SCHOOL OF LAW HAMDARD INSTITUTE OF LEGAL STUDIES AND RESEARCH

JAMIA HAMDARD

INTERNATIONAL LAW
BA.LLB(HONS)/SEM VI
SESSION:-2020-2025

TOPIC:- The Fourth World Approaches to International Law: A Cursory Glance

SUBMITTED TO. SUBMITTED BY

TABISH SIR Aabid Maqbool
ROLL NO-2020-342-001
 ABSTRACT
The questions of Fourth Worlds are still not widely discussed in

philosophical perspectives, even though a Third-World interpretation of

international law is an established and thriving theme. The segmentation

of the world community along economic, political, and ideological lines is

referred to as the "Fourth World." It is an exegetical evolution of the

"Three Worlds" theory. The study uses doctrinal research methods and

literature from the "Third World" to spotlight the "Fourth World." under

international law. This article aims to highlight the similarities and

differences between third- and fourth-world people’s experiences and

expectations under international law.

Keywords: TWAIL, First World, Second World, Third World, Fourth

World and Indigenous People.

I. INTRODUCTION

Fourth World Approaches to International Law (FWAIL) is a relatively

recent theoretical framework that seeks to challenge mainstream

international law, which is largely focused on the relations between

states and international organizations. FWAIL aims to give voice and

agency to marginalized groups and communities, particularly those who

are not recognized as sovereign states, but who are still subject to

international law. The term "Fourth World" refers to groups such as

Indigenous peoples, minority communities, and other marginalized

groups that are not considered part of the traditional first, second, or

third world categories. FWAIL seeks to address the historical and ongoing

injustices that these groups have experienced, and to create a more

inclusive and just international legal system.Some of the key ideas

associated with FWAIL include the recognition of the diversity of legal

systems and the importance of understanding and respecting the

perspectives and values of nonstate actors. FWAIL scholars also

emphasize the need to address the power imbalances that exist in the

current international legal system, and to give greater consideration to

the social, cultural, and economic factors that shape the experiences of

marginalized groups. While FWAIL is still a relatively new and evolving

theoretical framework, it has already had a significant impact on the field

of international law, particularly in terms of highlighting the importance

of considering the perspectives and experiences of non-state actors. As

the international legal system continues to evolve, it is likely that FWAIL

will continue to play an important role in shaping debates and

discussions around issues of justice, equality, and human rights. The

concepts of the First, Second, and Third Worlds were originally

developed during the Cold War era to describe the geopolitical divisions

between the capitalist Western countries, the communist Eastern bloc,

and the non-aligned countries of the Global South, respectively.

However, the meaning of these terms has evolved over time, and

scholars have offered a range of perspectives on the interplay between

these three worlds. Some scholars argue that the First World has

historically dominated the Second and Third Worlds, both economically

and politically. This domination has led to exploitation and inequality,

with the First World benefiting from the resources and labor of the other

two worlds. From this perspective, the relationship between the worlds

is characterized by a power imbalance and a history of colonialism and

imperialism. Others argue that the distinctions between the worlds have

become increasingly blurred in recent years, with the rise of emerging

economies in the Global South and the decline of Western dominance.

Some scholars suggest that the world is now characterized by a

multipolar system, with power and influence more widely distributed

across the globe.

II. CHALLENGING THE STATUS QUO
More than 370 million people in more than 70 countries are called

"Indigenous and tribal peoples (“Fourth World”). Indigenous and tribal

peoples are frequently referred to by national labels such as native

peoples, aboriginal peoples, first nations, Adivasi, janajati,

huntergatherers, or hill tribes.ILO Convention refers to both "indigenous

and tribal peoples" and accords the same rights to them.4 For instance,

several afro-descendent cultures in Latin America have been referred to

as "tribal."Indigenous and tribal peoples are not universally defined.

However, ILO Convention No. 169 adopts a pragmatic stance and offers

objective and subjective criteria for recognising the people in question.In

the case of the Indigenous Group of People, A person who identifies as a

member of an indigenous group is the subjective criterion.In contrast, in

an objective standard, a person's lineage returns to the people who lived

there at the time of the state's founding, colonisation, or conquest. In

addition, despite their legal position, they continue to have their own

social, economic, cultural, and political institutions. Whereas in the case

of tribal people, in the subjective criterion, a person who identifies

oneself as a member of a tribe and on the other hand, in the objective

criteria, compared to other groups within the national society, they have

unique social, cultural, and economic circumstances. They have their

conventions, traditions, specific laws, and regulations that either entirely

or partially govern their status.

