioned as the primary legal instrument in resolving tenure conflicts, leading to legal certainty and social justice for all levels of society.

Abstract The integration of Indigenous Knowledge into Australian educational curricula has been a longstanding objective of Indigenous Peoples. While the introduction of the cross-curriculum priority, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander histories and cultures, in 2008 partially addressed this goal, a significant gap between policy intentions and practical implementation has since emerged. This paper provides a critical analysis of the Australian educational landscape, highlighting the persistent challenges in implementing Indigenous content despite policy initiatives. It explores the impact of the current teacher shortage crisis and the trend of positioning educational resources as a solution to teacher workload issues. Against this backdrop, the paper introduces Ngarrngga, a comprehensive nation-building program designed to empower educators to confidently showcase Indigenous Knowledge within the Australian educational system. By situating Ngarrngga within the broader context of Australian educational reform, this paper contributes to ongoing discussions on cultural inclusivity and Indigenous rights in education. The paper argues for a systemic approach to integrating Indigenous Knowledge, potentially serving as a model for similar initiatives globally. Through this analysis, the paper aims to advance understanding of the complexities involved in bridging the gap between educational policy and practice, particularly in the realm of Indigenous knowledge incorporation.

ABSTRACT To what extent are preferences for individual versus collective rights shaped by historical experiences, particularly colonialism? To answer this question, we conducted field studies in Fiji, a former British colony, home to two populations with distinct histories of colonial subjugation. We reasoned that for Indigenous iTaukei, for whom collective rights were stripped, prioritizing group rights on issues tied to colonial harm would be seen as essential for cultural survival. Contrastingly, we reasoned that Indo‐Fijians (descendants of indentured laborers brought to Fiji under colonial rule) would prefer equal rights for all. In Study 1, we assessed attitudes toward equality across various social and political issues, finding that iTaukei were less likely to endorse equality, particularly concerning land ownership. Study 2 explored iTaukei perceptions of land rights, revealing that they view granting Indo‐Fijians land access as a threat to their identity and survival. Study 3 explored support for democratic norms, themselves an artifact of Western legal thinking imposed upon Fiji. While support for democratic norms was high in abstract, members of both groups were more supportive of democratic violations when such violations served their group's interests. Findings highlight the lasting psychological impact of colonialism, demonstrating how historical grievances shape reasoning about rights and governance in postcolonial societies. Understanding these dynamics provides insight into contemporary intergroup conflict and the tension between universal democratic principles and Indigenous collective rights. This work contributes to broader discussions on decolonization and underscores the need for culturally sensitive approaches to human rights discourse.

This paper presents a framework implementing the Psychology Board of Australia’s Competency 8 through an Indigenous Rights-Based Approach (IRBA), recognising that effective cultural competency requires Indigenous expert leadership rather than models developed without Indigenous guidance. Centring Indigenous Sovereignty, self-determination, and reciprocal partnerships with Indigenous experts, the framework emphasises sustained relationships rather than episodic training. The three-tiered structure—Active Engagement, Adapting Practice, and Synthesis and Integration—guides practitioners from foundational understanding to systemic leadership, addressing colonial legacies within educational systems. It provides practical applications across all seven Competency 8 subsections, including culturally responsive care, trauma-aware practices and consultation frameworks, underpinned by pedagogically informed approaches. Critically, this paper addresses how implementation of Competency 8 risks placing another “colonial load” on Indigenous people expected to fix colonial systems without addressing the fundamental systemic flaws. The framework advocates for structured, Indigenous-expert-led supervision and reflective practice incorporating Indigenous ways of being, knowing, and doing, supporting professional growth of both Indigenous and non-Indigenous psychologists. By centring Indigenous rights, it provides actionable guidance for creating culturally safe environments that honour Indigenous students’ identities, aspirations, and inherent capabilities, contributing to decolonising psychological practice and fostering equity within Australian educational contexts.

