Stephanie Ferrell Stover, APRP
Stover P.R. & Publishing
TEL 304-646-3065
Rupert resident Drema Shires and other local residents are circulating a petition that will be presented to the Greenbrier County Commission (GCC) at its regularly scheduled meeting on Thursday, February 8, at 7 PM in the upstairs courtroom at the Greenbrier County Courthouse in Lewisburg. Those wishing to speak out against the move are encouraged to sign up to speak at the meeting.
“We, the undersigned, are concerned citizens of Greenbrier County who oppose the removal of the Greenbrier County Magistrates’ Office in Rupert,” the petition states. “We are opposed to the removal of an office of the court, not only because it has been in Rupert since the Magistrate System began in 1976, but because Greenbrier County citizens who elected our commissioners and magistrates were given no consideration regarding the closing of the Rupert office or relocation of this office to a Lewisburg location which would house all three Greenbrier County magistrates.”
There are three magistrates, Doug Beard, Brenda Smith and Brenda Campbell in Greenbrier County. Only Beard is housed in the Rupert facility. Speculation is that the hush-hush relocation is due to Beard residing on the eastern end of the county and complaining about the travel back and forth to the western end of the county.
Local advocates for the economic development of Western Greenbrier County feel that this is just another ploy to take away much needed agencies and facilities from the western end of the county, cheating citizens of things and means necessary to maintain a positive way of life.
Anyone interested in signing the petition to stop the removal can do so at several locations in the western end of the county. In Rainelle, petitions can be found at Wallace & Wallace Funeral Home, Peking Buffet Chinese Restaurant, Subway, the gas station at Rt 20 & Rt 60, McDonald’s, Hardees, Pizza Hut, J&S Restaurant and K&G Tire. In Rupert, petitions can be found at Lance’s Video Rental, City National Bank, Summit Bank, Dairy Delite, Anita’s Hair Circuit, Value Max, Handy Place, A&A Service Center and Western Greenbrier Senior Housing Senior Center. In Charmco, a petition is located at the Hillbilly Market. In Quinwood, petitions can be found at the B&M Grocery Store and the gas station across the street.
The prospective move to a building across the street from the county courthouse is expected to cost more than $3,000 per month in rent. The county magistrates currently rent space from the Rupert Volunteer Fire Department (VFD) for about $300-$650 per month. Residents are worried that removal of the Greenbrier County Sheriff’s Department, also housed in the Rupert VFD building, is next on the hit list.
Shires spoke to each commissioner of the GCC, President Lowell Rose, Betty Crookshanks and Brad Tuckwiller. Tuckwiller told Shires that the magistrates did not feel safe at the location in Rupert and that the move was their way of “making the department more efficient.” Rose reiterated Tuckwiller’s position, Shires said “but was much nicer about it.” Crookshanks, who is also a Rupert area resident, is totally against the move but with the other two commissioners voting against her, she doesn’t have much of a stand.
Western Greenbrier County residents are outraged over the potential closure of the magistrates’ office in Rupert (cont’d).
“The magistrates’ office has been operating efficiently at the Rupert location since 1976,” Shires said, “and I see no reason to move it. It’s not right that they are sneaking around doing this kind of thing without caring about what the people who elected them have to say about it.”
It has not been confirmed yet, but Judge James J. Rowe, who is the facilitator of the county courthouse, is expected to have to write to the U.S. Supreme Court to get the move approved.
Businesses wishing to allow the petitions to be displayed can do so by calling Shires at 392-6341.
Those concerned citizens not able to attend the county commission meeting Thursday can call or e-mail the county commissioners at the following telephone numbers and e-mail addresses:
Brad Tuckwiller, 646-8095, brad@jacobsandcompany.com
Lowell Rose, 646-8899, lynnbrook@hughes.net
Betty Crookshanks, 661-5232, bdcrookshanks@frontiernet.net
Greenbrier County Commission Hqs, 647-6699, jajacks@assessor.state.wv.us
For those wishing to express their concerns about economic development and other opportunities in Western Greenbrier County contact Stover Enterprises LLC at 304-646-3065 or via e-mail at SFerrellStover@aol.com.
