Last month, Newmont released the results of an independent review, which provides information about the company's community relationships and important recommendations for improving operations on the ground. The review, the first of its kind by a major mining company, came at the request of shareholders, led by New York-based Christian Brothers Investment Services, concerned about protests and environmental problems at Newmont's mining projects around the world. The company will formally present the results of the report to shareholders at the annual meeting.
"We commend Newmont for conducting a critical assessment of their community relationships. As shareholders gather this week, plans for urgent action to improve relations with the communities living near its operations should be at the top of the agenda," said Raymond C. Offenheiser, president of Oxfam America.
Recommendations from the report include handling community conflicts at an earlier stage, holding management accountable for community relations, and establishing effective grievance processes at all sites. The report indentifies problems with Newmont's community interaction at several locations, including sites in Ghana and Peru.
Nearly 10,000 villagers, mainly poor farmers, were displaced by the Newmont's Ahafo mine in Ghana. The report identified the long-term success of the resettlement as one of the greatest risks confronting the project and called on Newmont to actively monitor the implementation of resettlement. Newmont and the World Bank (IFC) will be conducting an audit of the resettlement program this year. Oxfam urges Newmont to make the audit process transparent and participatory.
Newmont's Yanacocha mine in Peru has been the site of repeated protests and violence in recent years. In 2007, local mining activists were the targets of harassments and death threats.
"The report identified an atmosphere of fear and intimidation among local residents at the Yanacocha mine, who worry about speaking out against the company out of fear of harassment by the mine's security forces," said Offenheiser. "It is very troubling that people are afraid to peacefully express their concerns. Newmont must address this situation immediately."
Communities affected by mining projects should have a role in decision-making about how the project will affect their lands and livelihoods. The report recommends an action plan that includes clarification of Newmont's commitment to the principle of free, prior and informed consent for communities.
"Newmont's endorsement of the principle of free, prior and informed consent for communities would be an important step forward," said Offenheiser. "The key now is to engage with local communities and apply this principle to company practice. We are pleased that Newmont's board of directors has accepted the report's analysis and recommendations and directed management to engage with affected communities on the report's findings."
The Newmont report also highlighted community concern about lack of access to information about the revenues the company pays to local and national governments, leaving communities unable to hold their governments accountable for how mining revenues are used.
"Newmont has been a leader in committing to greater transparency and can help address community concerns about revenue sharing by recommitting to disclose all payments made to host governments," said Offenheiser. "Endorsing mandatory public disclosure policies like the Extractive Industries Transparency Disclosure Act would be an important first step."
Oxfam advocated passage of the Extractive Industries Transparency Disclosure Act, legislation that would require all mining, oil, and gas companies registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission to disclose the payments made to foreign governments. The bill, which was introduced by House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) in the 110th Congress, is expected to be reintroduced shortly.
]]>In the arid north of the country, where the government has prioritized copper mining, farmers and copper mines struggle to co-exist. Both need water, but the major copper mines, with support from the government and plenty of capital, are buying up the water rights. Farmers, many poor and without powerful friends in the government, are seeing their rivers and streams dry up—or worse, become so polluted they can't use the water.
In 2004, the 2,000 residents of Caimanes, a remote town in Chile's IV Region, faced an additional challenge: a massive tailings dam Pelambres Mining Company built on their doorstep. The dam, which collects waste rock from dissolved copper, would allow the Las Pelambres mine to continue operating for an additional 28 years. And the new tailings dam, when full, will hold 1.7 billion tons of waste.
Despite this huge new source of pollution to their water sources, local people had few outlets to defend their rights. Chile has no provisions in its laws on mining that require any citizen participation in approving or authorizing any expansion of existing mining operations.
But farmers in Caimanes and several other villages continued to voice their concerns that the dam would destroy an entire valley and cut off their supply of water. They said that acid will drain out of the dam, polluting what water that remains, and endangering the one stream that provides their town with water. Tailings dams are also usually a source of dust particles containing heavy metals—these can blow into town and poison people and their animals.
Caimanes is in the poorest region of Chile. Farmers there are concerned about their ability to continue to earn a living, but are also aware that a major earthquake could collapse the dam. This has happened before: In 1965 an earthquake spilled 10 million cubic meters (350 million cubic feet) of mine waste out of a similar holding area and killed 200 people.
In 2004 community members in Caimanes began working with the Environmental Oversight Office (the Fiscalía del Medio Ambiente or FIMA, a Chilean NGO). They gathered signatures on petitions and filed them in legal courts and requested an injunction to halt construction of the tailings dam. In 2005 the Caimanes community group representing farmers in the area alleged that the permit process for the dam had not been followed properly and that there were archeological sites that were being damaged in the construction. In 2007 a local court in the nearby city of Los Vilos ordered that the mine company halt construction of the tailings dam.
The Las Pelambres mine company appealed the 2007 court order, and the decision put responsibility on a government water commission. This commission had already approved a permit for the construction of the tailings dam, with limited participation from local farmers, so it allowed construction to continue. In 2008 the Chile's supreme court ruled that the right to water for the farmers affected by the tailings dam was being violated, and awarded each of the farmers $40,000. In December 2008 the company announced that it had finished the tailings dam.
Oxfam America provided grant funding for FIMA to help the citizens of Caimanes to defend their rights in court, and raise awareness about their situation among people in Chile. FIMA advocated for a hearing at the Latin American Water Tribunal in 2007, which issued a statement calling for the dam construction to be stopped and the citizens compensated. FIMA has also published reports about the situation in Caimanes and prompted considerable coverage of this case in the international media.
