KAIROS Participatory Research with partners on Free, Prior and Informed Consent: CEIBA’s experience in

By: Teresa Sanic and Community Development and Promotion Association (CEIBA) Translation: Camila Rosales Editing Team: John Dillon, Anne O’Brien, Rachel Warden September 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. Introduction...... 3 II. Mining Conflict Background vs. FPIC Point of view...... 4 2.1 Historical conflict: territory control...... 4 2.2 A Peace Agreement used for the development of a few...... 4 2.3 FPIC: Vision and perspective...... 5 2.4 CEIBA’s experience with FPIC...... 7 2.5 Main elements of FPIC according to CEIBA...... 8 2.6 Main challenges in the application of FPIC...... 9 2.7 Principles and practices of sustainable development...... 9 2.8 Alternatives to the extractive development model...... 10 III. Context...... 11 3.1 Extractive activities in the communities that CEIBA accompanies...... 11 3.2 Existing Indigenous protocols...... 11 3.3 Regulations of FPIC...... 13 IV. Responses of Main Mining Activity Actors in Indigenous Communities...... 15 4.1 Community responses to proposed or imposed mining concessions and licenses...... 15 4.2 Strategies for acknowledgement of Indigenous models of FPIC and peoples’ self-determination...... 15 4.3 Government responses...... 16 4.4. Responses from mining extraction companies...... 17 V. Impacts...... 18 5.1 Impact of exploration concessions and mining projects...... 18 5.2 Impact of community responses...... 22 VI. Canadian Connection...... 23 6.1 Canada’s connection with mining extraction projects...... 23 6.2 Role of the Canadian Government...... 23 6.3 CEIBA’s message to Canadians...... 24 VII. Recommendations...... 26 References...... 27 Annex 1...... 28 List of community, Good Faith and municipal consultations held in Guatemala up to April 2014 Annex 2...... 30 Maps of Mining Concessions

2 KAIROS Participatory Research with partners on Free, Prior and Informed Consent: CEIBA’s experience in Guatemala l.

Introduction Unidad Campesina) and CEIBA, 2) Context. This section aims and international leaders from to describe the economic, Systematization of Free, , Spain and Argentina political and social state of Prior and Informed shared their experiences. the country and the promotion of mining Consent CEIBA has overseen this process extraction projects through since 2006 when the first five Case Study/Partner’s exploration and mining community consultations were licences which impact Testimonies organized simultaneously in the communities accompanied Department of . This investigation is based on by CEIBA and a legal Information and awareness a synthesis of documentation framework that protects FPIC. campaigns were held to address and interviews with a number the impacts of mining activity of individuals and organizations 3) This section reports on on Indigenous territory and the in Guatemala. These include community responses to growing practice of treating the members of Community the impact of megaprojects the leaders who defended the Development and Promotion and the responses of the land as criminals. KAIROS has (CEIBA), the Peoples’ Assembly different actors involved in supported these actions and this of Huehuetenango (ADH), the this process. study has been developed as a Committee for Life and Peace part of the KAIROS Participatory in the Defense of Natural 4) This section sets out the Research Project, with the Resources of San Rafael, the positive and negative objective of documenting Free, mayor of Mataquescuintla impacts of the exploration Prior and Informed Consent and community leaders in and mining license (FPIC) as a process of self- San Rafael La Flores, Xalapan concessions. determination, analyzing the and Mataquescuintla. impacts of mining from different 5) Canadian connection. Documentation developed perspectives and identifying This section describes the by various national and connections with Canada. international organizations was role of Canadian citizens, the Government of Canada also used, as well as information The content is divided into six parts: generated by state institutions and Canadian companies 1) Mining Conflict Background. such as the Ministry of Energy that are mining in This section presents a brief and Mines of Guatemala. Guatemala, as well as CEIBA’s analysis of the elements message to these citizens, Further clarity on the which have caused the governments and investors. consultation process was conflict; the perspective developed through a of FPIC; CEIBA’s experience 6) Recommendations. participatory reflective and the challenges of This section details workshop organized by applying FPIC; and recommendations directed Oxfam America. A number of Indigenous development towards the government Guatemalan organizations, alternatives from the of Guatemala, the such as CALAS (Centro de government of Canada, Accion Legal y Ambiental de and the of San and citizens of both Guatemala), CUC (Comite de Rafael Las Flores, Santa Rosa. countries.

© KAIROS Canada, September 2014 3 ll.

