Indigenous Rights

Supporting Mayan beekeepers in their struggle against GMO soy

Civil society urges the United Nations to document human rights violations committed by businesses in Mexico

A group of organizations delivered their report highlighting more than 60 cases of violations across the country. Mining, infrastructure and energy projects—including hydroelectric and wind—were responsible for the greatest number of human rights violations. Mexico City, Mexico. On the occasion of the United Nations Working Group on Business and Human Rights’ official visit to Mexico, a coalition of more than 100 civil society organizations, movements and networks prepared a report outlining cases of human rights violations perpetrated by corporations in Mexico. The report highlights Mexico’s current human rights crisis, which has been recognized by various UN agencies[1] and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.[2] It lays out the clear dangers facing those who protect human rights, the land and their own territory.[3] Documented cases of human rights abuses involve 50 foreign, 41 national, and eight public companies. More than half the cases involved intimidation and/or attacks against human rights defenders. The most frequent violations were to the rights to: land and territory; access to information; health; a healthy environment; and consultation and free, prior and informed consent. During the Working Group’s regional visits, affected communities will show the experts the negative impacts caused by companies linked to mining, wind power, hydroelectric dams, agribusiness, infrastructure, oil and gas exploitation, real estate, tourism and maquilas (manufacturing facilities), among others. At the suggestion of civil society, the Working Group will meet with companies including: Grupo México, Grupo Higa, Grupo BAL, Bimbo, Goldcorp, TransCanada, Eólica del Sur, and CEMEX. They will also meet with the state-run production companies, Petróleos Mexicanos (Pemex) and the Federal Electricity Commission (CFE). Situations in Mexico that systematically hinder compliance with the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights include: State Capture: complicity, corruption and impunity. In many documented cases, the Mexican State, at all levels (federal, state and municipal), has served business interests above public interest. This has been evident in: the promotion of rules and regulations that benefit business interests over human rights; the use of public force against peaceful social mobilization; the support of extractive projects against community interests; the lack of inquiry and sanction by the judiciary regarding allegations of human rights abuses; and the criminalization of environmental advocates. Structural reforms that weaken the protection of human rights and support companies, such as the energy reform, which does not always consider its impacts on human rights, and does not guarantee the participation and right of access to information of affected communities. Lack of consultation and the free, prior, informed, culturally appropriate, and in good faith consent of affected communities; lack of due diligence on the part of companies; and the proliferation of megaprojects with severe impacts on human rights. Lack of access to justice and non-compliance with rules and judgments, by companies as well as the Mexican State. On multiple occasions, affected people who have reported rights violations have later been the victim of attacks. And, even if a court—including the Mexican Supreme Court— ruled in their favor, the fulfillment of that ruling was not observed. Reduction of participation mechanisms and an increase in abuses against human rights defenders. The cases illustrate an increase in murders, criminalization, threats and attacks on human rights defenders who have spoken out against mega-projects and business activities. In 2011, the United Nations Human Rights Council issued the "Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights" in order to empower States to exercise control over business activities, ensure due diligence, and guarantee access to effective and appropriate remedial measures. In order to monitor the application of these principles, the Council established the Working