PRIMERA PARTE:
SEGUNDA PARTE:
TERCERA PARTE:
Showing posts with label PERU. Show all posts
Showing posts with label PERU. Show all posts
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Friday, November 14, 2008
PERU: Asamblea Nacional de los Pueblos
ASAMBLEA NACIONAL DE LOS PUEBLOS
8 DE NOVIEMBRE SESIÓN DE INSTALACIÓN
CONVOCATORIA.
Fuente: http://www.congresobolivariano.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=4949
Dirigentes y delegados de organizaciones sociales, sindicales, campesinas, políticas y de diversos sectores ciudadanos, convencidos de la necesidad de construir la gran unidad del pueblo peruano para lograr los grandes cambios que el país demanda, nos hemos autoconvocado ... (sigue)
... para dar nacimiento al proceso de organización de la Asamblea Nacional de los Pueblos, concebida como un espacio amplio y plural, de profundo contenido democrático y protagonismo ciudadano en la formulación y aplicación de políticas de Estado.
La Asamblea Nacional de los Pueblos surge como una necesidad frente a la crisis del Estado y a la “democracia” deformada, restringida y excluyente que ejercitan los sectores dominantes. La verdadera democracia es integral: Social, económica y política; es representativa, participativa, descentralista, sujeta al control ciudadano. Tal democracia está por hacerse, tan igual como la justicia social, la igualdad de derechos y oportunidades para todos, el reconocimiento de los pueblos originarios y minorías étnicas, asume y fortalece el protagonismo de los jóvenes, la igualdad de género, la plena soberanía nacional; en suma, la equidad en la distribución de la riqueza y en la conducción del Estado para garantizar el desarrollo sostenible y bienestar para las mayorías.
La Asamblea Nacional de los Pueblos se plantea también como respuesta al desvergonzado entreguismo del gobierno actual, su creciente tendencia autoritaria y prepotente, su indeclinable sometimiento a las trasnacionales y los poderosos del país; además de su corrupción sin límite ni control. Ello exige proponer alternativas prontas y firmes, que sólo pueden surgir de los ciudadanos concientes de sus responsabilidades, organizados, unidos, dispuestos a hacerse oír y respetar.
La Asamblea Nacional de los Pueblos representa un reto para millones de peruanos que son víctimas del injusto modelo económico y no aceptan la prepotencia, ni la intolerancia; que quieren ser actores de su presente y su futuro, que sueñan con una Patria libre, digna, solidaria y soberana, y anhelan un nuevo régimen económico, social y político. Sin renunciar a la democracia representativa, depurándola de sus elementos corrosivos, y apoyándose en la lucha social y política, la Asamblea Nacional de los Pueblos se propone dar curso a la democracia participativa y directa, como expresiones genuinas del principio “el poder emana del pueblo” y del verdadero cambio que ello exige.
En ella caben los hombres y mujeres de buena voluntad con sed de justicia y de Patria, de todos los credos y culturas, de las organizaciones sociales, sindicales y políticas nacionales, regionales y locales comprometidas con el cambio, de las comunidades campesinas y nativas, de las rondas campesinas, de las minorías étnicas, de organizaciones de emprendedores, micro, pequeños y medianos empresarios, comerciantes, productores del campo y de la ciudad, de los movimientos regionales descentralistas, estudiantes de todos los niveles, profesionales, trabajadores de la cultura, de la investigación y de la ciencia, de la intelectualidad y de la prensa crítica, de los movimientos de mujeres y de jóvenes, de las iglesias vinculadas a los pobres, identificados todos con el cambio social que el pueblo peruano demanda.
Buscamos que la Asamblea nazca del pueblo, se nutra de sus luchas y tradiciones, y le sirva como una poderosa herramienta de cambios, de defensa y de conquista de derechos. Queremos constituirla para defender el derecho al pan y al trabajo, a la educación, salud y seguridad social para todos; el derecho a la organización, la participación y el control ciudadano sobre las autoridades; así como a un medio ambiente sano, protegido y equilibrado.
Llamamos a todos los que aspiran a vida digna y solidaria a incorporarse a este proceso unitario y los convocamos este 08 de noviembre a sesión de instalación donde se elegirá la correspondiente Comisión Organizadora de la Asamblea Nacional de los Pueblos, en la perspectiva de forjar una amplia unidad por un nuevo régimen económico y social y por una democracia verdadera para todos.