The preservation of intangible cultural heritage (ICH), such as music, dance, language, indigenous law and other oral traditions and practices, is essential for peoples who are experiencing rapid culture change. This enables them to access and understand their cultural past as a valuable preparation for the future. Unlike tangible cultural heritage such as sites, monuments, and objects that can endure for centuries, intangible cultural heritage exists only momentarily. It is traditionally preserved in the minds of its practitioners. When these experts pass away, the intangible cultural heritage may be lost. This heritage can be preserved by its continual performance and by passing it on to the next generation, by writing it down through descriptive transcription, or by recording it. Various recording procedures have been used throughout the past century to record intangible cultural heritage, and today older analogue data can be digitised. But there are inherent difficulties in this process. This article examines the UNESCO Convention for Safeguarding the Intangible Cultural Heritage and issues arising thereof. It discusses processes of transcription and especially the recording of intangible cultural heritage. Finally, it proposes the planning and establishment of an audiovisual archives in Kota Kinabalu to preserve the intangible cultural heritage of all ethnic groups in Sabah and wider Borneo that will also ensure that the indigenous property rights of the people are preserved.

The Rohingya community of Myanmar is considered the most persecuted community in the entire world, which is not only denied citizenship and Indigenous rights but also exiled from their ancestral home by their own government and military. One of the main reasons behind this is the religious minority of the Rohingya community. However, the geopolitical conditions of the Rakhine State and the Myanmar government’s constant greed to take over the natural resources of that state so that they can continue state-led development in their ancestral lands are another important mechanism that is responsible for conducting inhuman violence against the Rohingya people. As a result, Rohingya persecution, which has been viewed as an issue of Political or human rights violation, is also an issue of ecofeminism and environmental justice, and it has remained unnoticed in academia for a long period. Against this backdrop, this paper wishes to explore how the Myanmar government, with its patriarchal, reductionist, and colonial mindset, has exploited both the ecosystem and the Rohingya community’s marginalized identity so that it can diminish the social, political, cultural, and spiritual identity of the Rohingya community while extracting their land, livelihood, and identity. Using theories from Discard studies, ecofeminism, and environmental justice, this paper argues that the Myanmar government has historically set a narrative against the Rohingya community as waste, unwanted, or inhuman, so that they can grab and control their lands and identity. At the same time, this paper will critically examine how the Myanmar government has commodified land for state-led development agendas.

This study examines the legal implications of transferring notary legal counseling duties to a substitute notary or acting official in the preparation of deeds of granting traditional land rights. The primary areas of focus are the legality of the deed, the legal responsibilities of the substitute notary, and the defense of indigenous peoples' rights. By examining Law Number 5 of 1960 concerning Basic Agrarian Principles, Law Number 2 of 2014 concerning the Position of Notary, and putting provisions like Government Regulation Number 24 of 1997 concerning Land Registration into effect, the research method is normative juridical through a statutory approach. The results of the study indicate that the validity of the deed of release of customary land rights can only be guaranteed if the appointment of the substitute notary or acting official meets formal and substantial requirements, including the inclusion of the position status on the minutes and a copy of the deed. Non-compliance has the potential to give rise to customary land disputes and the risk of nullity, particularly when the principle of recognizing The rights of indigenous peoples are not being upheld under Article 18B, paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution and Constitutional Court Decision Number 35/PUU-X/2012. In accordance with Civil Code Article 1365, acting officials or substitute notaries are nonetheless subject to civil culpability, administrative sanctions under Articles 85–88 of the Notary Law, and the obligation to maintain professional ethics. This study recommends strengthening legal counseling procedures, harmonizing land regulations and notary positions, and establishing national guidelines to ensure the protection of indigenous peoples' rights and legal certainty in every process of releasing customary land rights.