Group on Business and Human Rights, whose visit Mexico from August 29th to September 7th 2016 will be their second visit to Latin America. On behalf of the organizations and communities that prepared this report, we hope that the conclusions reached by the Working Group at the close of their visit will reflect what Mexico truly needs. We urge companies operating in Mexico, as well as the Mexican State, to consider the recommendations seriously and implement them in current and future operations. For more information in social media, following along: #ONUenMX   The report was created with the participation of the following organizations and human rights groups (in alphabetical order): Alianza de la Costa Verde Ambiente y Desarrollo Humano Asociación Interamericana para la Defensa del Ambiente (AIDA) Bios Iguana Campaña Nacional Sin Maíz No Hay País Cartocrítica Casa del Migrante Saltillo Centro de Derechos Humanos “Fray Bartolomé de Las Casas” Centro de Derechos Humanos “Fray Francisco de Vitoria” Centro de Derechos Humanos “Miguel Agustín Pro Juárez” (Centro Prodh) Centro de Derechos Humanos de la Montaña, Tlachinollan Centro de Derechos Humanos Toaltepeyolo Centro de Derechos Humanos Zeferino Ladrillero (CDHZL) Centro “Fray Julián Garcés” Derechos Humanos Centro de Información sobre Empresas y Derechos Humanos (CIEDH) Centro de Reflexión y Acción Laboral (CEREAL) Centro Diocesano para los Derechos Humanos “Fray Juan de Larios” Centro Mexicano de Derecho Ambiental (CEMDA) Colectivo sí a la vida No al basurero tóxico en Noria de la Sabina Comités de Cuenca Río Sonora (CCRS) Comité de Defensa Integral de Derechos Humanos Gobixha (CODIGODH) Comité de Derechos Humanos de Tabasco (CODEHUTAB) Comisión Mexicana para la Defensa y Promoción de los Derechos Humanos (CMDPDH) Consejo en Defensa de la Vida y el Territorio TiyatTlali DECA Equipo Pueblo DH Rayoactivo El Barzón Chihuahua EcoRed Feminista la Lechuza Buza Enfoque DH Estancia del Migrante en Querétaro Frente de Pueblos en Defensa de la Tierra y el Agua (FPDTA) Fundar, Centro de Análisis e Investigación Foro de Derechos Humanos y Resistencias de la Sierra de Puebla Greenpeace México Grupo de Estudios Ambientales Grupo Focal sobre Empresas y Derechos Humanos Indignación, Promoción y Defensa de los Derechos Humanos Instituto Mexicano para el Desarrollo Comunitario (IMDEC) Movimiento Ciudadano en Defensa de la Loma Movimiento Mexicano de Afectados por las Presas y en Defensa de los Ríos (MAPDER) Movimiento Mesoamericano contra el Modelo Extractivo Minero (M4) OrganicConsumersAssociation (México) Oxfam México Programa Universitario de Derechos Humanos, Programa de Incidencia, Programa de Medio Ambiente, UIA Proyecto de Derechos Económicos, Sociales y Culturales (ProDESC) Proyecto sobre Organización, Desarrollo, Educación e Investigación (PODER) Red Mexicana de Afectados por la Minería (REMA) Semillas de Vida SMR, Scalabrinianas: misión con Migrantes y Refugiados Serapaz, Servicios y Asesoría para la Paz Y la Red Nacional de Organismos Civiles de Derechos Humanos “Todos los Derechos para Todas y Todos” (conformada por 80 organizaciones en 21 estados de la República mexicana).   The information was collected based on the baseline questionnaire for documenting abuses of companies prepared by the Business Information Center and Human Rights(CIEDH) and the network(DESC) https://goo.gl/YLhbSM [1] Declaration of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, ZeidRa’ad Al Hussein, done in his visit to Mexico in October 7, 2015: http://www.ohchr.org/en/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=16578&LangID=E [2] Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.  Human Rights situation in Mexico, (OAS.Official Documentation; OEA/Ser.L) ISBN I. Title. II.  Series. OAS. Official Documentation; OEA/Ser.L. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.Doc. 44/15 p. 11 http://www.oas.org/es/cidh/informes/pdfs/Mexico2016-es.pdf [3] Institute for Economics & Peace, Global Peace Index 2015 Measuring peace, its causes and its economic value p. 8 http://economicsandpeace.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Global-Peace-Index-Report-2015_0.pdf Mexico´s Rank 140 out of 163 http://www.visionofhumanity.org/#page/indexes/global-peace-index/2016/MEX/OVER  