Otro Perú es posible. Ese es el sentido de la historia por escribir con la acción protagónica de las mayorías excluidas y los sectores olvidados.
¡La Asamblea Nacional de los Pueblos inicia su Marcha!, ¡Nadie la detendrá!
COMITÉ PROMOTOR DE LA ASAMBLEA NACIONAL DE LOS PUEBLOS
CGTP, CUT, CCP, UFREP, SUTEP, FEP, COLEGIO DE PROFESORES DEL PERÚ, CUNARC (Rondas Campesinas), FRENTE CÍVICO DE LIMA, FRENTE REGIONAL DE SAN MARTÍN, CONFIAR (ambulantes), CPS LIMA SUR, CPS LIMA CENTRO, CPS SAN JUAN DE LURIGANCHO, CPS VILLA EL SALVADOR, CPS LIMA NORTE, CPS LAMBAYEQUE, SUNTTTERP, COORDES, CTE, JUVENTUDES CGTP, ANCIJE, FENTUP, FACA AREQUIPA, FENUTSSA, FESIDETA, FREDELL LA LIBERTAD, ACCIÓN INTERNACIONAL POR LA PAZ, COLECTIVO MANOS LIMPIAS, SINDICATO DE TRANSPORTES, SUCHOCOP, FOROMIPE, CPS RIMAC, CPS OXAPAMPA, FEDERACIÓN MÉDICA DE CUSCO, SINDICATO CONSTRUCCIÓN CIVIL HUANCAVELICA, CONSTRUCCIÓN CIVIL TINGO MARÍA, CONSTRUCCIÓN CIVIL MOQUEGUA, IDPA, CGTP APURIMAC, CGTP HUÁNUCO, CGTP PUNO, CGTP TUMBES, CGTP LORETO, GRUPO DE ESTUDIANTES IP, PRESUPUESTO PARTICIPATIVO SJM, CONFERENCIA AGRÍCOLA, OTRO MUNDO ES POSIBLE, PARTIDO COMUNISTA DEL PERÚ – PATRIA ROJA, PARTIDO COMUNISTA PERUANO, PARTIDO NACIONALISTA PERUANO, PARTIDO SOCIALISTA, MOVIMIENTO NUEVA IZQUIERDA, FOCEP, LIBERACIÓN POPULAR, FEDEP, PUEBLO UNIDO, VOZ SOCIALISTA, COMITÉ MALPICA, PARTIDOSOCIALISTA REVOLUCIONARIO, COORDINADORA POLÍTICA REGIONAL AYACUCHO, JUVENTUD FOCEP, COMISIÓN DE MUJERES CPS (MNI, PCP, PS, FOCEP, LIBERACIÓN POPULAR, VOZ SOCIALISTA, PCDEL P – PATRIA ROJA, CGTP)
La Asamblea de la ANP se realizará en: Local de la Federación de Trabajadores En construcción Civil del Perú, sito en Prolongación Cangallo Nº 670 – La Victoria. A partir de las 10.00 a.m. del día sábado 8 de noviembre del 2008.
Enviado el viernes, 07 de noviembre a las 04:04:00 por unidadlatinoamerica
Sunday, October 19, 2008
PERU: ¿Por qué la Revocatoria?
¿Por qué la revocatoria?
El poder en manos del ciudadano no es solo un atributo, es además una facultad que tiene para ejercerlo
Por Francisco Miró Quesada Rada
El poder en manos del ciudadano no es solo un atributo, es además una facultad que tiene para ejercerlo
Por Francisco Miró Quesada Rada
Fuente: http://www.elcomercio.com.pe/Edicionimpresa/Html/2008-09-29/por-que-revocatoria.html
La democracia, desde que fue creada por los atenienses significa 'poder del pueblo' (demos: pueblo, cratos: poder). En consecuencia, el pueblo es el poseedor del poder, su titular.
El poder no es solo un atributo o una relación social, es además una facultad que tiene el individuo para ejercerlo. No se consigue nada con poseer poder sin ejercerlo, por eso cuando las democracias comenzaron a reducirle el poder a la monarquía, hasta dejarla sin ninguna capacidad de ejercicio, surgió la famosa frase "reina pero no gobierna". En consecuencia, el pueblo no solo debe poseer poder sino ejercerlo.