Mining Conflict the demands of international institutional process of liberal markets, shifted the economy democracy, and the negotiation Background vs. from one based on the export and signing of the Peace The FPIC Vision of traditional and agricultural Agreements in December 1996. Guatemalan products, such as It was during this period that , rubber and bananas, the legislative and institutional 2.1 to one based on financial framework enabling the Historical conflict: accumulation and speculation. privatization of the generation territorial control1 This was accomplished through and commercialization of such means as: electricity and the current The social conflicts in Guatemala Mining Law were put in place. are the result of several a) the liberalization of markets; structural issues embedded in This new model was b) the privatization and the history of the country. One developed in the areas control of basic services of these issues is the power that were most affected such as electric energy and that certain economic and by the counterinsurgency telecommunications; political groups have wielded operations. The human and over the majority of the mostly c) the construction of psychological impact and the Indigenous population, resulting infrastructure megaprojects social destabilization that these in domination and territorial such as highways, ports and campaigns caused, along with control. airports; the endemic poverty in the area, were key in facilitating and The Guatemalan society of d) the extraction of natural implementing this new model. today was built on repression resources such as oil, and violent strategies including mining and forests, the occupation of territories, including the ; natural resource extraction 2.2 and the displacement of e) the creation of huge tracts A Peace Agreement used for communities. For centuries, of land in order to cultivate the development of a few Indigenous territory, essential such products as African to the survival and identity of palm, sugar and pine nuts In 1996, as the Peace these peoples, has been the for large-scale industrial oil Agreements were being focus of the powerful sectors and agro-fuel production. signed, the institutionalization of Guatemalan society in order of neoliberalism began. This to guarantee their ongoing This accumulative model began included changes to the accumulation of capital and in the 1980s, when structural constitution, privatization of consolidate their domination. changes were implemented basic services, multilateral along with the repressive agreements with banks, In the last decade, the political and genocidal campaigns led reforms to the Mining, Maquila and economic oligarchy of by the counterinsurgency. and Investment Laws, bank the country, in response to It was solidified during the rationalization and negotiating

1 “Territorios indígenas y democracia guatemalteca bajo presiones” in El Observador Análisis Alternativo sobre Política y Economía de Guatemala Magazine. Pages 4-5.

4 KAIROS Participatory Research with partners on Free, Prior and Informed Consent: CEIBA’s experience in Guatemala In Sipakapa, San Marcos, Fausto and Pedro lay the groundwork for new coffee plantations. The municipality of Sipakapa started a organic coffee cooperative in 2009. The community organized a referendum where 98.5% of the community said no to mining because it hreatened their water supplies and farm lands. | Photo credit: Allan Lissner the Free Trade Agreements. All groups. Government policies of this constituted the multiple are focused on attracting 2.3 dimensions of building post-war international investment in FPIC: Vision and Guatemala: social and political key sectors such as maquilas, perspective stability, with a neoliberal call centers, mining, hydro Community consultations stance and open to foreign resources, tourism and represent social licenses, a investment, paving the way to infrastructure. This is reflected means of resistance and the modern times. in the implementation defense of the territory. They of programs such as Plan More than 350 mining are a legitimate means of Nacional de Competitividad concessions have been democratic participation. They (PRONACOM), Plan Visión País granted to national and are a response to the violation transnational companies. Some or Invest In Guatemala. and “invisibilization” of the rights 40 hydroelectric projects with of Indigenous peoples within an The State ensures the legal reduced State participation exclusionary state, dominated framework and institutions that are waiting for approval. The by a powerful minority. favour investments, as well as budget for the Ministry of the intervention of national and Energy and Mines was reduced Community consultations are transnational capital, linking from 126 million quetzales meant to enforce rights such as: development to business while (Guatemala’s currency) in 2013, criminalizing all opposition and a) The right to self- to 91 million in 2014 (Gamarro, social resistance by peoples determination. This right 2013). This Ministry has one of and their communities. This is recognizes that a the smallest budgets, indicating community can decide its its role in the state – one that done through the repressive own governance and is weak, that readily hands intervention of security direct its own economic, concessions to the private apparatuses, openly violating political, social, cultural and sector and delegates the international agreements that environmental responsibilities of development validate human rights and the development, without to companies. mechanisms that defend them. intervention. This is As a result of the State’s Nevertheless, there is emerging stipulated in the limited capacity to assume any an international consensus Constitution of the Republic responsibility for the welfare that companies looking to of Guatemala; in of the people in rural areas, proceed with megaprojects international agreements all projects related to health and other kinds of initiatives on such as Convention 169 and education are left in the Indigenous territory must also of the International hands of private economic secure a social license. Labour Organization