Brazil & The Olympics: Signs of Danger, Signs of Hope

By Rodrigo da Costa Sales, AIDA attorney As the Brazilian flag was raised at the Rio Olympics to the soft sounds of acoustic guitar, the familiar words of my country’s national anthem struck me: Giant by thine own nature, Thou art beautiful, thou art strong, an intrepid colossus, And thy future mirrors that greatness. For centuries, it’s been easy, a point of pride, to celebrate the natural bounty of our landscape, from the mighty Amazon basin to the thousands of miles of pristine coastline.  What’s proved most difficult is defending it. Last year Brazil was the world’s most dangerous country for environmental defenders. At least 50 of us were killed; so far this year, 23 have been assassinated. The Amazon, where I was born and spent my childhood, is the epicenter of these crimes. Plantations and ranches have been built on land where homes once stood. Indigenous and Afro-Brazilian communities, guardians of the natural world, have been evicted from lands passed down through the generations. It’s clear that economics and development have been prioritized above public health and wellbeing. Increasingly, large dams are also becoming agents of dispossession in the Amazon. On the mighty Rio Xingu, the massive Belo Monte hydro dam displaced indigenous communities that depended on and cared for the river basin. Vast amounts of rainforest were destroyed, with disastrous impacts on wildlife. Several plant and animal species are now extinct; literally tons of fish died, likely from contamination. Altamira, the city closest to the dam, is now ranked third in Brazil for violence and inequality. Belo Monte is hardly bringing equitable and just development to Brazil.  There are reasons for hope, though. A couple of things that happened last week made me believe we might see some positive changes in the near future. First, the government denied the environmental license for a Tapajós River mega-dam that would have repeated the destruction of Belo Monte, devastating the lands and culture of the Muduruku people. The second is more symbolic – the opening ceremony of the Olympic games. I was particularly moved by the focus on two issues that Brazil must make a priority in coming years: deforestation and climate change.  The attention to environmental crisis was powerful. It would have been even stronger, though, if indigenous people hadn’t been portrayed only as relics of Brazil’s ancient origins. In reality, our indigenous groups are crucial players in present and future efforts to achieve sustainability. To a certain extent, hope is what the Olympics are all about.  They bring the world together for a common good, and, at their best, aid in the development of a peaceful society concerned with preserving human dignity across all continents. Although I have deep personal disagreements with the execution of the Olympics in Rio, I hope Brazil takes seriously the symbolic commitment demonstrated in the opening ceremony. I hope Belo Monte is the last case of its kind. I hope human rights and environmental defenders can work safely and without fear. I hope future generations grow up in a country that really is “giant by thine own nature.” Only then will our future truly be as great as the magnificent lands we call home.   Please consider making a donation to AIDA today to help us make the future great for people in Brazil and throughout Latin America.