During the cold war, each nation was categorised as belonging to a

specific sort of which under the following headings; The term "First

World" was used to refer to states that supported NATO and capitalism,

"Second World" to represent those that backed communism and the

Soviet Union, and "Third World" to indicate countries that were not

actively supporting either side. These nations included the destitute

former colonies of Europe and every country in Asia, Latin America, the

Middle East, and Africa. Later, the phrase "Fourth World" was coined

when the Third World developed to represent regions and people with

meagre per capita incomes and sparse natural resources.During the

1970s, Mbuto Milando (Diplomat and the first Secretary of Tanzania High

Commission) in Canada and George Manuel, Chief of the National Indian

Brotherhood, are credited with coining the phrase "Fourth World" for

the first time in Canada (now the Assembly of First Nations). The Fourth

World will exist when indigenous peoples "come into their own cultures

and traditions," according to Milando.14 The citizens of the countries in

the Fourth World were marginalised groups. As an illustration, though

completely self-sufficient, Aboriginal tribes in South America or Australia

do not engage in the global economy.From a global perspective, these

tribes were regarded as Fourth World states despite being able to

function without any outside support.

III. THE INTERPLAY BETWEEN THE FIRST, SECOND, AND THIRD WORLDS

SCHOLARS’ PERSPECTIVES

The Second World and Third World are interwoven with one another,

and the First World views this as a form of prebendalism. Third-Worldism

fights against the legalised dominance of international law and rejects

the idea of a One-World Order in which the Third World is assimilated.

He further argues that once understood, the distinction between

emancipation and liberation may be used to distinguish between

legitimate scholarship from the Third World and the First World's

dominant muddled narratives. He also promotes the idea of a Fourth

World that differs from the Third World and tries to create a form of

people's law that is unique from

the current state of state law.Ronald Dworkin opposes the current

system of a legitimising regime based on consent in his

essay, A New Philosophy for International Law, and instead advocates for

a system based on the concept of consensus. He grounds his arguments

on the idea of his morality, which is based on the premise that every

state has a responsibility to advance not just its own political legitimacy

but also the legitimacy of the entire international order. From this
theory, he developed the Salience Principle, which takes his consensus-

building strategy to a worldwide level and suggests that some

international ideas will gain more legitimacy and acceptance if they are

widely adopted and put into practice. He gives a hypothetical futuristic

proposal with a four-pronged decision-making system to assure his idea

of consensus as well as an ideal type that exemplifies his thesis and

provides a variation of the prisoner's dilemma to demonstrate it. On the

other hand, Professor Upendra Baxi,19 explores what the Third World

could anticipate from international law in his study examines the current

structures via a post-structuralist Third World lens and, in addition to the

title question, poses several significant queries. Who built the Third

World and Who belongs to it are the main concerns. It criticises the West

and the Eurocentric Westphalian governments that make up the First

World for imposing their narratives and interpretations of International

Law on the Third World by focusing on the Third World as being more

than just economic status. The First World attributes a kind of

prebendalism to the Second World and the Third World since they are

intertwined with one another. Third-Worldism rejects the idea of a One-

World Order, in which the Third World is absorbed, and seeks to

overthrow the legalised dominion of international law. Additionally, he

contends that once grasped, the difference between

emancipation and liberation may be used to discriminate between

genuine scholarship from the Third World and the First World's

hegemonic jumbled narratives. In addition, he advances the notion of a

Fourth World as distinct from the Third World and works to develop a

peoples' law that differs from the current condition of the law of the

states. Dworkin is does not dispute with the Westphalian system as a

whole, but his arguments have frequently been criticised from the

perspective of the Third World. Although he rejects the consent-based

legitimation approach, he emphasises the legitimacy component

through his novel Salience Principle and consensus model. This is

completely at odds with Baxi's vision of the perfect global community. In

his paper What is TWAIL?, Makau Mutua delves into the Third World

Scholarship and claims that the international law that is dominated by

eurocentrism is "... a regime and rhetoric of domination and

subordination, not resistance and liberation."21

A Eurocentric perspective silences and marginalises the voices of Third

World citizens, whose daily injustices make up the Third World.