Existen dos formas de ejercer el poder en la democracia moderna. A través de los representantes o directamente. No son dos democracias distintas. La representativa y la directa constituyen modalidades de ejercicio del poder perfectamente compatibles. Lo que sucede es que en la directa, llamada también participativa, el ciudadano ejerce el poder sin intermediación.
Son diversas las instituciones de la democracia directa y entre ellas se encuentra la revocatoria, considerada un derecho que tiene el elector de remover a una autoridad elegida antes de que concluya el período de su mandato. Cuando estudiamos la legislación extranjera vemos que la revocatoria varía en cada país y depende tanto de la realidad como de las contingencias políticas en una sociedad.
En Estados Unidos se llama 'recall'. Funciona en algunos estados de la Unión Americana, condados y distritos. En América Latina las autoridades pueden ser revocadas en el Perú, Colombia, Cuba, Venezuela y el Ecuador, pero no todas.
Las constituciones de Venezuela y del Ecuador reconocen la revocatoria del presidente de la República. En el proyecto constitucional boliviano, la revocatoria se aplica para todas las autoridades, pero no existe un artículo específico que se refiera al presidente de la República.
Un grupo de ciudadanos ha planteado la revocatoria del presidente en nuestro país. Es una propuesta política y democrática, como muchas otras, por ejemplo la de los congresistas. Pero para que proceda se tendría que reformar la Constitución, porque de acuerdo con nuestro ordenamiento constitucional, solo pueden ser revocadas las autoridades regionales y municipales.
Ha causado preocupación esta propuesta argumentándose que puede generar inestabilidad política y afectar la gobernabilidad. Sin embargo, para lograr un equilibrio entre el poder del pueblo y el poder del presidente, la solución a mi modo de ver es que se establezcan causales, de esta manera el presidente solo podrá ser revocado en caso que incumpliera esas causales. Así como las autoridades tienen límites en el ejercicio del poder, también el ciudadano debe tenerlos.
La democracia, como hace tres siglos sostenía Montesquieu, es un sistema de "pesos y contrapesos". Se basa en el equilibrio de poderes para evitar la tiranía de un poder sobre otro u otros.
La racionalidad de este equilibrio radica en la ley y si una ley obedece a criterios de justicia, es decir de simetría, todo ciudadano, sea autoridad o no, debe respetarla.
La democracia, desde que fue creada por los atenienses significa 'poder del pueblo' (demos: pueblo, cratos: poder). En consecuencia, el pueblo es el poseedor del poder, su titular.
El poder no es solo un atributo o una relación social, es además una facultad que tiene el individuo para ejercerlo. No se consigue nada con poseer poder sin ejercerlo, por eso cuando las democracias comenzaron a reducirle el poder a la monarquía, hasta dejarla sin ninguna capacidad de ejercicio, surgió la famosa frase "reina pero no gobierna". En consecuencia, el pueblo no solo debe poseer poder sino ejercerlo.
Existen dos formas de ejercer el poder en la democracia moderna. A través de los representantes o directamente. No son dos democracias distintas. La representativa y la directa constituyen modalidades de ejercicio del poder perfectamente compatibles. Lo que sucede es que en la directa, llamada también participativa, el ciudadano ejerce el poder sin intermediación.
Son diversas las instituciones de la democracia directa y entre ellas se encuentra la revocatoria, considerada un derecho que tiene el elector de remover a una autoridad elegida antes de que concluya el período de su mandato. Cuando estudiamos la legislación extranjera vemos que la revocatoria varía en cada país y depende tanto de la realidad como de las contingencias políticas en una sociedad.
En Estados Unidos se llama 'recall'. Funciona en algunos estados de la Unión Americana, condados y distritos. En América Latina las autoridades pueden ser revocadas en el Perú, Colombia, Cuba, Venezuela y el Ecuador, pero no todas.
Las constituciones de Venezuela y del Ecuador reconocen la revocatoria del presidente de la República. En el proyecto constitucional boliviano, la revocatoria se aplica para todas las autoridades, pero no existe un artículo específico que se refiera al presidente de la República.