Indigenous People of the Americas Have New Hope for Justice

By Astrid Puentes Riaño (text originally published in Animal Político) June 15 was a historic day. After 17 years of negotiations, the American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples was approved. That’s cause for celebration. The Declaration brings advances on many fronts. It means States must commit to respecting the rights of indigenous peoples, including their rights to land, territory, and a healthy environment. It means respecting sustainable development. It recognizes that violence against indigenous women “prevents and nullifies the enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms.” And it reinforces the rights of indigenous peoples to participation; to prior consultation; and to free, prior, and informed consent – particularly when they’re faced with harm to their territories.  The need for effective justice As the Organization of American States was approving the Declaration, activists held a Global Day of Action to call for justice for Berta Cáceres, the Honduran indigenous rights defender assassinated on March 3. These simultaneous events demonstrate the lack of effective justice in the region. Latin America yearns for justice, particularly with regard to human rights violations caused by extractive, energy, tourism, and infrastructure projects. The events also highlight the urgent need to put declarations and international obligations into practice. Berta’s death was foreshadowed. The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights asked the Honduran government to take precautionary measures to protect her life, which the government did not do. Two days after her death, the Commission also requested protective measures for the organization she led, the Civic Council of Popular and Indigenous Organizations of Honduras (COPINH). Just days later, however, Nelson García, another of the organization’s members, was assassinated. The primary demand on the Global Day of Action was to create a commission of independent experts to investigate the murders and to help uncover the truth. The assassinations of Berta and Nelson are not exceptions. More than 100 people dedicated to protecting their lands, forests, and rivers have been murdered in Honduras since 2010. And it’s not only there. Brazil, Colombia, Nicaragua, and Peru are four of the five most violent countries in the world for environmental defenders (alongside the Philippines). 2015 has been widely recognized as “the worst year on record” for those who defend the Earth. Towards real development Berta dedicated her life to defending rivers. At the time of her death, she was working to save her people’s territory from being flooded by the Agua Zarca Dam on the Gualquarque River. Indigenous communities there have taken stands against more than 50 extractive and energy projects affecting their land, the majority of which violate national and international law. Her case has thrust into the spotlight the realities of development in Latin America. Although governments—with the help of international financial institutions, national banks, and foreign investors—promote extractive, energy, tourism, and infrastructure projects as essential to development and poverty alleviation, the reality is quite different. Systematically, these projects are built in violation of laws and without adequate planning or evaluation of impacts on the environment and human rights. Sustainable alternatives are rarely evaluated at all. In fact, many of the projects pushed through in Latin America would not be viable in developed countries, where better technologies and safeguards are the norm. Special Rapporteurs to the United Nations have been calling attention to this issue for years. The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights also recognized it in a recent report on extractive industries and their impacts on tribal and indigenous peoples. Unfortunately, the Commission is undergoing an unprecedented financial crisis because States aren’t making sufficient contributions. Some have delayed or withdrawn funding because of conflicts over the Commission’s rulings on extractive and energy projects in their territories. The clearest example can be found in Brazil, which reacted to the Commission’s call to suspend Belo Monte Dam construction by withdrawing its ambassador, initiating a thorough review of the Commission, and freezing financial contributions. Brazil has yet to re-establish a regular contribution to the body. Hope and opportunity For all these reasons, approval of the American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples is encouraging news. It’s essential that the rights and obligations it contains be upheld immediately. Starting with Berta’s case, States must demonstrate their seriousness. They must show, through action, that they recognize the problems facing the region; that they’re reaching for truth and justice; and that they favor real development to uplift their people. Latin America has a historic opportunity. Governments can finally join the 21st Century by respecting the rule of law, practicing what they preach, and promoting development that cares for our natural resources and those who most intimately depend on them. 

NGOs call on Mexico to protect Mayan beekeeping communities affected by cultivation of genetically modified soy