The food estate program in Indonesia, introduced as part of the National Strategic Projects, aims to bolster national food security through the development of large-scale agricultural zones outside Java. Central Kalimantan has become a key pilot area, selected for its perceived land availability and strategic potential. However, this top-down initiative has raised critical concerns related to ecological degradation, legal centralization, and the marginalization of indigenous communities. This study adopts a qualitative methodology that integrates doctrinal legal analysis with empirical research to assess the implementation and impacts of the food estate program in Central Kalimantan. Legal sources, environmental reports, field interviews, and NGO documentation provide the evidentiary basis for this inquiry. The findings reveal significant legal-ecological dissonance: the program undermines constitutional principles of environmental protection, regional autonomy, and indigenous land rights. Ecologically, the conversion of peatlands has accelerated deforestation and carbon emissions. Socially, it has disrupted traditional livelihoods, excluded local participation, and triggered land conflicts. Legally, the policy bypasses decentralization mandates and weakens the role of local governments. This article argues that the food estate program constitutes agrarian misgovernance, where national food ambitions compromise justice, sustainability, and legality. Its novelty lies in adopting a legal-empirical framework that bridges constitutional analysis with socio-environmental realities. By situating Indonesia’s case within global debates on ecological justice and participatory governance, this study contributes to rethinking agrarian policy toward more democratic and sustainable models of food security.

ABSTRACT This article critically examines the legal struggle of Keith Boucher, a Mi’kmaq non-status Indigenous man from New Brunswick, to expose the structural violence embedded within Canada’s recognition regime under section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982. Although Boucher ultimately achieved vindication before the New Brunswick Court of Appeal, his decade-long ordeal reveals the systemic barriers faced by non-status Indigenous Peoples: colonial courts privilege written genealogies over lived Indigenous experience, delegitimizing oral tradition and cultural memory, and retraumatizing claimants. The analysis examines how courts apply blood quantum and genealogical criteria, require stringent documentary evidence, not fully considering Indigenous resilience and community affirmation. Legal recognition operates within frameworks inherited from colonial legal traditions which can limit Indigenous resurgence and self-determination. The article traces broader societal and academic campaigns that frame non-status Indigenous identities as fraudulent, entrenching public suspicion and exacerbating internal gatekeeping within Indigenous communities. Through a critical doctrinal and structural analysis, the article argues that legal recognition functions as a reenactment of colonial oversight, undermining Indigenous resurgence and self-determination. Boucher’s case ultimately exemplifies the precariousness of Indigenous rights recognition in Canada and underscores the urgent need for profound structural transformation that honours Indigenous lived realities beyond colonial evidentiary regimes.

Colonization has left enduring social, cultural, economic, and political legacies across Fiji and the Pacific, profoundly shaping indigenous societies and their development trajectories. The imposition of foreign governance structures, land tenure systems, and Western education disrupted traditional knowledge systems, social hierarchies, and community governance, creating persistent inequalities and challenges to cultural continuity. This paper critically examines the lasting impacts of colonization on indigenous cultures in Fiji and the wider Pacific, highlighting how historical policies have influenced contemporary issues such as land disputes, educational disparities, social stratification, and economic dependency. Drawing on Human and Indigenous Knowledge frameworks, the study explores efforts at decolonization, including curriculum reforms that integrate indigenous epistemologies, community-led cultural revitalization programs, and policy initiatives aimed at restoring indigenous governance, land rights, and social equity. The paper emphasizes the resilience and agency of Pacific communities in reclaiming identity, knowledge, and cultural practices disrupted by colonial processes. Furthermore, it investigates the role of regional and international frameworks, such as the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) and the 2050 Strategy for the Blue Pacific Continent, in supporting local decolonization and cultural revitalization initiatives. The findings underscore that decolonization in Fiji and the Pacific is not merely a historical or symbolic endeavour but a transformative process with implications for education, governance, economic development, and social cohesion. By centring indigenous perspectives and fostering culturally grounded solutions, Pacific nations can navigate the legacies of colonization while promoting inclusive development, social justice, and cultural sustainability. This paper contributes to broader discourses on postcolonial studies, indigenous rights, and Pacific development, offering insights for policymakers, educators, and community leaders committed to creating equitable and culturally vibrant futures.

Abstract Wild and intentionally ignited fires are not new to North American landscapes or to the Indigenous cultures whose ancestral places encompass them. For millennia, Indigenous fire stewardship has been regionally and locally distributed across North American ecosystems. These practices reshaped fire regimes to provide safe living and foraging conditions and reduced wildfires and their emissions prior to Euro-American colonization. Euro-American colonization impacts initially included introduction of foreign diseases and widespread genocide, which broadly diminished the extent of Indigenous fire stewardship. Colonial policies and practices thereafter effectively altered vegetation and fuel patterns, fire regimes, and the once far-reaching effects of Indigenous fire stewardship. These influences have contributed to the current state of wildfires and their climate effects. Prior to colonization, Indigenous stewardship rights had been passed down through generations for millennia of active stewardship, and those rights were and continue to be protected under Indigenous law. However, US federal laws do not recognize these fundamental rights despite their legal standing in international law. Re-instating these rights would provide many advantages to addressing the modern wildfire and climate crisis. Re-instatement could be accelerated through linked land access, policy reform, and learning opportunities.