Un grupo de ciudadanos ha planteado la revocatoria del presidente en nuestro país. Es una propuesta política y democrática, como muchas otras, por ejemplo la de los congresistas. Pero para que proceda se tendría que reformar la Constitución, porque de acuerdo con nuestro ordenamiento constitucional, solo pueden ser revocadas las autoridades regionales y municipales.
Ha causado preocupación esta propuesta argumentándose que puede generar inestabilidad política y afectar la gobernabilidad. Sin embargo, para lograr un equilibrio entre el poder del pueblo y el poder del presidente, la solución a mi modo de ver es que se establezcan causales, de esta manera el presidente solo podrá ser revocado en caso que incumpliera esas causales. Así como las autoridades tienen límites en el ejercicio del poder, también el ciudadano debe tenerlos.
La democracia, como hace tres siglos sostenía Montesquieu, es un sistema de "pesos y contrapesos". Se basa en el equilibrio de poderes para evitar la tiranía de un poder sobre otro u otros.
La racionalidad de este equilibrio radica en la ley y si una ley obedece a criterios de justicia, es decir de simetría, todo ciudadano, sea autoridad o no, debe respetarla.
Thursday, October 2, 2008
PERU: Mining Referendum in Piura
Peru: Piura Votes, A Dangerous PrecedentWritten by Jennifer Moore
Tuesday, 16 September 2008
Source: http://upsidedownworld.org/main/content/view/1479/1/
One year ago today, a local vote was held concerning possible mining activity in three highland districts in northwestern Peru. The referendum drew thousands of peasant farmers, many of whom traveled for the best part of a day by horse, truck or on foot to mark their ballot “yes” or “no.”
“We are here to say ‘no’ to this mining project,” said one young woman from the El Carmen de la Frontera district, close to the northern border with Ecuador. “And we would like the government to respect the decisions that we are making here.”
“We are defending our water and land for our children and grandchildren,” she stated, speaking to a film crew from Guarango Cine y Video.
This week, people in the districts of Ayabaca, Pacaipampa and El Carmen de la Frontera are commemorating last year’s impressive results: about 60% of the electorate participated and 94.5% said “no.”
But one year later, the government of President Alan Garcia still refuses to recognize the results.
“There is no reason that this project shouldn’t go through,” said Garcia to members of the Zijin Mining Consortium during his trip to China in March.
Zijin is the major shareholder in Rio Blanco Copper S.A. (formerly Minera Majaz S.A.). UK-based Monterrico Metals also maintains an interest in the project that is hoped to reach production by 2011. It could be the start of a large scale mining district reaching across the Ecuadorian border.
Garcia’s statement, however, not only ignores last year’s decision but also dismisses reports from several national institutions that declare the project illegal and in violation of the project’s own environmental plan.
In the lead up to the vote, the Ombudsman’s Office reported that the project was illegal. They cited the company’s lack of the two-thirds approval from assemblies of the two campesino communities on whose land the copper and molybdenum mineral exploration activities would take place, as required by Peruvian law.
In early 2008, the Supervisory Body for Private Investments in Energy and Mines (OSINERGMIN) sanctioned the company for not meeting its environmental commitments to the Ministry of Energy and Mines.
But despite social and environmental red flags, the government has insisted “on radical neoliberal and centralizing policies inevitably [leading] to political polarization and the deepening of social conflicts,” comments Rafael Hoetmer from the Democracy and Global Transformation Program in Lima and one of about two dozen international observers who attended the Piura vote last year.
Stalemate between government and communities
Dialogue broke down between the government and communities after it had just begun. In December 2007, Prime Minister Jorge del Castillo walked out from one of the first meetings with the Front for Sustainable Development on the Northern Border of Peru (FDSFNP) because they wanted the referendum results to be on the agenda.
But the government had already signaled that productive discussions would be difficult. It tried to boycott the referendum and have it declared illegal. It had also signed a stability agreement with the company and included the Rio Blanco Project in a proposed bill to congress designating it and nineteen other mining projects as national priorities. While the bill failed to pass, the conflict continued.
After Castillo walked out, the Front - which represents communities, social organizations and municipalities of Piura as well as potentially affected areas of the neighbouring department of Cajamarca - decided to reaffirm their decision opposing mining and favouring an agricultural-based economy.