The lives, health, and integrity of indigenous people are threatened by deforestation and contamination of their land caused by the cultivation of genetically modified soy. The situation is worsening because the Mexican government has not adopted effective measures to safeguard the rights of the communities.  Washington D.C., United States. Traditional Mayan beekeeping communities, alongside a coalition of national and international organizations, have denounced the cultivation of genetically modified soy in the Mexican states of Campeche and Yucatan as damaging to the lives, health, and integrity of Mayan people, and to the health of the environment on which they depend.   On July 25, a coalition of organizations filed a complaint on behalf of Mayan communities with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR). The organizations are the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA); Centro Mexicano de Derecho Ambiental (CEMDA); Greenpeace Mexico; Indignación, Promoción y Defensa de los Derechos Humanos, A.C. (Indignación); and Litiga, Organización de Litigio Estratégico de Derechos Humanos A.C. (Litiga OLE). The health and way of life of affected people—especially children, pregnant women, and the elderly—are at increasing risk from deforestation and the use, during planting, of the toxic herbicide glyphosate, which has been proved to contaminate soil and water sources. The crops have been genetically modified to resist the herbicide, which leads growers to apply it in ever greater concentrations. The organizations asked the Commission to grant precautionary measures, an action that would urge the Mexican government to implement actions that protect the rights of communities and effectively halt the cultivation of genetically modified soy in Campeche and Yucatan. Leydy Pech, representative of the Mayan communities, said, “planting genetically modified soy in Mayan territory violates our rights and our culture, which has been passed down to us from our ancestors. Because of the cultivation of soy on our lands, we have lost medicinal plants, vital trees for local bee populations, and animals, and have even seen some of our archeological sites destroyed. This harms our Mayan identity and denies us the possibility of passing that knowledge on to our children; traditional knowledge that allows us to preserve the forest and generate wellbeing for our communities.” AIDA attorney María José Veramendi added, “the Mexican government has an obligation to apply the precautionary principle and take into account the health risks that come with glyphosate and the cultivation of genetically modified soy. By not doing so, the State is failing to comply with its duty to prevent violations of the rights of Mayan communities, who are exposed to the herbicide as it drifts on wind and contaminates water sources.” The affected Mayan communities live in the municipalities of Hopelchén, in the state of Campeche, and Mérida, Tekax and Teabo, in the state of Yucatan. Permits to cultivate genetically modified soy also affect other communities in the seven states of the Mexican Republic. The communities were not consulted, nor did they give their free, prior, and informed consent, before Mexico granted the permits necessary for the cultivation of genetically modified soy in their territory. Under international law, indigenous communities must be guaranteed the right to prior consultation and informed consent. What’s more, the planting has seriously affected traditional beekeeping practices, part of Mayan culture and one of the main sources of livelihood for the communities. In addition to requesting precautionary measures, the organizations filed a petition with the IACHR denouncing violations of the rights to land and communal property, to life and personal integrity, to a healthy environment, to work, and to judicial protection and access to justice. According to the organizations, the State has not taken effective measures to safeguard the rights of affected populations despite their efforts to seek justice in domestic courts. “Although the Mayan communities obtained a favorable ruling from the Second Chamber of the Supreme Court last November, the judgment did not resolve all the human rights violations,” explained Francisco Xavier Martínez Esponda, legal representative of CEMDA. “During the consultation process, authorities neither respect traditional manners of decision-making nor meet Inter-American standards for upholding this fundamental right. Since the Mexican State could not rule on all instances of rights violations or order their rectification, we have now brought the case before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.”   

AIDA condemns threats to environmental defenders in Tolima, Colombia

As a regional organization, we call on the Colombian government to immediately adopt measures to guarantee the life and integrity of at-risk activists. The Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA) categorically condemns threats made against the Youth Socio-Environmental Collective of Cajamarca, Colombia (Cosajuca). On July 8, the organization—which forms part of the Environmental Committee of Cajamarca and the Network of Environmental Committees of Tolima—received a document containing death threats, only the most recent of a series of intimidations to which its members have been subject. The urgency of addressing this situation comes light of a larger problem in Colombia and across the region. In their most recent report, the international NGO Global Witness identified Colombia as the third most dangerous country in the world to be an environmental defender; 26 deaths were registered there in 2015. AIDA calls on the government of Colombia to guarantee the life, liberty and physical integrity of the members of Cosajuca. We also urge the establishment of a safe space for these environmental defenders to do their work, and a prompt investigation into the threats made against them. Freedom of expression and association are fundamental to the rule of law and a democratic society. Access to information, participation and the search for environmental justice are legitimate activities protected by the Constitution and the international legal treaties to which Colombia is a party. Cosajuca exercises those rights by promoting a popular referendum against mining contamination in the town of Cajamarca, and the department of Tolima, where large-scale gold mining operations are being planned. The harassment and murder of environmental defenders is pervasive throughout Latin America, which, according to the Global Witness report, is home to two-thirds of the world’s murdered activists and seven of the ten deadliest countries to be an environmental defender.    