Although the citizens of Caimanes did win compensation and a favorable judgment in court, they did not succeed in blocking the dam construction. "Unfortunately for the people, there are no winners," says a report published by FIMA, The Battle for Water in the Pupío Valley. "This compensation will not make up for the destruction of the quality of life in the valley." FIMA says in the report that the people achieved a "legal and economic victory, but a social and environmental defeat."
Nevertheless, the case sets an important precedent and provides an example to the global mining industry of how responsible companies should not operate.
]]>Since 2006, Peru has seen an impressive annual economic growth rate of more than six percent. Mining has been the main driver of this impressive growth with copper production doubling and gold production up 30 percent over the past five years. Peru's mineral wealth has attracted investment from a wide range of foreign mining companies, including 13 of 17 members of the International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM). Mining exports surpassed $17 billion in 2007, amounting to 62 percent of the country's total exports.
"In the midst of this economic windfall, Peru's regulatory infrastructure remains weak and under-resourced," said Raymond C. Offenheiser, President of Oxfam America. "Forty percent of all Peruvians remain in poverty; in the mineral-rich Andes region, poverty rates exceed 70 percent."
Since large scale resource extraction generates relatively few jobs, mining benefits must trickle down to communities through government programs that redistribute revenues. In Peru, this redistribution process has proven highly problematic because of limited governmental capacity to regulate the industry. Currently, the Ministry of Energy and Mines is tasked with both promoting mining investment and enforcing social and environmental regulations—a problematic conflict of interest. The new Ministry of the Environment should assume this role to regulate mining and strengthen the independence of this ministry.
"There is a justifiable sense of frustration among the Peruvian people impacted by mining who have not reaped the benefits of resource wealth generated from their lands," said Offenheiser. "They have not seen these revenues translate into health services, education, or infrastructure to improve their everyday lives."
In many areas around large-scale mining operations, this frustration has lead to conflict and violence. The Peruvian government's public defender's office, Defensoria del Pueblo, recently counted more than 70 active conflicts around mining operations spread across the country.
"Communities do not trust the government to address their concerns and protect them from pollution and other harms that mining can cause," said Offenheiser. "They're left believing organized protesting is the only option for making their voices heard."
The Peruvian government has cracked down on social protests and criminalized activities defined "anti-mining" for fear that local protests could potentially disrupt foreign investment in mining. To make matters worse, some mining companies have exacerbated social tensions by using private security forces that have been accused of violating human rights.
Several steps, outlined in a new paper from Oxfam America, need to be taken by government, mining companies, international donors and civil society groups to reduce conflict and preserve the long term viability of the mining sector in Peru. These include recognizing the right of community consent; condemnation of all threats and harassment; strengthening government capacity and independence; and full disclosure of information on the social, environmental and economic impacts of mining.
At a minimum, mining companies should actively participate in Peru's Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) process, a global initiative designed to promote disclosure of revenue payments by oil, gas and mining companies. Members of the US Congress can help take this a step further by supporting legislation to make revenue disclosure mandatory. The Extractive Industry Transparency Disclosure (EITD) bill was introduced in the House and Senate in 2008. This legislation, expected for reintroduction in 2009, would require all oil, gas, and mining companies registered with the SEC to disclose their payments to host countries and extend transparency as a truly global standard for company operations.
"By publishing what they pay to the government, mining companies could help communities hold the government accountable for ensuring local economic development," said Offenheiser.
International donors, like the International Finance Corporation, can support these efforts by insisting on transparency, backing government efforts to strengthen capacity, supporting civil society efforts to hold mining companies accountable for compliance with human rights and environmental standards, and helping the Peruvian government diversify its economy in order to the reduce the country's dependence on resource extraction.
"Acting with full transparency and involving affected communities in the process from the start will go a long way to address the underlying cause of conflict," said Offenheiser. "This would open lines of communication that could foster the long term viability of the industry and the ability of mining to contribute to the development in Peru."
]]>Oxfam America is joining other groups in Peru in calling for a complete investigation of these events, and for the individuals responsible for these crimes to be brought to justice.
"We are requesting that the Public Ministry [public prosecutor] and the police carry out an investigation," said Javier Aroca, coordinator of Oxfam International's extractive industries program. "It is essential that these accusations be investigated and that those responsible are punished to ensure that the laws of our country are enforced and that the fundamental rights of our citizens are protected. In the future, we must be able to attain peaceful solutions to social conflicts."
In January 2009 the National Human Rights Coordinator released a report alleging that 28 community members, who were concerned that mining exploration was being carried out on community farm land without their permission, were kidnapped and detained for three days. They had been marching to the mine site, where the Majaz Mining company (now known as Rio Blanco Copper) was exploring for copper deposits. The community members came from Segunda y Cajas and Yanta in Piura, and Jaén, and San Ignacio in the neighboring department of Cajamarca. According to the report, the march was peaceful—no participants carried any weapons apart from the machetes and whips customarily used when traveling by foot in the rough Huancabamba mountains. According to local leaders, they intended to go and speak with the representatives of the mining company, since other attempts to discuss their concerns had failed.