NEWS ANALYSIS/COMMENTARY: UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples: A Sad Day at Turtle Bay
Posted by kinchendavid on November 29, 2006
By Rebecca Sommer
New York, NY — It took two decades of discussions between indigenous peoples and governments to develop — in a truly slow pace — a Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which was supposed to be finally adopted Tuesday, Nov. 28, 2006, at the UN General Assembly (UNGA) in New York City.
Not a treaty with binding legal obligations, the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples nevertheless holds “situation-specific” guidelines on the rights of peoples (tribal, indigenous, ethnic minorities) explaining how the rights of the UN universal declaration of Human Rights apply to the very particular case of Indigenous peoples around the world.
Many Indigenous peoples feel that the Declaration constitutes only minimum standards for their survival, well-being and dignity. The United States, Australia, New Zealand and Canada have been during the years the most vocal in opposing suggested language in the declaration’s negotiation process, a process advanced by Indigenous representatives from around the world.
The Declaration which was finally to be adopted at the UNGA is often described by indigenous delegates as being of second range standards and below expectations and needs. But the Indigenous delegates participating at the Declaration’s process for over 20 years considered that it would be better to have this urgently needed Declaration — than none at all.
But on Nov. 28 at the current session of the UN General Assembly in New York, the adoption of this important human rights instrument — one of the most discussed and studied declarations in U.N. history — came to a halt, even though the newly formed United Nations Human Rights Council urged the General Assembly to formally adopt the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
Canada, a country which brags about its high human rights standards, and a member of the Human Rights Council, actively opposed the adoption of the Declaration.
“Canada no longer enjoys a ‘blue beret’ reputation at the United Nations. Canada’s disgraceful and disgusting conduct against Indigenous People at both the national and international levels is being noted,” said Grand Chief Stewart Phillip, President of the Union of BC Indian Chiefs.
A resolution put forward by the Namibian delegation — in effect, a non-action motion on the Declaration — was supported by a majority of Nation States with 82 voting in favor, 67 Nation States voting not in favor and 25 Nation States abstaining.
Indigenous representatives who traveled to NYC to lobby governments to support the adoption of the Declaration reacted in frustration and disbelief. Many Indigenous representatives worked long and hard to get the Declaration to this point.
“They decided to put another year of work into it –- but how will that be deliberated?” asked Petuuche Gilbert, a member of Acoma tribe in New Mexico. ”We as Indigenous peoples are highly concerned that we will be left out of the process, and that only the states will decide, and will change and demolish the Declaration, especially in regards to our rights to self-determination and land rights. They will subject us again and again to the [nation] states’ discriminating rules.”
The Declaration does not create any new human rights, but articulates guidelines for the very diverse needs of a collective peoples — not individuals, but Indigenous Peoples. As nations without a country, Indigenous people have struggled for decades to be respected as a collective, to maintain their unique cultural traditions, to have their rights for self-determination, their distinct aspirations and their unique ways of life as a peoples.
Indigenous Peoples, (ethnic minorities, tribal peoples, aboriginal people) have their own languages, political, social, cultural and religious structures and systems. Being the first people, or the original people to the land they reside on — indigenous peoples are often separated by artificial borders of countries, which they have never created.
One can find Native American Indians such as the Mohawk living at both sides of the border created by Canada and the US. The O’odham living at the Mexican side or the U.S. side. The Ashaninka in Peru or Brazil. The examples are endless. So are the never ending stories of Indigenous peoples being forced of their traditional lands, most often for development purposes.
Indigenous peoples are the poorest of the poor, the most discriminated and the most disadvantages of all.
The Declaration which was made inactive today by the majority vote of member states at the UN GA holds well articulated, clear articulations of obligations for member states, which most often colonized the land and it’s indigenous people. But it is obvious, that they do not want to loosen the tight and merciless grip of unfair and abusive power over Indigenous Peoples.
* * *
Rebecca Sommer is the United Nations representative for the Society for Threatened Peoples International, in consultative status to the UN (ECOSOC). The German-born, New York City-based human rights activist is also a filmmaker who has just released “Hunted Like Animals,” a documentary on the plight of Hmong refugees in Southeast Asia. The film had its world premiere last week in St. Paul, MN.
Photo of U.N. Headquarters by Dave Kinchen
Posted in Guest Commentaries, News | Leave a Comment »