© KAIROS Canada, September 2014 5 (ILO), ratified in 1999; the Informed Consent is community consultation, held United Nations Declaration essential for establishing in Sipakapa, San Marcos, in on the Rights of Indigenous acceptable conditions and 2005, have become proposals/ Peoples, International criteria for negotiating with principles for structural Human Rights Pacts and the State, particularly and changes. These include: international resolutions, above all regarding issues as well as the Agreement concerning land and • Indigenous peoples’ on Identity and Rights of the way of life of our autonomy; Indigenous People, signed people” (Carmen, 2008). • exercising ancestral in 1996. participatory democracy; FPIC is ratified in international b) Right to the land/territory. laws including, among others, • establishing self- This is one of the the XXIII General Declaration of governance; fundamental pillars of the United Nations Convention international law. on the Elimination of All • recognizing social, Indigenous communities Forms of Racial Discrimination economic, political, are redefining the (CERD); the Action Program of environmental, territorial concept of territory, shifting the General Assembly of the and cultural sovereignty; it towards a fundamental United Nations for the Second right of Indigenous International Decade of the • establishing a Communal peoples, not as property World’s Indigenous People; Right State rather than for commercial exchange, and ILO Convention 169. In a private one (redefining but a space where Guatemala, this is reinforced “common good”); culture, natural resources, by the Municipal Code of • organizing local power and communities with Guatemala, the Decentralization through community and identities and Law and the Municipal ancestral authorities; organizational structures Development Council Law. come together. As the • reconfiguring of Indigenous Mayan communities in The Sacred Book of the Maya, peoples such as the Mam, Guatemala put it: it includes Pop Vuh, recognizes consensus Kich’e, Xinca as well as rivers, lakes, ocean, earth, as a decision-making process. Mestizos; renewable and non- Consultation is, therefore, not renewable resources, a new practice, but one that is • establishing areas free of people, air, flora and fauna. rooted in ancestral practices. In megaprojects fact, the principles of consent (hydroelectric, mineral c) Right to Free, Prior, and were also applied when asking extraction, monoculture, Informed Consent. “This is a permission from the plants, etc.) in the Huista, Kanjobal basic and fundamental animals, minerals, rocks, and Mam regions; element of the Indigenous water and spirits before using peoples’ capacity to the land, harvesting food or • creating the Kanjobalano sign and execute Treaties medicines, digging the earth, Council that brings and Conventions, to hunting or fishing for eating together Zapatecos, Chujes, exercise sovereignty and or ceremonial purposes. This is Popt’is and Q’anjobales for protect our land and why Free, Prior and Informed the Defense of Territory natural resources, and to Consent is required in order and Life, committees for participate and create to obtain permission before life and peace and in processes that repair initiating actions that could defense of the natural violations against the affect the lives of others. resources in Jalapa, earth and the rights San Rafael las Flores, stipulated in treaties. The approaches and proposals Mataquescuintla, Casillas, The right to Free, Prior and that arose from the first and others;

6 KAIROS Participatory Research with partners on Free, Prior and Informed Consent: CEIBA’s experience in Guatemala The Candelaria brothers work on the family farm in San Miguel Ixtahuacan, San Marcos. | Photo credit: Allan Lissner

• creating strategies around (including good faith, municipal part, the resources to hold land appropriation that and community member the consultations come from ensure collective consultations) have been the same communities where ownership, recognizing that advanced by the communities they are held. They have been there are Indigenous and, in some cases, supported self-managed, and they use peoples who have by the municipal mayors. ancestral community practices. legitimately owned land They also reflect the different for thousands of years. organizational and participatory The engagement of different structures of the communities. sectors and organizations at the community, municipal and 2.4 In San Juan Atitán, regional levels has been key for CEIBA’s experience Huehuetenango, for example, the success of the consultations. with FPIC the mayor supported Some of these include transportation for observers Mayan, Xinca and Mestizo CEIBA has indirectly from other communities. In authorities, the campesinos, participated in 28 community San Sebastián, with no support women, children, youth, consultations held in good from the mayor, the people NGOs, universities, municipal 2 faith in Huehuetenango, formed committees (logistics, governments, religious entities, supported by national and education, transportation, teachers and the Community international observers. They communication) and held a very Development Councils have resulted in the distribution successful consultation. Each (COCODES, in Guatemala). of information about FPIC and person donated two Quetzal mining in Guatemala and other for transportation and food for FPIC has had a domino countries on the internet and the national and international effect in Guatemala, as well through community radio observers who witnessed the as in areas right across the stations. The consultations3 consultation. For the most border. Consultations began

2 Consultations held in Good Faith are regulated by ILO Convention 169, as well as being traditional Indigenous practices. 3 Municipal Consultations: regulated by the Municipal Code, they can be held if 10% of the enumerated population requests the Mayor to consult regarding issues pertaining to the specific Municipality.

© KAIROS Canada, September 2014 7 Marlin Mine, owned by Goldcorp Inc., San Miguel Ixtahuacan, San Marcos . | Photo credit: Rachel Warden in San Marcos (SIPAKAPA and organizations such as the includes community radio. ) and Zacapa (Río Huehuetenango Peoples This has informed the Hondo). Others were held in July Assembly and the National migrant population, as 2006 in Huehuetenango, the first Struggle Front, which are well as audiences in five simultaneous consultations political and organizational Canada and the United of the . In March spaces for developing States, of the experiences 2014, 78 consultations had actions to defend life on with the consultations. been held all over the country, the territories and to and two were held by migrant present alternative • While the consultations Maya Quiché people from the proposals to extraction . were initially held to decide Department of Totonicapán, if a mining project was residing in Los Angeles, • These structues are accepted or not, they California (see Annex 1). inclusive and democratic. have expanded and now Different age groups, are also held to make community actors, decisions regarding 2.5 observers, migrants and any kind of natural Main elements of FPIC national and international resource exploitation according to CEIBA institutions participate. including megaprojects, hydroelectric dams and There are several common and • The consultations are monocultures. essential elements of FPIC: ratified and validated by national and international • Consultations are not • Free, Prior, and Informed observers. imposed. They are a Consent is achieved community initiative, through methods pertinent • The process has facilitated from where the proposal to, and agreed on, by the collecting the experiences is put forward to the different communities. of each community municipal governments. consultation in a way that • Each territory and informs the general • Mayan communities community has a population. decide on appropriate permanent committee that dates for consultations maintains active • There has been active according to the Mayan participation in other media coverage which calendar. The anniversary of

