Since 2009, Pantiacolla has been accompanying the indigenous Harakmbut Indians against the plans of the United States’ Hunt Oil Company. This company is planning to extract oil or gas from the Amazon Amarakaeri Communal Reserve, just east of the Manu National Park, using methods that are inadequate to guarantee the forest’s ecological balance needed for the Harakmbut’s sustainable way of life. Pantiacolla’s point of view is that the rainforest should be protected, either by convincing the oil company to use the best available techniques and practices, accompanied with an extensive social and environmental program, ór by preventing the oil company from drilling all together. However, we do understand that in the end, only the indigenous people of the reserve can have the final word in this.
As off the year we learned of the oil company’s plan, we have been helped and advised by E-Tech, an NGO from the United States consisting of oil engineers and other specialists who promote best ecological practices for oil and gas projects. They offer their expertise to be used in the legal processes Fenamad (Federation of Indigenous People of Madre de Dios) started against the oil company.
E-Tech also organizes a yearly forum, in which they invite representatives of oil companies, the government, indigenous peoples and international NGO’s to talk sense to each other; not an easy task with the interests at stake.
This year’s forum had three main topics: the Law of Free and Informed Consent, that recently has been adopted by Peruvian Congress; the recent institutional changes made by the new nationalistic administration of president Ollanta Humala; and third, the present state of consequences of hydrocarbon activities, according to indigenous grassroots organizations and international NGO`s.
The Law of Free and Informed Consent has been dragged around in confusion and contradiction by the last government of Alan Garcia, known for his arrogance towards indigenous peoples. Probably because of its history, it has been made one of the new president’s, Ollanta Humala, first measurements to pass through congress. This law states that all projects in and around indigenous peoples’ land that can affect their way of life, has to be informed to and be approved of by those indigenous peoples. This all looks like reason for optimism; though in reality it is a nation catching up with a decision that had already been made years ago. You see, this law is based on the United Nations International Labor Organization’s (ILO) Convention #169 that was already ratified by Peru in February of 1994. And an international convention in reality is of a higher legal order than a national law, so its approval by Peruvian congress was really mandatory. Still, the exact wording used when noting down the law in the Peruvian books is important for later legal interpretation of its regulations. For example, the ILO Convention #169 does not elaborate on what should happen if no reasonable consent can be reached between indigenous people on one side and the government with their multinational allies on the other. The Peruvian Law of Free and Informed Consent now says that in that case, simply the government will decide. Having lived in Peru for the last 5 governments, this is a worrying idea and work has to be done in congress to find another solution, which legally guarantees human rights for indigenous peoples, independent of the ideas of individual presidents.
Then several people from government institutes connected to the Peruvian Ministry of Energy and Mining spoke about the changes they are making in their organizations to assure they can improve the quality of their work; in some cases the changes to assure they can actually start doing their jobs. A representative of OEFA (Organization for Environmental Evaluation and Inspection) even pronounced the following words about recent problems with indigenous people: “if we had considered this matter carefully beforehand, we could have avoided economical losses and emotional pains”. An obvious truth, however, hearing this from the mouth of a government representative was something new. Though one has to be careful to rejoice before real changes have been seen, it did feel as a fresh wind going through this third forum.
The indigenous grassroots organizations and NGO’s explained where improvements are needed. A surprising fact: indigenous communities of the enormous Camisea gas project are not receive direct compensation from the oil companies for alterations of their environment. Though this does look bad on the oil company, it is not the complete picture. The region and municipalities do receive royalties and taxes adding up to about 230 million dollars per year. This should be enough to give the indigenous communities their fair share, but, till this day, this has not happened; moreover, the indigenous communities still do not even know how big their share is supposed to be.
Interesting was also the report by the South Peru Panel; a panel set up and paid by the United States Import-Export Bank, that finances gas projects in Peru. The panel’s goal is to give an independent assessment of the consequence of oil and mining in Peru to be reported to the highest circles of financing banks, governments and oil and mining companies. And that is what its very conscious members are actually doing. And the ImEx Bank is not very happy with the results, since their report almost 100% underline our social and environmental arguments against the present practices of oil and mining companies in Peru (www.southperupanel.org). I can only wish these results will be more widely published ánd hope the ImEx Bank has the stamina to continue paying for this panel.
Revenue Watch Institute (www.revenuewatch.org) had a striking line of thinking. Using data from the website of the Ministry of Energy and Mining, they showed that almost 50% of the increased and unforeseen need of energy in Perú, actually goes to the oil- and mining companies themselves; for them to again drill more energy out of Earth. Revenue Watch actually calculated, that if balance would be brought into the extend of energy use by oil- and mining projects, plus a minor restriction of gas export to Mexico, actually no need for drilling the Peruvian Amazon will exist till at least 2017. A mind boggling idea that seems worthwhile to look into.
Bill Powers, engineer from E-Tech, commented on his work on a guide book for the Best Practices in oil and gas drilling, to be ready in December of this year. This will be an important tool for everyone who has legal arguments with oil- and mining companies.
In short, a worthwhile forum, with important new ideas and insights for all stakeholders; and we did hear more sense now than during the fora of the previous two years.
Thanks E-Tech!
The content of the talks will soon be available on-line.