Dworkin's core tenets, Duty to Mitigate and Principle of Salience, are

both derived from his fundamental moral philosophy. He asserts that it is

the

moral responsibility of all States to advance international law, although

this notion is founded on a profoundly Eurocentric understanding of

morality.Baxi sums up the issue with Dworkin's conception of morality

perfectly when he describes the First World as a "... vehicle, vessel, and

countenance of world control." In the imperialistic age, the first world

had colonised the Third World, and as Antony Anghie has argued, this

colonisation is what gave rise to contemporary international law. In fact,

any TWAIL scholarship, in Matua's opinion, must be oriented against

international law itself. Dworkin is not actually proposing anything "new"

when he tries to add a new philosophy to the framework

of international law that already exists. Since there is more room for

majoritarianism, the Third World movement will actually suffer if

consent is simply substituted for agreement. Although it may be claimed

that because the Third World States are the most numerous, this should

give them more power, the author thinks that the intense control the

First World wields over the Third World will prevent the Third World

States from banding together and will continue the oppression. His

arguments for the Principle of Salience and consensus disintegrate once

the notion of Dworkin's morality based on the obligation owed by States

to one another is disproved. The ideal type and other postulates of

Dworkin are based on his idea that the United Nations would be a

perfect base for the implementation of his consensus model, but the UN

as he envisioned it is very unlikely to ever materialise if viewed

realistically. This is despite the

problem of Eurocentric morality. The simple act of casting a vote in the

General Assembly is merely a token representation; the actual lived

experiences of the Third World's marginalised voices must be heard.The

Third World was never fully freed from colonial rule, as B. S. Chimni

discusses in his study. Despite being given the opportunity to join a

group that is essentially Eurocentric, Third World countries are never

given the freedom to cast their votes however they see fit. The Third

World nations are labelled as "developing," which renders them

dependent on the First World due to sanctions, economic pressure, and

other international issues. Dworkin concedes that the UN is biassed in

favour of the First World in its current form, but his suggested ideal type

model leaves the First World in control of economics and, consequently,

decision-making.

IV. THE FOURTH WORLD FROM THE LENS OF THE LAW

The Fourth World is "comprising those native peoples whose lands and

cultures have been engulfed by the nations of the First, Second and Third

Worlds. The term 'IV World is coming into general academic use.

However, unlike its precursor, the III World, it has not yet reached a level

of public understanding in either North America or Europe. The

emergence of concept of the IV World has arisen from:

a) A need for social scientists to generalise about the processes and

characteristics of a particular socio-political category of people and

b) From the growing worldwide consciousness among the leaders of the

very peoples to whom the term applies who, like members of the III

World, wish to form cross-national alliances and to demarcate

themselves by a term encapsulating their unique predicaments. Fourth-

World problems are still not discussed in great detail regarding the

discipline's philosophical underpinnings. Among the many meanings

which have so far been attached to the IV World, the features of minority

status and relative powerlessness are standard. In addition, for the term

to be precise enough to be helpful, (the term III World is now so misused

as to be relatively useless for social scientists. Indigenous peoples in the

Fourth World typically have a unique spiritual, cultural, and historical

connection to their traditional lands, which are often tied to their

traditional practices, beliefs, and ways of life. This connection to the land

is often central to their identity and worldview. In addition to their

connection to the land,

indigenous peoples in the Fourth World are often distinguished by their

emically perceived "ethnie" difference from the majority population of

the country in which they live. This may involve distinct languages,

customs, and beliefs that set them apart from the dominant culture.

From a legal perspective, the Fourth World is not officially recognized as

a distinct category under international law. However, there are a number

of legal frameworks that apply to indigenous peoples and communities

that can be relevant to the Fourth World. One of the most important

legal instruments for indigenous peoples is the United Nations

Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), which was

adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 2007. UNDRIP

recognizes the collective rights of indigenous peoples to

selfdetermination, land, culture, and language, among other things.