8 KAIROS Participatory Research with partners on Free, Prior and Informed Consent: CEIBA’s experience in Guatemala the consultations is Community. Achieving unity development,” is in reality celebrated every year. and organization within the ancestral wisdom. Victor Sales, community remains a challenge currently a coordinator of • In the Mayan and Xinca when it comes to defending the ADH (Peoples’ Assembly worldview, life is considered the land and human rights. The of Huehuetenango), states: a part of nature, and no results will be more positive if “Ancestral knowledge is the being is considered the awareness and information starting point. We have learned superior to another. Mother campaigns are constant before how to struggle and live, we Earth is a living organism and after each consultation, in know the earth, what it produces that provides food, air, rural as well as urban areas. and what our strengths are, water, fire, and forests for all what we are capable of, we do living beings to live well. It is also important that both not talk about appropriating mainstream and community all the resources that there are media are within the reach and and concentrating them in a 2.6 the service of the communities person or a company. A way Main challenges in the and that there is a bilateral of life has been imposed on us application of FPIC flow of information from the that we do not want because it communities to the media and There have been numerous has not been informed by this. vice versa. challenges from the many Capitalists always think of interest groups involved in the National and transnational and , but the people think of consultations. companies. Community agriculture, community tourism, resistance to the systematic a community development State. The key challenge has attacks perpetuated by the model that fits with the climate in been in ensuring adherence national and transnational which we live including organic to the principles of the companies (supported by the agriculture and alternatives to consultations: free, prior and government) against leaders and commercialization. This has been informed. The government defenders of the land needs to our way of life for thousands of has the duty to inform the be strengthened. These attacks years.” communities about positive cause divisions, internal conflict These ways of life have protected and negative social impacts and dislocation, amongst (health, education and housing); food sovereignty and the other things. It is necessary to environment, through heirloom economic factors (cost and avoid the damages that are benefit for the state, companies, seed banks, agro-ecological caused by resource extraction, practices for cultivating and , communities and megaprojects and monocultures livestock management, localized families, budgets for the projects and the plunder of natural, food consumption, and forest and final destination of the non-renewable resources. All conservation. products); and environmental injustices, such as the fact that and cultural impacts of mining the mining companies pay only Guatemala’s development has and oil extraction mega 1% royalties to the country, must been based on agriculture projects. It is important for be denounced. which makes up 13.6% of the these decisions to be respected, Gross Domestic Product4 and, and the self-determination according to the National and sovereignty of the Maya, 2.7 Statistics Institute (INE), employs Xinca and Mestizo people to Principles and practices of 37% of the workforce. The more be asserted. Unfortunately, sustainable development than two million people that are since these decisions are not It is important to understand directly employed, are located considered legally binding, they that what is known in developed in rural areas where Indigenous are not respected. countries as “alternatives for peoples are concentrated,

4 Gross Domestic Product, 2001 database, Bank of Guatemala.

© KAIROS Canada, September 2014 9 Agroecology workshop. Making organic fertilizer in the community of Palugua . | Photo credit: CEIBA living in conditions of extreme corn, beans and vegetables change, food sovereignty, poverty and high levels of food (mainly tomato) and trading in sustainable local development insecurity. nearby villages, as well as in El and other topics have been Salvador and Honduras. held in order to empower the Alternative development people of the communities and proposals are related to Development is more local in strengthen their capacity to agricultural and forestry Huehuetenango, due to the affect decision making. activities, artisanal production smaller portions of land that are as well as tourism that is available. However, corn, beans, responsible and respectful coffee, vegetables, medicinal 2.8 of the local culture and the plants and livestock are available, Alternatives to the environment. At the same time, depending on the climate and extractive development Indigenous communities are the area. Most of the production model aware that they should improve is for self-consumption, and any There is no consensus in agricultural practices and surplus products are sold in local Guatemala as to the solutions to create a qualified workforce, markets, where the ecotourism these problems. Some solutions working with the government, and craft sale is also taken that are being debated are development institutions and advantage of. the nationalization of the the companies that support mines, or a redistribution of their way of life. It is important to understand the royalties. A few campesino that urban areas depend on the organizations such as CONIC There are real alternatives food produced in rural areas. propose raising the royalty to development, such as Any decrease in production rate to 35%, and distributing the example of San Juan related to the presence of 15% to the municipalities and Sacatepequez where a cement mining companies and land 20% for the state. The current company has been installed appropriation, pollution of government proposes an with Dutch capital and there water and soil, and increases increase in voluntary royalties. is currently a thriving practice in illnesses, affects the food The alternative that would be for the cultivation of roses for sovereignty of the communities put in place, if the decisions export. In the Municipalities as well as the cities. made by the communities of San Rafael, Santa Rosa and were respected, would include Mataquescuintla, Jalapa, where CEIBA, along with some equitable land distribution and the Canadian-owned San Rafael municipalities, supports environmentally responsible Mining Company operates, the ecological agro-forestry agricultural production, along people have lived for many production. Several educational with forest management, years off the cultivation of coffee, workshops related to climate artisanal production and tourism.