Victims of business-influenced human rights violations face obstacles to achieving justice

The asymmetry of power between companies and affected people, among other factors, makes access to justice difficult in the Americas. Organizations provided detailed information on this problem during a hearing before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR). Santiago, Chile. Across the Americas, people and communities whose human rights have been violated by business activities face obstacles when exercising their right to access justice and achieve reparations for damages done. They are often confronted with criminalization, harassment and threats. Among other reasons, the situation reflects the reality that, in many countries, businesses are not properly controlled and may even receive government incentives to continue operations, despite the fact that they violate human rights. In a hearing before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, civil society organizations[1] demonstrated, through emblematic cases in South America, that this is a problem that happens throughout the region. One of these cases occurred in Brazil on November 5, 2015, when a dam of mining waste owned by Samarco burst in the Río Doce basin. The rupture caused the worst socio-environmental disaster in the country’s history: tons of toxic sludge moved down the river, destroying homes, schools, crops and livestock on its slow and deadly path to the Atlantic Ocean. The government and the company have since closed the case on the disaster, after reaching a settlement in which the victims were not even able to participate. “I lived a quiet life. I never would have expected to see what I saw, to witness families destroyed. We need employment, but we need it responsibly, not in a way that ends up killing people. We are asking for help now, because we can’t let these companies do whatever they want. If this Commission can help us, we would be grateful,” said Antonio Gregorio Santos, a victim of the case in Brazil. In the hearing, the organizations also referred to the case of Southern Peaks Mining, financed by the British-owned Barclays Bank, in which they are accused of breaching agreements with Mala communities in Peru. Here the victims found persecution and illegal detention in their search for justice. “We have identified various barriers to access to justice for the victims. Some—such as socio-economic, cultural and linguistic barriers—were identified in the Commission’s Report on indigenous peoples, afro-descendent communities and extractive industries,” said María José Veramendi Villa, attorney at the Inter-American Association for Environmental Defense, one of the petitioning organizations at the hearing. “Many obstacles are exacerbated in disputes with companies due, in large part, to the sharp asymmetry that exists in this relationship, expressed, for example, in political interference on the part of companies and in the lack of adequate independent safeguards for judicial power in many countries of South America.” The organizations requested that the Commission remind the States of their obligation to guarantee access to justice for those who have suffered human rights violations at the hands of companies, and urge them to strengthen domestic legislation accordingly. They also requested that the Commission develop binding standards regarding business and human rights in its rulings on petitions and individual cases—as well as in its thematic reports—in particular with regards to access to redress mechanisms. Finally, they highlighted the work of those who defend human rights against the actions of companies and reminded States that they must provide adequate conditions for their operation.  [1] Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA, regional); Centro de Información sobre Empresas y Derechos Humanos (CIEDH, regional); Centro por la Justicia y el Derecho Internacional (CEJIL, regional); Centro de Derechos Humanos y Ambiente (CEDHA, Argentina); Campanha para parar o poder das Corporações (Brasil); Justiça Global (Brasil); Pensamiento y Acción Social (PAS, Colombia); Project on Organizing, Development, Education, and Research (PODER, México); Fundar Centro de Análisis e Investigación A.C (México); Proyecto de Derechos Económicos, Sociales y Culturales (ProDESC, México); Centro Mexicano de Derecho Ambiental (CEMDA, México); Código DH - Comité de Defensa Integral de Derechos Humanos Gobixha (México) y Asociación Pro Derechos Humanos (Perú).  

