Two of the most laudable achievements of human rights are the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). Aside from advancing human rights, both are examples of soft law. For the UNDRIP, this soft law status has generated significant controversy which is evocative of the earlier debate surrounding the legal status of the UDHR. Yet unexamined, this article analyses this contemporary controversy surrounding the UNDRIP in light of the historical debate surrounding the legal status of the UDHR. Fleshing out points of convergence and divergence, these debates unearth narratives which shed light on the claims and advocacy strategies of Indigenous Peoples and the role of customary international law within human rights. Ultimately, it reveals that these narratives do little to secure the enforcement of indigenous rights.