10 KAIROS Participatory Research with partners on Free, Prior and Informed Consent: CEIBA’s experience in Guatemala lll. Context resolutions and regulations that establishes that Development are related to FPIC. is an inalienable human right and that all human beings 5 a) International Conventions and all peoples are entitled to 3.1 The norms related to human participate, contribute and enjoy Extraction activities in rights have been developed economic, social, cultural, and the communities CEIBA along with Indigenous political development in which accompanies Peoples rights (land and fundamental human rights and natural resources, the right CEIBA has presence in the freedoms can be exercised. It is to self-governance) and Huehuetenango, Retalhuleu and implicit that self-determination based on Convention 169 on Sololá departments. According is a part of this, including rights Indigenous and Tribal Peoples to the Ministry of Energy and and sovereignty over the natural of the International Labour Mines, in Huehuetenango, resources and wealth. Organization.6 Convention 169 there are seven mining licenses was ratified by Guatemala in The duty to consult is also for exploration as well as 20 1996 and become active in 1997. found in other international extraction licenses, with 44 treaties which Guatemala requests for explorations licenses It is also important to indicate has signed on to, such as the being processed. All of these that ILO Convention 169 International Convention on are for metallic minerals. The is internally validated in the Elimination of All Forms of following list details the most Guatemala by Article 46 of Racial Discrimination (CERD), important licenses that have the Political Constitution of the International Covenant been granted for exploration, Guatemala, Decrees 9-96 of the on Civil and Political Rights, extraction and surveying in Congress of the Republic and the International Covenant on the areas where CEIBA works, the opinions contained in files Economic, Social and Cultural as well as those that have a 199-95 of the Constitutional Rights, and the American relationship with the Minera Court. Guatemala also voted Convention on Human Rights. Montana Exploration Company, in favor of the UN Declaration This duty to consult is according a subsidiary of Goldcorp on the Rights of Indigenous to the interpretation given Transnational Inc. (See Annex 2: Peoples (a resolution that was by the supervising entities, Map of license locations.) later approved on September including the Inter-American 13, 2007, by the UN General Court of Human Rights and the 3.2 Assembly), and played a key Experts Commission on the Existing Indigenous role in its development. Both Application of ILO Conventions protocols legislative pieces establish the and Recommendations State’s duty to consult. (specifically for Convention 169). The framework that regulates the consultations is both The same UN General Assembly Therefore, the Guatemalan national and international. also approved the Declaration State has the duty to consult What follows is a description on the Right to Development, in Indigenous peoples around all of the laws, conventions, resolution 41/28. The first article legislative and administrative

5 Instituto Centroamericano de Estudios Fiscales (ICEFI). Minería en Guatemala: realidad y desafíos frente a la Democracia y el Desarrollo. 2014. Pages 19-20 6 Onwards Convention 169

© KAIROS Canada, September 2014 11 Chart 1 Important Mining Concessions in CEIBA coverage areas

Name Registry Square Type of License Holder Date Mineral Municipality (s) Department (s) Kilometres License Granted

