to analyze the health conditions that are presented by the Nukak, improving access to health care by sick persons and providing safer water sources for consumption by the group.

The nature of the duties imposed on states under the Declaration, however, equally supports arguments that may be made in favor of intervention. Complete non-intervention may render Colombia and India in contravention of their duty to promote and enhance the socio-economic rights of their indigenous populations. Any argument in favor of the status quo may be rebuffed on the basis that it constitutes discrimination against indigenous communities. By insisting on non-intervention by the government and depriving them of access to scientific inventions which have assisted in the diagnosis and treatment of many preventable and treatable diseases, the right of the Sentinelese and Nukak to health is being undermined.

# _Humanitarian Assistance_

Another argument may be canvassed in favor of intervention on humanitarian grounds. States have a legal duty to intervene to mitigate or prevent possible threats to the fundamental human rights of its citizens as well as aliens in their territories. States may realize this duty by providing relief and extending humanitarian assistance in disaster situations. As a complement to national efforts, the international community also coordinates humanitarian relief in areas beyond the relief capacity of national authorities alone.<sup>80</sup> States are duty-bound to avoid discrimination against sections of their population. The ethical principles of non-discrimination, justice, and equity which have been imported into international law prohibit states from treating a section of their population more favorably than others. This means that in the case of the Sentinelese, the obligations owed by the Indian state to other regions in times of disaster extend equally to the Sentinelese. Advocating for non-intervention by the government will render external assistance during disasters difficult or impossible. India’s failure to maintain physical contact with Sentinelese exemplifies this argument. In December 2004, when an 8.9 Richter scale earthquake triggered a tsunami that affected the North Sentinel Island – destroying lagoons and causing a possible loss of shallow water fishing ground for the Sentinelese,<sup>81</sup> who harvest fish and crabs for sustenance – the state sent coast guard helicopters to examine the conditions on the island without making any contact with the Sentinelese.<sup>82</sup> However, the Indian state’s obligation to the Sentinelese goes beyond patrolling the island with coast guard helicopters to actually providing relief items, including food and health care services. In order to reasonably discharge this duty, India may be required to make physical contact with the Island and its inhabitants, thereby violating the manifest intention of the Sentinelese to remain uncontacted. Intervention on this basis requires a balancing of the desires of the group to remain uncontacted against the obligation of the state to guarantee and protect the rights of all citizens without discrimination. States may physically intrude or otherwise intervene in the affairs of indigenous groups in order to facilitate the provision of relief against disasters and other natural occurrences.

Graham and Wiesner suggest that indigenous sovereignty is founded on the aspiration to preserve indigenous peoples’ inherited way of life, preserve their traditions, and allow them to express and

> 80 United Nations (Year), ‘Deliver Humanitarian Aid’, _United Nations_ , https://www.un.org/en/our-work/deliver- <u>humanitarian-aid</u> (last visited May 5, 2023).

> 81 - ‘Tsunami leaves tribal island high in the wa(TEAter’, https://www.esa.int/Applications/Observing_the_Earth/Proba

> <u>1/Tsunami_leaves_tribal_island_high_in_the_water (last visited May 5, 2023).</u>

> 82 Smith, _supra_ .

14