According to the report published by the National Human Rights Coordinator and FEDAPAZ, the community delegation of approximately 400 people was camped out the night before their planned arrival at the mine site when they were attacked by helicopters shooting tear gas. Soon after, police entered their camp and burned their equipment, food, and medicine. The next day the group was attacked again when it arrived at the Majaz mining camp, one person was killed, 40 were injured, and 28 were kidnapped and detained inside the mining camp. The National Human Rights Coordinator report says the detained individuals were subjected to "diverse forms of physical and psychological torture. As well as being savagely beaten…they were kept hooded, sprayed with tear gas and blindfolded, with no warm clothes in spite of the low temperatures." They were released after three days.
The kidnapped community members made formal legal complaints, but the public prosecutor in the region did not conduct an investigation. Instead, the government accused these individuals of terrorism, and they have been under police investigation. In June of 2008 the Human Rights Coordinator and FEDAPAZ filed a legal case in Piura against the police officers and employees of the security firm Forza who were working for the mine company. The suit also included the public prosecutor and medical examiner, who are alleged to have been aware of the kidnapping and torture, and failed to take proper legal action against the perpetrators.
In January of 2009 the national Human Rights Coordinator received photos taken during the three days in 2005 when the community members were detained at the mine site. The organization says the photographs, submitted anonymously, clearly verify the accounts of the detained individuals and have shocked many in the country.
The Prime Minister and Minister of Justice have issued statements urging a thorough investigation of the incidents in 2005. However the police still have not identified any of the officers involved.
"People living in a democracy should not be kidnapped, tortured, and persecuted just for expressing their opinion and raising their concerns," says Oxfam's Javier Aroca. "We need our institutions to create avenues for dialogue so we can avoid conflict and ensure our laws are respected."
]]>The Yanacocha gold mine is currently operating on 26,000 hectares (about 63,700 acres), high above the city of Cajamarca in the Andes mountains of Peru. But that is just a small area: The government conceded a total of 282,000 hectares (690,000 acres, slightly , larger than the state of Rhode Island) to Minera Yanacocha, a company comprised of majority owners Newmont Mining of the United States and Minera Buenaventura of Peru. Yanacocha continues to be a significant part of Newmont Mining's global production, contributing about a quarter of the 5.3 million ounces of gold Newmont sold in 2007.
Minera Yanacocha is working aggressively to expand the mine. In 2004, the mine began exploring for gold on Cerro Quilish, a small mountain that comprises the top of the watershed supplying the city of Cajamarca and the rest of the valley. Dairy and potato farmers in the area and many others opposed to mining Quilish blocked the road to the mountain in 2004. There were weeks of violent confrontation between police and protesters. In the end, Minera Yanacocha stated publicly that it had underestimated the concerns of local people and asked the Ministry of Energy and Mines to revoke its permit to explore for minerals on Cerro Quilish.
The mountain remains in the mine's concession area. Many of the Quechua-speaking indigenous people in the area consider Quilish their apu, a mountain spirit, and a sacred place. "When the clouds gather above Quilish, we know it will rain," says Nelida Chilon, a 24-year old from Bajo Porcón, midway between the city and the mountain. "We want to protect Quilish, our source of water. The [mining] engineers tell us there is water, and no pollution, but we know the land does not produce as it used to, and there is less water than ever."
Local governments representing communities opposed to mining on Quilish also adopted laws to designate it a protected natural area. Other communities where the mine intends to expand have taken similar measures. Oxfam America's partner GRUFIDES is supporting efforts by local communities to protect their land, and provides training and other support to local people eager to learn about and defend their human rights and protect their water sources. With help from Oxfam America, GRUFIDES is also working with the regional government's environmental management agency to create a land use plan that would clearly designate areas for agriculture, human settlement, mining, and other activities.
Minera Yanacocha is disputing 12 local ordinances that prohibit mining, and plans to expand mining exploitation to these and other areas, including La Zanja, where one person was killed by police during a demonstration in 2004. The environmentally fragile high altitude wetlands of El Solitario, where there are 240 ponds and lakes, is another area of proposed expansion.
Minera Yanacocha is claiming jurisdiction in Lima where the company is officially located and where judges are not familiar with these local areas. Communities are hard pressed to be properly represented in the proceedings due to costs and distance (375 miles). "With that kind of trial you know who is going to win," says Marco Arana, one of the founders of GRUFIDES, Oxfam America's partner in Cajamarca. He added that when legal and institutional roads are closed to citizens, it leads to confrontation, and "adds to the social exclusion and asymmetry of power in Peru."
Oxfam America is supporting the work of GRUFIDES to help local communities defend their rights and create an appropriate land use plan for the region. Oxfam is calling on Minera Yanacocha to:
"While Peru's macroeconomic indicators are improving, individuals feel frustrated because they do not perceive their income to be increasing as a result of the country's economic growth," Baca said. "Grupo Propuesta Ciudadana recommends that the government implement policies that increase the benefits of economic growth to excluded populations, improve the efficiency of social programs, and improve the quality of education and health services."
Baca spoke at a panel discussion at Oxfam America's headquarters in Washington titled "Peru's Windfall—The Challenge of Harnessing Extractive Industries Revenues for Poverty Reduction." He said that while the extractive industries such as gold and silver mines and natural gas pipelines are leading Peru's booming economy and contributing more than $2 billion per year to government accounts, half the country still lives in poverty, and Peru is not converting its resource wealth into benefits for its poorest citizens.
One example is the municipality of Echarate, in the Urubamba River valley in the department of Cusco. This area has recently seen rapid development of the Camisea gas pipeline, which is expected to bring Peru $10.8 billion over the 30-year life of the project. The pipeline is being run by an international consortium, and partly funded by $135 million from the Inter-American Development Bank.