ATACAMA LEXT-509 1.0000 Extraction Industriales 20/10/2004 Sandstone Santiago Huehuetenango Santorini, S.A. Chimaltenango El LEXT-207 2.0607 Extraction Juan Marco Antonio 02/06/1999 Lead, , silver Nentón Huehuetenango Sacramento Díaz Alva Cantzela LEXR- 57.5334 Exploration María Isabel Farnel 02/02/2006 Gold, silver, , nickel, , Aguacatán, Huehuetenango 021-05 de Obrist chrome, lead, and zinc Huehuetenango and San Rafael II LEXR-811 22.0000 Exploration Montana 11/12/2003 Gold,, silver, copper, lead Tectitan, Tacana, San Huehuetenango Exploradora de and zinc José and Ojetenam and San Marcos Guatemala, S.A. ANABELLA CT-007 2.4545 Extraction Minas de 01/11/1997 Polymetallics San Ildelfonso Huehuetenango Guatemala, S.A. Ixtahuacán and San Cristobal MT-0222 0.3 Extraction Jorge Raul, Marco 28/10/1993 Lead San Juan Atitán Huehuetenango Antonio, Luis Ro- berto and Francisco Ricardo all of whom have the following surnames: Diaz Alva y Marta Jul San Rafael III LEXR- 22 Exploration Montana 16/04/2008 Gold, silver, nickel, cobalt, Tectitán and Tacana Huehuetenango 034-06 Exploradora de chrome, copper, lead, zinc, y San Marcos Guatemala, S.A. antimony and rare Earths ORBITA LEXR-905 1.33 Exploration Lori A. Walton 06/05/2005 Lead, zinc, copper, gold, San Sebastián Huehuetenango silver, gallium, germanium, Huehuetenango antimony, rare Earths, marble and serpentine SATURNO II LEX-032- 24.2154 Exploration Montana 23/09/2006 Gold, silver, argentite, galena, San Sebastián Huehuetenango 05 Exploradora de cerussite, lead, smithsonite, Huehuetenango, Guatemala, S.A. blende, hemimorphite, zinc, Chiantla, Huehu- chalcopyrite, copper, etenango and Santa antimonite, antimony, Barbara pentlandite, nickel Casiopea II LEXR-907 11 Exploration Montana 28/02/2008 Gold and silver , San Marcos, Exploradora de Malacatancito and Huehuetenango Guatemala, S.A. San Carlos Sija and Quetzaltenango La ET-056 4.49 Extraction Josefina Granados 18/05/1978 Lead and silver Nentón Huehuetenango providencia widow of Tello ISA No. 1 LR-004- 2492.0655 Reconnais- Firecreek Resources, 07/04/2010 Rare Earths, wolframite, cobalt, Adjoins several Retalhuleu 08 sance S.A. chromite, hematite, zircon, departments ilmenite, magnetite, rutile, nickel, monazite, cassiterite, sand and gravel

Source: Chart made by CEIBA based on data obtained from Mining Rights in Guatemala, Ministry of Energy and Mines. February 2014.

12 KAIROS Participatory Research with partners on Free, Prior and Informed Consent: CEIBA’s experience in Guatemala measures that directly affect been ratified by Guatemala. them including on development Moreover, in a proceeding 3.3 projects, infrastructure number 199-9, dated May 18, Regulations of FPIC investment, exploration or 1995, the Constitutional Court In Iximulew-Guatemala, the good extraction of natural resources states that Convention 169 does faith consultations and their on their territories that might not contradict what is in the regulations follow the ancestral directly or indirectly affect them Constitution and complements practices of Mayan communities. and their rights (Articles 6 and the programs laid out in articles According to Guatemalan 15.2 of ILO Convention 169; 66, 67, 68 and 69. Therefore, it judicial pluralism, consultations articles 19 and 32.2 of the UN consolidates the values of the have always been active in the Declaration on the Rights of constitutional text. communities, and the decisions Indigenous Peoples). are legitimized by information, The Agreement on Identity dialogue, and consensus. This b) National legislation and Rights of Indigenous is what is known as Free, Prior framework for Indigenous Peoples, which was signed and Informed Consent in human Peoples consultations in 1995 during the peace rights language. The state’s obligation to talks that ended the armed consult Indigenous Peoples is conflict, was constituted as Judicial pluralism is not apparent in the Political a State commitment by way acknowledged in the Municipal Constitution of the Republic of Decree 52- 2005 of the Code. Article 2 states that of Guatemala. Rather it Congress. It provides the legal the Municipality is the basic incorporates a limited and institutional reforms that territorial unit of the State, recognition of the ways of guarantee active participation characterized by permanent life, culture and lands of the of Indigenous organization multi-ethnic, pluri-cultural and communities - Indigenous or representatives, including multi-linguistic relationships, ethnic groups, as they are called. in setting the framework for which are all organized to serve everyone’s best interest. There have been few mechanisms of consultation developments regarding in cases of legislative or The consultations are an constitutional precepts and administrative measures that ancestral practice as evidenced legislation that would regulate may affect them. in the scared book Popol Vuh, Indigenous issues. There are, It also commits the government where there are references to however, laws applicable to all to approving or promoting (in the idea of an Elder’s Council. of the population that stipulate cases involving the legislative Consultations are held to make the duty to consult, such as decisions of all kinds, from organism) all measures that Article 26 of the Rural and Urban domestic to community issues, allow ownership, use and Development Councils Law, such as the implementation of administration of natural Decree 11-2002, and Article 65 the Maya Community Justice resources, in order to strengthen of the Municipal Code, Decree system, collective use of natural Indigenous peoples collective 12-2002, which mandates resources, days for sowing corn rights over their land and consultations for communities and other issues. natural resources. It specifies or Indigenous authorities as a the obligation to obtain the general requirement. There is no specific legislation approval of Indigenous peoples approved for the country. The Constitution, in Article 46, before moving forward with any During Álvaro Colón’s also establishes that internal project that might affect the government, an attempt was law is subject to treaties and survival and ways of life of the made to promote a consultation conventions that have communities.7 law. These efforts however,

7 Government of Guatemala and Guatemalan National Revolutionary Unity (1995). Acuerdo sobre Identidad y Derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas. México, D. F., March 1995. P. 11.

