The Dakota Access Pipeline has rekindled a fresh controversy in the ethical, environmental and political angles. The opponents of the Dakota Access Pipeline are notably the native tribes in Dakota, Iowa and Standing Rock Sioux. The opponents of the pipeline argue that its construction would significantly interfere with their access to safe water and that it would violate their historical right as the owners of the territory (Sammon, 2016). The pipeline also invokes fundamental environmental concerns ranging from wildlife, drinking water, farming and sources f food. Besides, there is also a genuine concern of the use of eminent domain wrongfully as well as the risks of oil leakages. Because of the already mentioned concerns, this paper determines that the Dakota Access Pipeline violated the law.
In 2017, many people came out to protest the construction of the Dakota pipeline with some of the protestors assembling at the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation where the construction of the pipeline had already begun (Whyte, 2017). This was done to express solidarity with the Native American community. The situation had raised such serious issues that the human rights observers were sent to investigate the intimidation tactics that were alleged to be used by the government on the Standing Rock.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Apart from the serious implications that the pipeline has on the welfare and health of the Native American people, the pipeline controversy also implicates both the international and federal law. According to a report by Sidder (2016), more than 380 sites would be destroyed by the construction project besides the many federal policies and regulations regarding such historical sites. Moreover, the people of the Standing Rock argue that the construction violates the treaty of Fort Laramie which in part serves to delineate the land rights between the government of the United States and the various bands of the Sioux Nation.
The spirit of the treaty seems to suggest that the construction of the pipeline which runs through reservations could compromise the rights of the standing rocks’ to exclusively use and enjoy their land thus leading to a gross violation of the treaty. Moreover, even if the government of the United States suggests the need to accept the agreement, the Sioux nation argues that they were not consulted adequately on the project even though the project may adversely affect their lives. It also appears that the government of the United States may have conflicted with other international agreements like the political rights, civil rights, and the UN Declaration on the Rights of the indigenous people (Whyte, 2017).
Whether the government of the United States going with the international law has gone against the agreement with the Sioux nation depends on whether or not the government of the United States holds the treaty as a valid one in the first place. The relationship is indeed seen by many as plenty of broken promises. Against the claims by the Native American community, the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled consistently in the government's favor on this matter. For example, in the case of Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock , the Supreme Court ruled that the federal government had all the power to repeal the provisions of the U.S.- Indian treaty unilaterally (Whyte, 2017). In another case of United States v. Sioux Nation of Indians, the court ruled that taking of the Black Hills, a region which was given to the Sioux under the Fort Laramie Treaty of 1868 enabled the taking of the Black Hills which had due compensation but did not comment on whether the treaty was reached. The United Nations Permanent Forums on indigenous issues had recently called upon the government of the United States to fulfill its fiduciary obligations and trust responsibility to the Sioux Nation which had guaranteed significant rights.
References
Sammon, A. (2016). A History of Native Americans Protesting the Dakota Access Pipeline. Mother Jones , 9 .
Sidder, A. (2016). Understanding the controversy behind the Dakota Access Pipeline. Smithsonian Magazine .
Whyte, K. (2017). The Dakota access pipeline, environmental injustice, and US colonialism.