Research by Baca and Grupo Propuesta Ciudadana shows that while Echarate's budget for infrastructure projects was less than $700,000 in 2003, by 2007 it was more than $65 million as a result of Camisea royalties. Although the municipality has constructed a new office building, indigenous people in outlying villages report limited presence of government representatives in their communities.
"While indigenous communities have suffered from the negative effects of the gas project—including pipeline spills, decline in fish populations and environmental degradation—they have not significantly benefited from this municipal government windfall nor do they have adequate influence in determining how this money should be spent," says Emily Greenspan, policy advisor for Oxfam America in Washington, who recently returned from a visit to the Camisea project zone in the Peruvian Amazon.
Citizens of Peru already have the right to ask for information about revenues and spending, and companies are required to publish this information. But there is no government office overseeing the information requests, and companies do not always divulge the information requested, says Javier Aroca, an attorney who is Oxfam America's advisor on extractive industries in South America.
Aroca says lack of transparency makes it impossible to determine what companies are contributing to local and national governments. "All transactions related to extractive industries must be clearly defined and described, so that all the information is included in the national budget," he says. "National and international companies must meet international standards of accounting, audit, and publication of accounts. The management and final use of the funds must be published, especially at the regional and local levels. This would help increase trust in public institutions and ensure there is no corruption."
Baca made a number of recommendations about reformulating the laws governing distribution of mining and hydrocarbon revenues. He also recommended systems for fair allocation of the revenues to both producing and non-producing areas, and creating a system that is more transparent, predictable, and equitable.
One way to increase the transparency of extractive industry revenues would be to implement the Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative (EITI), an international agreement that requires companies to disclose payments to governments so that citizens are aware of what their country's natural resources are worth and where the money is being used. In Peru, the national association for the oil, gas, and mining industry (Sociedad Nacional de Mineria Petroleo y Energia, or SNMPE) has succeeded in having all royalty and gas payments to be published as a lump sum (including all companies together), instead of by each individual company. That makes it hard for people to know how much a specific company is contributing to the government and what portion of that should be coming to the communities that are producing minerals and hydrocarbons.
Complying with the highest standard under EITI would require each company to disclose its tax and royalty payments. Oxfam America is calling on the SNMPE to encourage its member companies and the Ministry of Energy and Mines to support a company-by-company, rather than aggregate, reporting standard for royalty and tax payments as a means to increase transparency of Peru's revenues.
]]>This report explores the basic concepts of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), and explores key social issues the mining industry must face in Peru. It includes a summary of the main national and international regulations, standards, and guidelines that will help Peru’s mining sector implement essential aspects of a good CSR program.
The report also recommends that the government, mining industry, and civil society jointly develop reference guides for employment, land acquisition and voluntary resettlement, public consultation, participatory monitoring, and social investments.
Corporate Social Responsibility in the Mining Sector in Peru seeks to take a first step towards meaningful dialogue about CSR among the different actors involved to help civil society obtain the highest benefits from CSR policies and actions implemented by government and corporations.
]]>Shivankoreni, Lower Urubamba, Peru
The small Machiguenga village of Shivankoreni is located within the Lower Urubamba region of eastern Peru, a remote forested area extremely rich in biodiversity. The village lies within the heart of the Camisea project zone, an area being exploited for the wealth of natural gas contained beneath the forest floor. Several other groups of indigenous peoples—both contacted and living in "voluntary isolation" within a state-protected reserve—also inhabit the fragile ecosystems of the project zone. Since the launch of the Camisea project in 2002, indigenous communities have raised growing concerns regarding project impacts to Peruvian authorities, companies (particularly Argentina's Pluspetrol, which leads the upstream consortium), and project financers such as the Inter-American Development Bank.
Unfortunately, to date Camisea project activities have presented several threats to the cultural and biological diversity of the Lower Urubamba. For example, five spills have occurred in the gas liquids pipeline, with serious health and conservation repercussions for local communities. According to Marianella Mata, a Shivankoreni resident, "Since the December 22, 2004 spill we've had very few fish to catch. We've been greatly affected—everything has changed since the spill." Increased boat traffic on the river also contributes to loss of fish, and represents a potential threat to community safety when not managed properly.
Community members have also expressed frustration with other challenges associated with the project:
Shivankoreni community members have been assertive in making their voices heard in response to these challenges. The community twice demanded a delay in consultation on environmental assessments for the project because they did not have adequate assistance, and sought support from an Oxfam America partner organization, CEDIA, in order to more effectively navigate negotiations with Pluspetrol. To call attention to the need for improved government support in dealings with the company, Shivankoreni and two other affected communities issued a declaration demanding that Defensoria del Proyecto Camisea (a body sponsored by the company to address community grievances) be deactivated and that an improved mechanism for community participation and consultation be developed.
After a delegation visit by Oxfam America and other groups, Shivankoreni community leaders successfully convinced Pluspetrol to restrict helicopter overflights in order to reduce fauna disturbance. However, much more needs to be done to promote transparency and prevent future environmental degradation in local communities like Shivankoreni. The second phase of the project, entitled "Camisea II" or "Peru LNG," includes expansion of the gas fields and construction of a new pipeline and a gas export plant on the coast. As in the past, Oxfam America will continue to support local community efforts to ensure the responsiveness of government authorities and company leadership to their concerns.