In what they called “The March of Sacrifice,” community members walked for six days from the municipality of Ayabaca to the capital of Piura.
“We have been very clear,” Hoetmer wrote, quoting Magdiel Carrión, President of the Provincial Federation of Farmer Communities of Ayabaca (FEPROCCA), “We do not want mining in our communities. It contaminates the water, creates conflicts, and doesn’t even bring us sustainable development.”
“As communities we have our own development model based on farming, ecotourism and our social organization. We have the same rights as the people of Lima and all other Peruvians. Both Peruvian and international law recognises the democratic right of communities to decide their own future.”
The company and criminalization
As part of a broader effort to repress the mining opposition, government and company supporters have criminalized the struggle in Piura.
According to an August report published by the Peruvian Observatory of Mining Conflicts, around 300 people involved in mining conflicts in Piura are currently facing charges. In the most notable case, thirty-five people involved in the promotion or organization of last year’s referendum face allegations of various crimes, including terrorism. According to the Environmental Defender Law Centre (EDLC), the charges have been brought by a “shadowy organization” called the Front of Unity for the Campesino Community of Segunda y Cajas.
"Let’s make no mistake what’s going on here,” comments Lewis Gordon lawyer and director of EDLC, “it’s a politically motivated effort by those who are unhappy about the activities of the leaders and others trying to stop the mine or the mining activities.”
Peruvian critics allege that the Front, whose name refers to one of two peasant farmer communities whose land pertains to the Rio Blanco project, is receiving money from the company and is made up of known company supporters.
The accusations it made were presented as a set of newspaper clippings, which Gordon calls “vague” and “very troubling to the extent that they allege criminal acts, but don’t indicate that the 35 participated or are in anyway connected to those acts other than the fact that those people were part of the anti-mining opposition itself.”
A recent analysis carried out by a group of US and UK lawyers was presented to the Prosecutor responsible for the case and looked at a range of possible charges, including terrorism, based on the facts as they understand them. It concluded that the 35 could not be prosecuted under US or UK criminal law and that prosecuting the individuals based on the current facts would violate international human rights law. Peru has ratified a number of agreements, including the American Convention on Human Rights.
“The real threat of these efforts and the impact they potentially have is to deter people from exercising their rights and to deter a debate on matters of extreme public interest, where everyone should be able to express their views and let the battle of ideas and participation decide the issue, instead of just trying to stop one group from participating in that debate.”
Decreeing collective rights away
A broad array of new legislation passed from January to June 2008 also threatening a more inclusive process pertaining to development in Peru. President Garcia issued over one hundred decrees during this period for the purpose of implementing the new Free Trade Agreement with the US. “At least forty decrees concern issues related to peasant and native communities and natural resources,” reports the UK-based Peru Support Group (PSG).
In part these imply “that the 'prior agreement' of the landowner regarding how property will be used - for instance, for mining - is no longer necessary,” says the bulletin from PSG. “Companies…could develop activities by simply gaining approval of the Ministry for Energy and Mines (MINEM).”
“Peasant communities, or other owners, would therefore no longer decide the fate of their lands.”
In August, indigenous groups led a twelve-day strike in the Peruvian Northern Amazon in protest of these laws. Ulises Garcia observes that their demands “are effectively in defense of the right to consultation,” noting a relationship to the struggle taking place in Piura.
Garcia is the son of Godofredo Garcia Baca, who was assassinated shortly before the first local vote over mining took place in Tambogrande in 2002. Tambogrande is an agro-export area in the lowlands of Piura. He continues to support ecological networks that assisted in the more recent vote in the eastern highlands.
The Amazonian protests concluded when Peru’s Parliament repealed two laws that were, according to Pulsar News Service, seen to be “opening the door for privatization of ancestral territories.” Garcia calls it “a victory for this struggle.”
A peaceful and democratic solution
The conflict in Piura emerged in 2004 and had already led to the deaths of two area residents when the local vote took place. When the decision to call a local vote was taken, community members hoped that a democratic expression of local opinion could provide a peaceful solution.
But at the moment, Garcia says that the situation in Piura has deteriorated. “Both sides are desperate. There is no development and no peace.”
“The communities in particular,” he says, “are in urgent need of legal support.” In addition to the multitude of charges they are facing, communities have also sued the company for usurpation of their lands. But this case is moving along very slowly.