Other important legal frameworks for indigenous peoples include the

International Labour Organization Convention

No. 169 on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples, which sets out minimum

standards for the protection and participation of indigenous peoples in

decision-making processes, and the African Charter on Human and

Peoples' Rights, which includes provisions protecting the rights of

indigenous peoples in Africa. Despite these legal frameworks, indigenous

peoples and communities continue to face significant challenges in

accessing justice and protecting their rights. Many countries have failed

to implement these legal instruments, or have implemented them in

ways

that do not adequately protect the rights of indigenous peoples.In order

to address the challenges faced by the Fourth World, it is important for

governments and international organizations to work with indigenous

peoples and communities to ensure that their voices are heard and their

rights are protected. This may involve implementing legal frameworks,

providing access to justice, and promoting dialogue and collaboration

between indigenous peoples and other stakeholders.

Therefore, The Fourth World aids in comprehending subjectivity

structures about thinking and feeling, enabling more profound and more

in-depth excavations crucial to the analysis of postcolonial studies. In the

context of global formations, as they pertain to Latin America, the United

States has inherited a privileged position as a new custodian of

intellectual production, particularly the legacy of the protectorate of

particular economic and cultural structures that are not always

consistent with the formative experiences that shape the coalesced

modernities that are lived.

V. EPILOGUE
Fourth World Approaches to International Law (FWAIL) is a theoretical

framework that seeks to critique and expand traditional approaches to

international law. This approach takes into account the experiences and

perspectives of indigenous peoples and other marginalized groups that

are often excluded or marginalized by dominant international legal

regimes.

The term "Fourth World" refers to peoples and communities who are not

recognized as states and who do not have the same political power and

sovereignty as nation-states. These include indigenous peoples, minority

groups, and others who have been historically oppressed and excluded.

FWAIL seeks to challenge the assumptions and biases of traditional

international law, which often reflects the interests and values of

powerful states and institutions. It calls for a more inclusive and

pluralistic approach to international law that takes into account the

diverse perspectives and experiences of different communities and

cultures. One of the key contributions of FWAIL is its emphasis on the

importance of self-determination and cultural autonomy. It recognizes

the right of indigenous peoples and other marginalized groups to

maintain their distinct cultures, languages, and ways of life, and to have

a say in decisions that affect their lives and communities. FWAIL also

highlights the ways in which international law has been used to justify

colonialism, imperialism, and other forms of domination and

exploitation. It calls for a more critical and reflective approach to

international law that takes into account the historical legacies of

colonialism and the ongoing struggles of marginalized groups for justice

and equality. The Fourth World has existed for as long as the first,

second, and third worlds, but it has never found a place in popular or

conventional literature. It was a discovery rather than the creation of a

brand-new world. The Fourth World is for all of the world's

underprivileged and successful groups; literature instils new hope. It is a

protest against a long-standing, deeply ingrained social attitude toward

the needy of the Fourth World rather than a challenge to the third or

first world. The Fourth World includes Muslims, Dalits, American Indians,

Australian Aborigines, and others. The ongoing efforts of indigenous

representatives have led to the development of the Fourth World

consciousness.

VI. REFERENCES

1. Alexie, Sherman. Indian Killer. New York: Atlantic Monthly Press, 2016.

Print.

2. Allen, Chadwick. Blood Narrative: Indigenous Identity in American

Indian and Maori Literary and Activist Texts. Durham: Duke University

Press, 2002. Print

3. Anthony J. Hall & Tony Hall, The American Empire and the Fourth

World 239 (2003).

4. Brotherston, Gordon. Book of the Fourth World: Reading the Native

Americas through Their Literature. New York: Cambridge University

Press, 2012. Print.

5. B S Chimni, The Past, Present and Future of International Law: A

critical Third World Approach, 8(2) Melbourne Journal of International

Law, 499, (2017).

6. B S Chimni, Third World Approaches to International Law: A Manifesto,

8 International Community Law Review, 3-27, (2006).

7. Fourth World Conference on Women, Beijing 1995’

<https://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/beijing/> accessed 7 February

2023.

8. George Manuel, Michael Posluns and Vine Deloria, The Fourth World:

An Indian Reality (University of Minnesota Press 1974) 41

<https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5749/j.ctvf34hsb> accessed 7 February

2023.

9. George Manuel and Michael Posluns, ‘The Indian World and the

Fourth World’ (1974) 67 Current History 263.

10. Hiroshi Fukurai, ‘Fourth World Approaches to International Law

(FWAIL) and Asia’s Indigenous Struggles and Quests for Recognition

under International Law’ (2018) 5 Asian Journal of Law and Society 221,