]]>Charupá does not seem particularly worried, as he is used to the uncertainties of raising cattle. Moreover, he is confident about the long-term prospects of his community: in June of 2007, the president of Bolivia announced that the Chiquitano people had successfully completed all legal requirements to attain title to a vast area of Santa Cruz's eastern forest known as Monte Verde.
The indigenous people took advantage of an agrarian reform law passed in 1996 that allowed them to claim "original community territories" known by their Spanish initials as TCOs. The Monte Verde TCO has immense significance for the Chiquitano people. Their ancestors were moved out of Monte Verde in the 1700s by the Spanish and relocated to communities run by Jesuit priests. Chiquitanos were enslaved on haciendas and eventually forced to tap rubber trees in the early 20th century. The area near Charupá's village is part of San Antonio de Lomerío, a place of refuge for escaped slaves. Their descendents organized groups to work on the legal claim for their territory, while illegal logging decimated their forests.
It took more than a decade of hard work and sustained Oxfam support for the Chiquitano people to achieve their goal. Oxfam helped three local organizations, in Lomerío, San Javier, and the village of Monte Verde to coordinate their work and collaborate with the Center for Legal Studies and Social Research (known by its Spanish initials CEJIS) to get the technical training to gather satellite positioning data on the TCO borders and investigate 158 land claims by ranchers and other nonindigenous people trying to grab a piece of the territory. Only a small number of these claims were legitimate, and it was only through the legal support, technical data, and satellite photos gathered by the community members and CEJIS that the Chiquitanos could defend their claim from these interlopers, some of whom were using forged documents.
Violence has been a continuous threat to the Chiquitano people for the last 200 years. Individuals forced into slavery were murdered if they tried to escape, and later when the ancestors of escaped slaves in Lomerío organized to win back their territory, their leaders were intimidated and attacked. "We heard of incidents in other communities where entire families had been pulled out of their houses and hung by their wrists under trees," Juan Soqueré, leader of the indigenous Chiquitano community in San Lorenzo said.
Opposition to the land investigations and the legal process from civic committees, representing nonindigenous business and ranching interests opposed to the indigenous people, became violent. When the land investigations exposed fraudulent claims, there was a strong reaction. One of the worst incidents involved Leonardo Tamburini, now 41 and the director of CEJIS. In 2001 while investigating one fraudulent claim, he was kidnapped.
"They beat me so badly they almost killed me," Tamburini said. "They put me in a pick-up truck, and took me to the Cattlemen's Association headquarters in San Javier—which is next door to the church. They had me there for about an hour. There was a cattlemen's congress going on, and they paraded me around the patio of the restaurant, all beat up and bloody, saying 'This is what we do to the people who want to take our land away from us.'"
Tamburini refused to sign a document recognizing the cattlemen's claim to half the territory of Monte Verde, and after the mayor of San Javier intervened he was released. "They didn't accomplish what they wanted," he said.
Juan Soqueré said that gaining the legal title to Monte Verde has brought peace for the Chiquitano. "There are no more threats. And those that threatened us before have left the territory, and now we are all calm, living in peace."
There are 33 communities, comprising roughly 5,000 people living in or near the Monte Verde TCO. They are now looking to the future and envisioning the best ways to manage and enjoy the roughly 3,830 square-mile territory.
Lorenzo Charupá says such planning will be essential for the future. "We are deciding together what areas are for crops," he says. "We are setting aside areas for grazing, hunting, and to preserve trees. We have a map showing all the different areas and what we will do there. Everything has its place."
José Luis Rivera, president of the indigenous organization of San Javier, says they have several ways of making more money:
With the legal title in hand, the community has the confidence to make proposals to development organizations that might have otherwise been reluctant to support agricultural projects on lands the community did not legally own. "These institutions will have no doubt we can do these projects on our own land," Rivera says. "We have the right to our land and can respect our culture."
Outside Rivera's temporary office, his compañeros are building a new office to replace the one burned down by thugs last December. The walls are up, and the smell of sawdust mixes with the wood smoke and cooking scents from a nearby restaurant. Pablo Solis Chuviru, 57, is looking at the new building and reflecting on the struggle to gain the legal title to Monte Verde and what it means for the future for his small village, Turuxnapez, which means "Heaven's Door" in the local Bésiro language. "I hope we can hunt and fish, and use our trees in an orderly way," he says, resting in a chair in the winter sun. "Now we are using a forest management plan so that our children will benefit from the forest. This is the future for them; they can see the fight we won. For them it is a treasure."
]]>Although Minera Majaz has not yet submitted its Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), there is reason to be concerned about the area's environmental future, especially if Río Blanco proves to be just one part of a mining "district," or group of mining operations.
First, mining is an activity with high environmental risks, as a list of hundreds of environmental liabilities compiled by the Ministry of Energy and Mines reveals. While it is true that a given mining operation usually affects a local area in a concentrated and relatively small manner—according to the company, the total area to be directly affected by the Río Blanco project will be around 4,450 acres (1,800 hectares)—it is also true that aquifers can be severely affected many miles downstream.