Tension is also rising in other parts of the region, as companies start to reassert their interest in gold mining in places like Tambogrande, where the 2002 vote resulted in 98% rejection of mining, with the participation of 75% of the electorate.
In fact, the Ombudsman’s Office reported in July that mining has contributed to a rising number of socio-environmental conflicts, which have doubled since last year. About sixty mining-related conflicts now exist across Peru.
On a more hopeful note, Garcia adds that groups have been strengthened by the results of the vote and are “demanding respect for their decision in a peaceful manner.” Over the past year, they have also been working on their own processes of participatory development planning.
But, he assesses, they pose a great risk to the Peruvian government and its model of development, possibly beyond its own borders. He says that “recognition of the results,” in reference to similar votes that have taken place in Argentina and Guatemala, “would lead to the possibility of more votes. Not just in Peru, but in all of Latin America.”
Clarification: The Ombudsman's Office did not actually say that the Rio Blanco Project is "illegal." Rather, they said that MEM had not ensured that legal process was followed in establishing the project, and that it endorsed the evaluacion biental when, had due diligence been exercised, it should not have been approved.
Jennifer Moore is an independent Canadian journalist living in Ecuador.
One year ago today, a local vote was held concerning possible mining activity in three highland districts in northwestern Peru. The referendum drew thousands of peasant farmers, many of whom traveled for the best part of a day by horse, truck or on foot to mark their ballot “yes” or “no.”
“We are here to say ‘no’ to this mining project,” said one young woman from the El Carmen de la Frontera district, close to the northern border with Ecuador. “And we would like the government to respect the decisions that we are making here.”
“We are defending our water and land for our children and grandchildren,” she stated, speaking to a film crew from Guarango Cine y Video.
This week, people in the districts of Ayabaca, Pacaipampa and El Carmen de la Frontera are commemorating last year’s impressive results: about 60% of the electorate participated and 94.5% said “no.”
But one year later, the government of President Alan Garcia still refuses to recognize the results.
“There is no reason that this project shouldn’t go through,” said Garcia to members of the Zijin Mining Consortium during his trip to China in March.
Zijin is the major shareholder in Rio Blanco Copper S.A. (formerly Minera Majaz S.A.). UK-based Monterrico Metals also maintains an interest in the project that is hoped to reach production by 2011. It could be the start of a large scale mining district reaching across the Ecuadorian border.
Garcia’s statement, however, not only ignores last year’s decision but also dismisses reports from several national institutions that declare the project illegal and in violation of the project’s own environmental plan.
In the lead up to the vote, the Ombudsman’s Office reported that the project was illegal. They cited the company’s lack of the two-thirds approval from assemblies of the two campesino communities on whose land the copper and molybdenum mineral exploration activities would take place, as required by Peruvian law.
In early 2008, the Supervisory Body for Private Investments in Energy and Mines (OSINERGMIN) sanctioned the company for not meeting its environmental commitments to the Ministry of Energy and Mines.
But despite social and environmental red flags, the government has insisted “on radical neoliberal and centralizing policies inevitably [leading] to political polarization and the deepening of social conflicts,” comments Rafael Hoetmer from the Democracy and Global Transformation Program in Lima and one of about two dozen international observers who attended the Piura vote last year.
Stalemate between government and communities Dialogue broke down between the government and communities after it had just begun. In December 2007, Prime Minister Jorge del Castillo walked out from one of the first meetings with the Front for Sustainable Development on the Northern Border of Peru (FDSFNP) because they wanted the referendum results to be on the agenda.
But the government had already signaled that productive discussions would be difficult. It tried to boycott the referendum and have it declared illegal. It had also signed a stability agreement with the company and included the Rio Blanco Project in a proposed bill to congress designating it and nineteen other mining projects as national priorities. While the bill failed to pass, the conflict continued.
After Castillo walked out, the Front - which represents communities, social organizations and municipalities of Piura as well as potentially affected areas of the neighbouring department of Cajamarca - decided to reaffirm their decision opposing mining and favouring an agricultural-based economy.
In what they called “The March of Sacrifice,” community members walked for six days from the municipality of Ayabaca to the capital of Piura.