© KAIROS Canada, September 2014 13 Top: March in San Jose del Golfo; | Photo credit: CEIBA Above left: Consultation in Cajola; | Photo credit: CEIBA Above right: Demonstration in support of community consultations | Photo credit: CEIBA faded once an appeal was made of the communities. According except for the case of the in the Constitutional Court on to this, each community forms a Municipal Consultation of April 25, 2011, on behalf of consultation committee, which Mataquescuintla, Jalapa several municipalities where meets with the municipality Department, when it endorsed previous consultations were to develop the rules and the consultation results of invalidated by this new law. regulations for holding a November 2012 and the law in consultation in good faith. Article 6 of the Convention December 2013. To this date, 169, as well as Articles 65 and Although several municipalities however, no consultation has 66 of the Municipal Code, and have attempted to validate been considered legally the UNDRIP all establish that this law, most of the responses binding because mining community consultations should from the Constitutional extraction is considered to be held respecting the criteria Court have been negative be of national interest.8

8 Carlos Estuardo Loarca Solórzano, Guatemalan, Bachelor of Legal and Social Sciences. Consultant for the Defenders of the Environment Legal Center for the V Mesoamerican REDLAR Encuentro in Boquete, Panama April 22-25, 2009. http://www.edlc.org/es/

14 KAIROS Participatory Research with partners on Free, Prior and Informed Consent: CEIBA’s experience in Guatemala lV.

Responses of as well as representatives of the of San Jose del Golfo and Ministries of Energy and Mines, San Pedro Ayampuc, have Main Mining Environment, and the Presidency. set up permanent camps in Activity Actors the location of resistance The Special Rapporteur on in Indigenous movement known as“La the Rights of Indigenous Puya” and communities have Communities Peoples was made aware of occupied private lands in San the violations of the rights of Rafael Las Flores, Santa Rosa to Guatemalan communities. In demonstrate their resistance. March 2012, a constitutional 4.1 appeal against the Mining Law Community responses was filed in the Supreme Court 4.2 to proposed or imposed on the grounds that the State Strategies for mining concessions and does not guarantee, nor does acknowledging licenses it respect, the right to FPIC Indigenous models outlined in Convention 169. Between 2005 and 2014, 78 of FPIC and peoples’ community consultations A lawsuit that lasted for over self-determination have been held where mining six years against the State of The specific goals of achieving exploration, extraction and Guatemala and the extraction recognition for the Indigenous megaprojects were either a in the Marlin Mine, property models of consultations are possibility or a reality. Over two of Goldcorp Inc. began in the respect for the right to Free, Prior million people from different Inter-American Commission on and Informed Consent, self- municipalities have participated Human Rights (IACHR) and was determination, and sovereignty in these consultations. Data accepted in the Inter American of the people. As a result, some varies because each consultation Court on Human Rights which municipalities and regions have has different modalities issued precautionary measures, been declared free of mining determined by the traditions of ordering the suspension of and megaprojects, rejecting the each community. (see Annex 1 extractive activities. This “development” model offered by for a list of consultations). was later modified in the companies. December 2011.9 The results of these consultations Movements against mining and have been brought forward Affected communities have megaprojects have expanded to legislative bodies , but have initiated different attempts and generated resistance, not yet received any positive at resistance. The people of in spite of the information responses from those who Huehuetenango, San Juan and efforts made by mining should be representing the Sacatepequez and Cobán Alta companies, mainstream media people. There have been several Verapaz marched all the way and the government to weaken attempts at dialogue with the to the capital city. Community them. Civil society organizations government and local authorities highways have been blockaded have experienced qualitative such as mayors and governors, in the Barillas. Municipalities and quantitative growth.

9 But in late December of 2011 the IACHR, bowing to political pressure, rescinded its call to suspend operations. Nevertheless it continued to call on the Guatemalan government to ensure an adequate supply of uncontaminated water for domestic and agriculture uses for 18 communities in the two municipalities where the Marlin mine is located.