The potential contamination of the Río Blanco has become one of the main causes of unease for the people in the area, given that the proposed mining project is located in the river's headwaters. The Río Blanco is a tributary of the Chinchipe River, which forms the most important valley in the neighboring province of San Ignacio, in the department of Cajamarca. According to the study "Mining and Development in Peru, with Special Reference to the Río Blanco Project, Piura," written by a multi-disciplinary team led by Anthony Bebbington, professor of the School of Environment and Development of the University of Manchester, the most serious environmental problems that the mine could generate are "the leaching of acidic mine waters (AMW) from the mining site, the heaps of tailings, and the piles of excavated material." According to the study, the high precipitation in the area (2,000 millimeters (6.5 feet) or more per year) "raises the possibility that rainwater could filter through the piles of tailings and excavated material, transporting contaminated metals to both surface and underground waters." The study indicates that another worrisome potential problem is AMW contamination of the water table, because the open-pit mine would probably be deeper than the groundwater in the area.
After analyzing the environmental variables and reviewing the technical proposal by Majaz, Bebbington and his team concluded that "it would be possible to handle the environmental impacts of the project as designed," provided that this is an isolated mining project. If Río Blanco became part of a large mining district, the situation would be different and the risks to the environment, and water resources in particular, would increase considerably.
At the same time, the team had reservations, given that the proposed mining technology "has never been used in an area with as much precipitation or a history of seismic activity" and hence "the possible combination of tailings/wet excavation material and seismic activity is a reason for serious concern."
Minera Majaz states in many of its official notices that using of state-of-the-art technology will protect the environment. However, simply complying with Peruvian laws, which are regrettably weak, is no guarantee of true protection from environmental contamination. Vito Verna, Director of the Indigenous Communities and Environment Program in the office of the Peruvian Ombudsman observes that "the Peruvian state apparatus lacks an integrated environmental policy. For example, each industrial sector has (or should have) its own maximum allowable pollution limits, and there should be national quality standard for water, soil and air. The system does not work because the ministries have not yet put these standards forward, and consequently the National Environmental Council (CONAM) cannot approve them."
As a result, Peru has approved standards only for air and non-ionizing radiation [such as emitted by radio waves, or microwaves], but not for water (the existing standard is obsolete) or soil. Although a mining operation is required by law to treat its waters before discharging them into a body of water, the maximum allowable limits are so lax that they could even be Class III—waters suitable for irrigation or livestock, but not to sustain aquatic life. Thus, in Peru, a mining operation could exterminate fish, amphibians, and other river wildlife without breaking the law.
But the potential environmental impact of the Río Blanco project does not end there. The project site, in addition to being at the headwaters of a river basin, is located in the heart of a vast area of high-altitude cloud forests—the last sizeable area of tropical rain forests remaining in the department of Piura. These forests have great value in themselves, owing to their diversity and the fact that they form an extension of the forests of Ecuador and Colombia, and thus contain flora and fauna rare in Peru. Yet their greatest value is the connection they provide between the Tabaconas Namballe National Sanctuary (SNTN) in neighboring San Ignacio, and protected areas extending to the Ecuador border. The Río Blanco forest creates a "biological corridor," serving populations of animals that require large areas to be viable, such as the spectacled bear and Andean tapir—two endangered species protected by law.
A large open-pit mining operation in the midst of these forests, and the resulting human activity, represent a threat to the very survival of this corridor. Without it, the spectacled bears and tapirs of the sanctuary, which would lack the space necessary to survive, would be condemned to extinction. A World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) study of the biodiversity of the sanctuary and its neighboring zones concluded that "the protection of a biological corridor between the SNTN in Peru and the Podocarpus National Park in Ecuador is critical for the preservation of the species that inhabit those areas."
A final consideration: Minera Majaz is not the only company interested in conducting mining operations in the area. A glance through the government's Cadastral Mining Atlas reveals, in addition to the Río Blanco project, concessions of several thousand acres in Carmen de la Frontera. Many of these are adjacent to the Río Blanco project—forming, on the maps produced by the National Institute of Concessions and Mining Surveys (INACC), a solid block of mining concessions in the forests of the Yanta and Segunda y Cajas communities. In context, then, the Río Blanco project is just the first of many future mining operations, which, as a group, constitute a potential new mining district in Peru—and whose environmental impact would be considerably more serious and significant than any single project such as Río Blanco.
It is imperative that the Peruvian government consider all the environmental issues at play in the Río Blanco case, both as part of the dialog process following the referendum and when it evaluates the EIA that the company must soon deliver.
]]>According to published figures, of the individuals qualified to vote in the referendum, there was a turnout of 50.9 percent in Ayabaca; 59.1 percent in Carmen de la Frontera; and 70 percent in Pacaipampa. Consulta Vecinal reported that of 31,388 registered voters, 18,107 cast ballots—a turnout of roughly 60 percent overall. Of these votes, 17,033 said NO to the mining company and 285 said YES. There were 239 blank ballots and 460 disqualified votes.
"Participation has been successful and voluntary," said Fernando Romero, coordinator for Oxfam International. "We believe that the referendum has succeeded in allowing the people of these three districts to voice their opinion regarding the Rio Blanco project."
The referendum has brought to light the issues at the heart of the Majaz case. First, there is a weak or nonexistent state apparatus in Peru for dealing with such issues—making plain the need for an environmental authority capable of regulating and supervising corporate conduct. Second, there is an urgent need for a land-use plan that would identify sites suitable for mining projects.
After explaining that this is a non-binding referendum that would not translate into law, Romero went on to say that "the inhabitants of mining areas are interested in voicing their opinions and being heard by the authorities."
"This is a call for attention and a reminder that these communities are part of the country and should participate when decisions are made that affect their way of life and their future," Romero said.