“We have been very clear,” Hoetmer wrote, quoting Magdiel Carrión, President of the Provincial Federation of Farmer Communities of Ayabaca (FEPROCCA), “We do not want mining in our communities. It contaminates the water, creates conflicts, and doesn’t even bring us sustainable development.”
“As communities we have our own development model based on farming, ecotourism and our social organization. We have the same rights as the people of Lima and all other Peruvians. Both Peruvian and international law recognises the democratic right of communities to decide their own future.”
The company and criminalizationAs part of a broader effort to repress the mining opposition, government and company supporters have criminalized the struggle in Piura.
According to an August report published by the Peruvian Observatory of Mining Conflicts, around 300 people involved in mining conflicts in Piura are currently facing charges. In the most notable case, thirty-five people involved in the promotion or organization of last year’s referendum face allegations of various crimes, including terrorism. According to the Environmental Defender Law Centre (EDLC), the charges have been brought by a “shadowy organization” called the Front of Unity for the Campesino Community of Segunda y Cajas.
"Let’s make no mistake what’s going on here,” comments Lewis Gordon lawyer and director of EDLC, “it’s a politically motivated effort by those who are unhappy about the activities of the leaders and others trying to stop the mine or the mining activities.”
Peruvian critics allege that the Front, whose name refers to one of two peasant farmer communities whose land pertains to the Rio Blanco project, is receiving money from the company and is made up of known company supporters.
The accusations it made were presented as a set of newspaper clippings, which Gordon calls “vague” and “very troubling to the extent that they allege criminal acts, but don’t indicate that the 35 participated or are in anyway connected to those acts other than the fact that those people were part of the anti-mining opposition itself.”
A recent analysis carried out by a group of US and UK lawyers was presented to the Prosecutor responsible for the case and looked at a range of possible charges, including terrorism, based on the facts as they understand them. It concluded that the 35 could not be prosecuted under US or UK criminal law and that prosecuting the individuals based on the current facts would violate international human rights law. Peru has ratified a number of agreements, including the American Convention on Human Rights.
“The real threat of these efforts and the impact they potentially have is to deter people from exercising their rights and to deter a debate on matters of extreme public interest, where everyone should be able to express their views and let the battle of ideas and participation decide the issue, instead of just trying to stop one group from participating in that debate.”
Decreeing collective rights away
A broad array of new legislation passed from January to June 2008 also threatening a more inclusive process pertaining to development in Peru. President Garcia issued over one hundred decrees during this period for the purpose of implementing the new Free Trade Agreement with the US. “At least forty decrees concern issues related to peasant and native communities and natural resources,” reports the UK-based Peru Support Group (PSG).
In part these imply “that the 'prior agreement' of the landowner regarding how property will be used - for instance, for mining - is no longer necessary,” says the bulletin from PSG. “Companies…could develop activities by simply gaining approval of the Ministry for Energy and Mines (MINEM).”
“Peasant communities, or other owners, would therefore no longer decide the fate of their lands.”
In August, indigenous groups led a twelve-day strike in the Peruvian Northern Amazon in protest of these laws. Ulises Garcia observes that their demands “are effectively in defense of the right to consultation,” noting a relationship to the struggle taking place in Piura.
Garcia is the son of Godofredo Garcia Baca, who was assassinated shortly before the first local vote over mining took place in Tambogrande in 2002. Tambogrande is an agro-export area in the lowlands of Piura. He continues to support ecological networks that assisted in the more recent vote in the eastern highlands.
The Amazonian protests concluded when Peru’s Parliament repealed two laws that were, according to Pulsar News Service, seen to be “opening the door for privatization of ancestral territories.” Garcia calls it “a victory for this struggle.”
A peaceful and democratic solution
The conflict in Piura emerged in 2004 and had already led to the deaths of two area residents when the local vote took place. When the decision to call a local vote was taken, community members hoped that a democratic expression of local opinion could provide a peaceful solution.
But at the moment, Garcia says that the situation in Piura has deteriorated. “Both sides are desperate. There is no development and no peace.”
“The communities in particular,” he says, “are in urgent need of legal support.” In addition to the multitude of charges they are facing, communities have also sued the company for usurpation of their lands. But this case is moving along very slowly.