Indigenous knowledge is at the heart of identity, culture, and wellbeing for Indigenous Peoples, and knowledge transmission is fundamental to sustaining a sense of belonging, connection to community, and upholding Indigenous Peoples inherent rights and sovereignties. However, colonial and Eurocentric ideologies have long disrupted this knowledge transmission, impeding self-determination and aiming to assimilate and control Indigenous Peoples, cultures, and identities. The inaugural Indigenous Wellbeing Gathering Conference hosted by the Urban Indigenous Wellbeing Collective on the traditional territory of the Syilx Okanagan Nation, sought to create a responsive and inclusive space for the sharing and revitalization of Indigenous knowledge systems. Grounded in reciprocity and relationality, the conference centred Indigenous-led pathways of wellbeing, with the aim of bringing together academic and Indigenous community-led wellbeing research and practices. This paper describes the journey of organizing the conference, offering insights into Indigenous approaches to knowledge translation within health research contexts. Emerging from the experience of organizing the gathering, we share an Indigenous Wellbeing Research Knowledge Translation Framework, which emphasizes iterative, community-engaged processes, valuing Indigenous knowledge systems alongside research and wellbeing practitioner knowledges. This framework aims to advance health equity, Indigenous human rights, and self-determination by centering Indigenous knowledge systems and practices. The conference's success highlights the importance of culturally relevant, community-led initiatives in promoting Indigenous wellbeing.

Climate change adaptation programs are increasingly presented as essential for sustainable forest management and resilience, yet their design and implementation often sideline Indigenous Peoples' rights. This study examined policy gaps in the implementation of forest-based climate adaptation measures that infringe on the rights of the Sengwer in Embobut Forest, Elgeyo Marakwet County, Kenya (2009–2020). Guided by securitisation and constructivist theories, the study analysed three major programs: the Natural Resource Management Project (NRMP), the Water Towers Protection and Climate Resilience Program (WaTER), and the Miti Mingi Maisha Bora Program (MMMB), implemented under the Paris Agreement. Although designed to enhance environmental resilience, these initiatives revealed systemic gaps between policy intent and practice, particularly when Indigenous voices were excluded or superficially engaged during design and execution. Anchored in a mixed-methods approach combining questionnaires, semi-structured interviews, focus group discussions, and direct observations, findings showed that despite Kenya's strong legal instruments, adaptation measures were weakened by politicisation, poor enforcement, and inconsistency. Safeguards such as Article 7.5 of the Paris Agreement, which stress gender-responsive, participatory, and rights-based adaptation, were undermined by top-down planning, tokenistic consultation, and misuse of Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC). This perpetuated forms of “carbon colonialism,” where global climate agendas advanced at the expense of Indigenous rights and sovereignty. The research calls for inclusive, justice-driven, and community-led adaptation models that integrate FPIC, uphold Indigenous ecological knowledge, and recognise Biocultural protocols such as the Sengwer's 2020 Biocultural Community Protocol. It contributes to climate justice scholarship by reframing adaptation failures as outcomes of governance and policy gaps rather than the absence of legal provisions, and offers policymakers and practitioners practical insights on embedding tenure security and traditional knowledge at the heart of forest governance.

The article deals with the legislation produced by the state of Roraima regarding indigenous rights and the scope of competence established by the federal constitution to legislate on the matter. The Federal Supreme Court decided in 2014, in the judgment of the Direct Action of Unconstitutionality 1,499, that only the Union can legislate on indigenous issues. However, the division of competences between the entities of the federation in this area must be discussed, on the states where most indigenous peoples reside, and especially for those indigenous peoples who reside outside their lands.