]]>Given everything this project represents for the government and the mining industry, all the attention is not surprising. This is a huge copper mine that will require an investment of about US$ 1.4 billion and that could export around US$ 1.0 billion a year for the next 20 years. The recent acquisition of close to 90 percent of the shares of the Majaz main company—the English junior miner Monterrico Metals Plc—by the Zijiin Mining Group Ltd. consortium, does nothing but add more weight in the balance for the development of the project, especially now that the Peruvian government wishes to sign a trade agreement with China.
The conflict, nevertheless, did not start this week, and the referendum that intends to collect the opinion of the local population about the continuation of the Majaz mine, is just the latest controversy. There have been a series of problems that have marked the presence of this mining company since it entered the scene in 2001.
From the beginning, the concerns about the environmental impact of this mining project have marked the tone and character of this debate. Located in the Huancabamba mountains, the mining concession area will cover a total of 6,473 hectares (about 18,858 acres) of deserts and cloud forests. The forests act like a sponge, collecting rain water and feeding it into the rivers that flow into the agricultural basins of Chinchipe (in Cajamarca) and Quiroz (in Piura). The communities of Yanta and Segunda y Cajas, under whose territories the copper deposit lies, immediately expressed their worries about the potential destruction of these fragile eco-systems and the effect on their agricultural lands. Soon other peasants and biologists from Piura joined in with concerns about the impact mining would have on the rich biodiversity of the area. The preliminary results of a recent study of the University of Texas made by researchers Kenneth Young, Blanca León and Julio Postigo confirmed their worries, when it found that a mine with an open pit of 1,000 hectares (2,450 acres) would cause alarming degrees of destruction because "it would cut connections among eco-systems (biological corridors), transcending impacts of local dimensions," and endangering species already threatened like the oso de anteojos or Andean spectacled bear and the altitude tapir. Majaz has not yet presented its Environmental Impact Study (EIS), which makes it difficult to know what plans they have to diminish these potential impacts.
But besides these environmental worries, another social problem that has legal implications must be added: Majaz never obtained the communities consent, required by law, to start the explorations in their territories. As it has been confirmed by the report N° 001-2006/ASPMA-MA of the Peruvian Ombudsman, the firm has not obtained the authorization of two thirds of the members of the communities found in the mining concession area. Recently, Andrew Bristow, operations manager for Majaz mine, has admitted that even if the firm had a document signed by leaders of both communities in 2002 authorizing the exploration activities, Majaz did not comply with the above mentioned legal requirement. It is not surprising then that the firm, after six years operating in the zone, has not obtained the social license required to operate a mine project. This fact was recognized even by Bristow, who has declared that the Río Blanco mining project "could be delayed if a social agreement with the communities where it operates is not obtained."
The social conflict reached its most critical moments in 2004 and 2005, when two demonstrations of thousands of community members coming from several miles around confronted police forces. Several peasants were injured in violent confrontations—some of them severely. Two died and more than 200 had lawsuits brought against them for taking part in the protests.
A few days from the referendum, hostilities have started again. "The referendum is being politically manipulated. "...mayors from outside of Piura and international NGOs are involved," declared Bristow. And the government, which in almost all other similar social conflicts has supported the mining investors, has ignored communities concerns. The Prime Minister Jorge Del Castillo, who traveled to Piura on Monday September 3rd with Monsignor Luis Bambarén, bishop of nearby Chimbote, said that "a referendum cannot be used to veto an economic activity...because natural resources are the property of all Peruvians and do not belong to a district, community, or province." The minister of Energy and Mining, Juan Valdivia, said that "the interests of other countries are behind these entities [NGOs] that intend to delay the country's development." On the same note, the National Jury of Elections (JNE) has delcared this referendum illegal, and that it will start the legal actions against those who should be held responsible for "acts against the legal order."
The Ombudsman office and the National Council for Human Rights of the Ministry of Justice have expressed a different opinion, recognizing this is not an illegal procedure. The Ombudsman in particular said that these kinds of mechanisms are useful if they are oriented to "start processes that will build consensus which enrich the decisions of the state authorities."
Answering the JNE statements, the mayors of the zone have said that they are holding the referendum because the government will not engage in a dialogue with them. According to Javier Jahncke, from the Technical Table for the support of Majaz, "since January 2006 there were several initiatives for dialogue, but this year, with the authorities of the new government, it definitely stopped. That is why this referendum was conceived."
At the time of this report, the mayors of Carmen de la Frontera, Ayabaca, and Pacaipampa are determine to hold the referendum in their towns and reestablish some type of dialogue afterwards. The mining company has reiterated that the offer they made last August 15th of giving US$ 80 million as a fund for social projects and infrastructure in the communities, "is still standing." Prime Minister Del Castillo expressed his wish to build bridges when he declared in a press conference that the president of Zijin "has no intention of exploiting the mineral resources in the zone if they do not reach an agreement with the population."
Being so close to the referendum, the political and media pressure on the organizers will be, no doubt, very strong during these days. Above all, it is expected that the action will take place in calm and with transparency.
From a legal point of view, the most important aspect of the conflict between Minera Majaz and the communities is the lack of consent from the communities, required by law, authorizing mining explorations in their territories. In its report N° 001-2006/ASPMA-MA, released in November 2006, the Peruvian Ombudsman declares that the Law of Peasant and Native Communities states that all use of lands for mining activities, including exploration, must have the authorization of the communities who own the surface property, granted in general assembly and registered in an act signed but two thirds of the accredited members. If the community authorization is not obtained, the firm must wait until the state carries out a "serving procedure," in which the government of Peru gives the authorization and pays compensation to the community. According to the Ombudsman, this legal requirement has not been completed, because Majaz has not obtained the authorization of two thirds of the members of the communities over whose territories the concession is located.