Letter to the President of Panama on Test Flooding in Barro Blanco Hydroelectric Project

AIDA and other organizations sent an open letter to Juan Carlos Varela Rodríguez, President of the Republic of Panama. We urge him to protect life and integrity of the Ngäbe communities and to immediately suspend the test flooding in the Barro Blanco Hydroelectric Power Plant Project which is violating their rights and placing them at risk of irreparable harm.  Dear President Varela, We, the undersigned organizations, are deeply concerned for the personal safety and security of the Ngäbe communities, affected by the Barro Blanco Hydroelectric Power Plant Project.  On May 22, Panama’s National Authority for Public Services (ASEP) announced in a press release that Barro Blanco’s reservoir would be filled[1], starting on May 24. ASEP’s press release indicated that the water would rise up to 103 meters above sea level by June 21, 2016. According to a fact finding mission led by the United Nations Development Programme in 2012[2], the Ngäbe communities of Kiad, Nuevo Palomar and Quebrada Caña will be directly impacted by the flooding. This report indicates that 6 hectares + 9816.86 m² of their lands, including 6 houses and a petroglyph located in the community of Quebrada Caña, will be under water. Furthermore, we have received reports from affected community members that floodwaters of the Barro Blanco reservoir have reached the limits of the Bakama Area (Corregimiento) of the Ngäbe-Bugle Territory (Comarca) in Western Panama. At this point, the Ngäbe communities of Quebrada Plata, Quebrada Caña, Kiad and Nuevo Palomar - as well as the Mama Tatda ceremonial sites - could be seriously harmed by the so-called test flooding this week, much ahead of the estimated June 21 peak level announced by ASEP. Contrary to what is stated by ASEP press release, and as confirmed by Milton Henriquez, Minister of Internal Affairs[3], the affected communities were not notified or consulted prior to the test flooding. This goes against international human rights standards, which stipulate that indigenous peoples have the right to consultation and free, prior and informed consent.  As derived from the right to property protected under the American Convention on Human Rights and other agreements, indigenous peoples have also the right to adequate housing, to possess, use, and “freely enjoy” their traditional lands and territories, and to “not be forcibly removed” from them[4]. The Ngäbe communities are determined to stay and defend their sacred lands, regardless of the ongoing flooding. We urge you to protect their life and their integrity and to immediately suspend the test flooding which is violating their rights and placing them at risk of irreparable harm. [1] http://www.panamaamerica.com.pa/economia/asep-anuncia-el-inicio-del-periodo-de-prueba-de-central-hidroelectrica-barro-blanco-1027251   [2] http://canal-empresarias.ciudaddelsaber.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/0-informe-mision-verficacion-final-20121219.pdf [3] http://www.mingob.gob.pa/mingob/inside.php?artID=3246 [4] For more information, please see http://www.ciel.org/Publications/BarroBlanco_Appeal_18Feb2014.pdf  

Correspondence with the World Bank Regarding Berta Cáceres and Large Dams

On May 11th, more than 300 organizations from around the world sent a letter to Dr. Jim Yong Kim, President of the World Bank, to respond to a statement he made during an event at the Union Theological Seminary in New York. In response to a question about the impacts of large dam projects as illustrated by the murder of Berta Cáceres in Honduras he stated, among other things, that “you cannot do the work we’re trying to do and not have some of these ‘incidents’ happen.” The organizations signing this letter consider these statements from the World Bank President unacceptable and urge him to immediately rectify his actions and make a public apology. Dr. Kim’s statement is available on video (minute 53).  CONSULT the letter sent to the World Bank President in ENGLISH and SPANISH.  On May 11th, the World Bank responded to the letter from organizations in a public brief on Honduras and indigenous peoples, which can be found on their website.  On May 13th, a drafting committee from the coalition of organizations answered the World Bank, taking note of the President's condemnation of the murder of Berta Cáceres. The also noted that the reference the President of the World Bank made to the grave human rights violations caused by dams, such a involuntary displacement, is worrying and must be addressed. They reiterated the existence of alternatives to large hydroelectric projects and the need to implement such solutions.  The organizations concluded: "In honor of your commitment to “hear the voices of the Berta Caceres of the world” we look forward to the World Bank Group moving towards energy alternatives that are respectful of the human rights of people and communities; that are more efficient, less expensive and actually respectful of the planet. That is the main way to achieve real prosperity for all."