Tension is also rising in other parts of the region, as companies start to reassert their interest in gold mining in places like Tambogrande, where the 2002 vote resulted in 98% rejection of mining, with the participation of 75% of the electorate.
In fact, the Ombudsman’s Office reported in July that mining has contributed to a rising number of socio-environmental conflicts, which have doubled since last year. About sixty mining-related conflicts now exist across Peru.
On a more hopeful note, Garcia adds that groups have been strengthened by the results of the vote and are “demanding respect for their decision in a peaceful manner.” Over the past year, they have also been working on their own processes of participatory development planning.
But, he assesses, they pose a great risk to the Peruvian government and its model of development, possibly beyond its own borders. He says that “recognition of the results,” in reference to similar votes that have taken place in Argentina and Guatemala, “would lead to the possibility of more votes. Not just in Peru, but in all of Latin America.”
Clarification: The Ombudsman's Office did not actually say that the Rio Blanco Project is "illegal." Rather, they said that MEM had not ensured that legal process was followed in establishing the project, and that it endorsed the evaluacion biental when, had due diligence been exercised, it should not have been approved.
Jennifer Moore is an independent Canadian journalist living in Ecuador.
Monday, September 8, 2008
PERU: Foro del JNE Sobre la Democracia Participativa
JNE realiza foro sobre democracia participativa y partidos en Tarapoto y Moyabamba
Fuente: http://www.andina.com.pe/Espanol/Noticia.aspx?Id=tSJ/i9zim8k=
Lima, ago. 17 (ANDINA).- Con el objetivo de impulsar la participación de jóvenes y la ciudadanía en general en el fortalecimiento del sistema democrático, el Jurado Nacional de Elecciones desarrolló en la región San Martín el foro “Democracia Participativa y Partidos Políticos”.
El evento se realizó el viernes 15 y sábado 16 en las ciudades de Tarapoto y Moyobamba, respectivamente, y fue en coordinación con el Congreso de la República.
Ante una masiva asistencia de estudiantes universitarios y representantes de organizaciones sociales, el integrante del JNE, Ulises Montoya Alberti, hizo hincapié en que la democracia no significa únicamente acudir a las urnas cada cierto tiempo sino utilizar responsablemente los diversos mecanismos que la democracia representativa permite, como la iniciativa de reforma constitucional, la iniciativa legislativa y la revocatoria.
En representación del Congreso, el legislador Aurelio Pastor abordó el tema de los partidos políticos. Dijo que sin ellos no hay democracia, y agregó que el ordenamiento constitucional conspira contra un sistema estructurado de partidos, por lo que consideró necesario impulsar reformas que permitan el fortalecimiento de esas organizaciones.
Los asistentes mostraron un gran interés por los temas que se trataron, lo cual se tradujo en las numerosas interrogantes planteadas a los expositores.
La actividad se concretó como parte del convenio de cooperación interinstitucional firmado entre el Jurado Nacional de Elecciones y el Congreso de la República con el fin de desarrollar programas, talleres, cursos, foros virtuales y eventos educativos referidos a temas como Parlamento, democracia, Estado de derecho, gobernabilidad, participación ciudadana y otros aspectos conexos.
(FIN) NDP/FPQ
Friday, February 22, 2008
Peru: Participatory Monitoring of Mining Royalties
Peruvian law requires that 50% of income taxes paid by mining companies be contributed to regional (25%) and municipal (75%) governments, but communities have not clearly associated mining with potential communal resources. Little information on this has been provided by the municipal governments which have no incentive to disclose such information to the public and therefore these funds have not been used to undertake local development projects. However, a new project is underway that will provide communities with the necessary information to take advantage of these funds, which have been increasing due to a rise in market prices for minerals and higher levels of investment and production, in order to positively impact mining communities. Civil society in Peru is currently being asked to participate in an Independent Monitoring Mechanism which will track municipal management of mining royalties. This effort to involve citizens in the distribution of funds will create transparency in the local government while it fosters individual investment in the well-being of the community. The project has the potential to provoke further participation in the local government as people discover success in controlling public funds. While it is scheduled to last only two years and by the looks of the webpage is somehow connected to the exploitative bureaucracy of the World Bank, citizens should approach this opportunity as a foot in the door that will create inroads to participatory democracy on the local level. -Editor
For more on this specific project and others like it, see:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