As for the legal status of the referendum, the Nacional Jury of Elections (JNE), in a communiqué dated August 15th, stated that the referendum has no official character, and is also illegal because "no person, sector of the population, or organization, including a city hall, can arrogate the exercise of exclusive and non transferable faculties that constitutionally belong to the electoral bodies."
The Peruvian Ombudsman has declared that, even though these mechanisms do not have legal implications, meaning that the State is not forced to accept its results, the referendum is allowed under constitutional law and is not illegal.
Anthony Bebbington, an academic from the Environmental and Development School of the University of Manchester and main author of the study "Mining and development in Peru, with special reference to the Río Blanco Project, Piura,"" has observed that the deep discrepancy among the central government and the local authorities about which are the adequate ways to solve the conflict could be a sign that the democratic practice is failing. As Bebbington says, "it seems that there are no institutions that permit a point of a balance among local wishes and concerns, on the one side, and national wishes and concerns, on the other."
]]>The proposed mining project has caused social conflict in this area of Peru. The problems started when the communities denied the company their authorization for the use of their lands, which the firm needs under Peruvian Law No. 26505. The Peruvian Ombudsman office verified this, and communicated the decision to the Ministry of Energy and Mining, which disregarded it. After that there have been several violent conflicts between the security forces hired by the company and community members, two of whom died.
In recent weeks, the Zijin consortium has offered $40 million to the community of Yanta, and the same amount to the community of Segunda y Cajas, to be paid over the duration of the mining project. The latter community held an assembly and decided not to accept this proposal, which conditioned the disbursement to the approval of the mining project. The former will decide in the following days.
"This plebiscite is taking place because the population has asked for it," said Fernando Romero of Oxfam International. "The citizens of this zone want to express their opinion about an activity that would profoundly affect their lives. This action respects the right to express one's opinion, a very fundamental right," he added. "Oxfam International decided to support the referendum because it is a legal mechanism that does not pretend to go further than what the law recognizes as a matter for local governments, as it has no legal implications. We think it is crucial to collect the communities' opinion and establish a dialogue between the authorities, firms, and civil society." Romero emphasized that, according to Oxfam's experience, only by listening to the population can social conflicts be mitigated.
In the last few days some Peruvian authorities have publicly criticized the referendum. The National Election Board, the body that regulates elections, has declared it an illegal activity because local authorities are not supposed to hold referenda in which citizens decide about extractive industries. The Ministry of Energy and Mining has said that local authorities cannot make declarations on a national issue. President Alan García and the Prime Minister Jorge Del Castillo have publicly opposed the referendum.
Nevertheless, the office of the Peruvian Ombudsman has declared that the referendum is not an illegal activity because it is within the jurisdiction of the local authorities. The Ministry of Justice has made similar statements. The organizers have stated that the referendum lies within the responsibility of the local government, and that it is meant to reflect public opinion, which they want the authorities to consider when it is time to make decisions.
"We make a public call for this activity to be held in peace, for the different points of view to be heard, and for the authorities to give the necessary help and make sure there is adequate security for everyone," said Romero. "Oxfam is opposed to any type of violence or coercion and supports freedom of expression and participation for everyone involved. We expect this opportunity will be used to hear the population's opinion and find the best solution for the social conflict that has been brewing. The communities of these three districts have sought a way to express themselves in a peaceful way, and this is a will and a right that should be respected."
]]>According to an Associated Press story, President Correa publicly pledged government support for the case, which began nearly 10 years ago in the United States and was thrown out on appeal in 2003. Since then the court in Ecuador has been conducting judicial inspections of polluted areas, gathering evidence a judge will use to make a decision, possibly in the next year.
During the same week, indigenous leaders representing the people affected by the pollution in the Orellana and Succumbios region of Ecuador attended the annual meeting for shareholders of ChevronTexaco in California. Humberto Piaguaje, a leader of the Secoya indigenous people, called for the company to resolve the case and help clean up the environment. "We want you to give us back our lives," Piaguaje said. "We want you to let us live in peace and harmony with nature. We want you to repair the damage so that our children do not have to continue suffering."
Oxfam America has supported the Amazon Defense Front's legal case for nine years, and assisted in the creation of the Assembly of Delegates of Communities Affected by Texaco, a community-based organization that has ensured those most directly affected by the pollution have a voice in the legal strategy.
"We think it is positive that President Correa has declared his support of those affected by pollution in the Lago Agrio region," said Javier Aroca, who coordinates programs related to indigenous rights for Oxfam America in South America. "We consider this is a signal that the government is interested in investigating and sanctioning those who are responsible."
"It is important to remember that the people affected are demanding compensation for almost 10 years now," Aroca said. "The pollution has affected the health of indigenous peoples and peasants... there have been cases of skin diseases and cancer. Furthermore, the lands are not as productive as they used to be, which has affected the agricultural economy. From our point of view, the government of Ecuador should support the affected population to complete the legal procedures, which are very expensive."
A win for the Amazon Defense Front in this precedent-setting case could change the landscape of the oil industry, and further establish the rights of communities to be compensated for negative social and environmental effects of oil operations.
]]>