Marcelina, the voice of the San Pedro Mezquital

At 57 years old, Marcelina López has a very active life. She sews her own clothes, makes beautiful jewelry, raises chickens, sells eggs, cooks, is a midwife and organizes the women of her community; all while faithfully conserving her traditions, those of the indigenous Wixárika people. Perhaps what distinguishes Marcelina most is her great character and conviction, qualities that have rooted her deeply in a grand cause: the defense of Mexico’s San Pedro Mezquital River, threatened by Las Cruces Dam. At AIDA we’re deeply moved by the commitment of Marcelina and honored to be part of the same fight. Just like her, we want the San Pedro—the only free-flowing river left in the western Sierra Madre Mountains—to run free. We’ve been inspired to know more about this incredible woman, and to understand why she does what she does. Colors of the Sierra Madre Marcelina lives in a house made of mud, built high upon a hill, in a small community in the state of Nayarit. To go anywhere from her house, she has to walk an hour and a half through the mountains. She travels everywhere on foot. There’s no doubt Marcelina is a special woman. Everyone in the region knows her; she is unmistakable. She has the look of a wise indigenous woman, the bright colors of her clothes equal only to those of the beaded necklaces she wears each day. She herself colors the beads; they are a symbol of the importance of her culture. She often wears a head wrap, which gives her an air of certainty and connotes rich ancestral wisdom. Though her profound presence can seem serious, Marcelina is a very sweet and loving person. Over the years, Marcelina has not been immune to violence and machismo, in its many expressions. She has had to fight to have her voice recognized in agrarian assemblies, and, for a time, had to provide for her children as a single mother. Her people, the Wixárika—known in Spanish as the Huicholes—are a majority group in Nayarit. They live in the western central region of Mexico, in the Sierra Madre Mountains; they primarily populate the states of Nayarit and Jalisco, but are also represented in parts of Durange and Zacatecas. In their native tongue, belonging to the family of Uto-Aztecan languages, wixárika means “people.”   For the Wixárika, ceremonies are fundamental to the social wellbeing of the group. It is through these sacred rituals that they ask for rain, give thanks for the harvest, bless its fruits, and pray for health and vitality. Their ceremonies are, in short, where they celebrate and honor life. For Marcelina and her people, the San Pedro Mezquital is the pillar of social, spiritual and economic life. Its waters support their subsistence farming and fishing activities; 14 of their sacred sites are spread along its length. What’s more, the river feeds Marismas Nacionales, one of the most important mangrove forests in all of Mexico. This important source of life and culture is threatened now by the construction of Las Cruces Dam, a project being proposed by the Federal Electricity Commission. The megaproject would be located 65 kilometers north of the city of Tepic. It would have a capacity of 240 MW, divided between three generators. The dam would effectively stand as a 188-meter high concrete curtain. Speaking for the river In her excellent Spanish, accented with clear links to her indigenous roots, Marcelina has on various occasions stood before microphones and cameras to defend the San Pedro River and the lives of those who depend upon it. “The construction of this dam will have a severe impact on our culture and our spirituality. Many of our ceremonial centers are located along this river,” she explained. “It is there that we leave our offerings of thanks; it there that we pray, not just for our own community, but for the entire world.” When asked why she decided to be part of the movement in defense of the San Pedro, Marcelina responded: “As an indigenous women, I’m hurt that they want to take away our river. What’s happening? Why didn’t they consult us indigenous people [about the project]? Where is their respect? Why are we treated this way?” Her questions remain unanswered. The construction of Las Cruces will have negative impacts on the land, its natural resources, and the way of life of the indigenous people who depend upon it. The dam will flood 4,506 hectares; the town of San Blasito, sections of communal land, at least 14 sacred sites, and one ceremonial center, will all be under water. “We are the roots of Mexico,” Marcelina concluded. “It’s not easy for us to change our sacred sites; they’re like a tree rooted deep in the soil. Down these rivers run the blood of our gods.”