© KAIROS Canada, September 2014 15 Another strategic aspect of this interest for implementing the of the Santa Rosa is the regional and pluri-national alternatives proposed Departments. articulation of movements by social movements and into broader alliances such as communities, preferring an b) In May 2013, a state of siege10 was declared in the the Mesoamerican Movement extractive development Mataquescuintla and Jalapa Against Mining Extraction model; Municipalities of the Jalapa (M4), which includes southern b) creating a legal framework Department, and the , Guatemala, El Salvador that facilitates natural Casillas and San Rafael and Honduras. resource extraction; Las Flores Municipalities Attempts to shake things up of the Santa Rosa c) disregarding the decisions Department because these on the legal front have also of the community areas were not in favour of been made. Petitions for the consultations held in good the San Rafael Mining revocation and annulment of faith; national mining laws looking Company, subsidiary to forbid highly contaminating d) disregarding and violating of Tahoe Resources Inc. extractive activities and human rights and using In May 2012, a state of siege megaprojects that would affect state institutions to protect was declared in the Barillas various communities have transnational and national Municipality, provoked debate and analysis extractive mining company Huehuetenango, due to the in the UN around issues of property; protests against the Hidro Indigenous self-determination Santa Cruz hydroelectric e) criminalizing, persecuting and whether or not the plant. and remilitarizing social consultations are legally binding. protest. c) The rise of social protest has motivated the The redefinition of certain The consequences of these terms, such as common government to decrease responses by governments state budgets for social good, territory, natural asset, at the state and federal level democratic and participatory programs (health, can be seen in the following education, recreation, food, process, autonomy, historic examples: community organization, is etc.) and increase the budget assigned for the strategic for understanding a) Six military detachments Ministry of the Interior and Indigenous models of have been deployed to the the Army. development as well as for Huehuetenango promoting alternative life Department; one military d) The conflict has caused philosophies such as “Buen Vivir,” base has been set up in divisions in the communities. or Living Well. Malacatan, San Marcos; one military detachment is e) Municipal governments, in the San Juan such as San Rafael Las 4.3 Sacatepequez Municipality; Flores in Santa Rosa, have Government responses five detachments are in the refused to hold Municipal Governments have supported Mataquescuintla and Jalapa Consultations in spite of mining activities and Municipalities of the Jalapa the fact that all megaprojects in a variety of ways: departments and San requirements for a Rafael Las Flores y Casillas consultation to be held at a) showing little or no political

10 “The State of siege is a state of extreme emergency and it is declared in situations when there are serious disruptions to the peace or public security, such as an armed conflict or a civil war. It is equivalent to a state of war, without the armed assault from outside of the border. Therefore, it implies that military forces rather than police forces, will be mobilized for repressive purposes. It also suppresses fundamental civil rights. Under the State of Siege, military authorities may (1) intervene and dissolve any organization, group, entity or association, with or without personali- dad jurídica, without prior warning; (2) arrest and incarcerate, without previous trial, any person that is suspicious of conspiring against the government, disrupting the peace, or fostering these actions; and (3) repell or repress, by any defensive or offensive means necessary, any individual or collective action that goes against the measures taken to re-establish normal public order.” (Editorial, El Periódico. 2013).

16 KAIROS Participatory Research with partners on Free, Prior and Informed Consent: CEIBA’s experience in Guatemala Left: Eight-year old Lisandro has itchy rashes all over his body which first appeared about four years earlier when the mine started operations. | Photo credit: Allan Lissner Right: “Since the company came we have diseases, before we didn’t have anything like this,” says Irma, whose daughter Yahira has itchy rashes all over her body. “Before the children were all healthy. Not any more!” | Photo credit: Allan Lissner

the request of the opportunities. They map out US$460 dollars per manzana community as stipulated by actors and key people to create (1.72 acres or 6,961 m2) and for the Municipal Code, have strategies in order to overcome US$130 dollars per manzana in been complied with. any barriers that might impede San Rafael Las Rosas. them reaching their objectives. f) Some municipalities, acting Community resistance has They enter communities on the awareness of the caused the companies and promising false “development,” social, environmental, the government to impose jobs, promotion of community economic and cultural their presence, causing and municipal economies, and damages that would be internal conflicts when pro- large incomes in return for caused by mining mining people, foreign to the mining extraction. industries, have followed community, disparage existing through with their duties Assuring that environmental social structures, criminalize of promoting community damage will be minimal, the and persecute community leaders, and discredit ancestral consultations. companies take advantage knowledge and community of the extreme poverty of development models. Guatemala and the vulnerability 4.4 of the population which makes Responses from mining Mining companies launch it easy to buy people off and extraction companies propaganda campaigns purchase land where there to improve their image, The mining companies are non-renewable resources. highlighting their view of carry out diagnostic studies In the San Miguel Ixtahuacan “development,” omitting the before beginning their Municipality for example, the reality of the effects of mining projects to assess strengths, Marlin Mining Company bought on the environment and human weaknesses, vulnerabilities and land from the people of the health in the short, medium and community for approximately long term.

© KAIROS Canada, September 2014 17 V.

Impacts of time and forced to flee, In August 2008, the Peoples people were jailed, and Council of the Western region ( food was stolen by the COP ), composed of people from 5.1 army and the national San Marcos, Quetzaltenango, Impact of exploration police force. Huehuetenango, Quiche and concessions and mining Las Verapaces and CEIBA held projects v) The criminalization of social a medical day in three villages protest, the loss of land, close to the Marlin Mine. Open pit and underground income and the means to Seventy-five per cent of the mines have had a serious grow food has forced many patients were ill with scabies impact on the communities to migrate to other parts of associated with the lack of where these are located: the country or abroad. water and the presence of fine a) Social impacts b) The community particles in the air along with i) Families where some Highways that access the high levels of humidity. members are employees communities have deteriorated “In May 2010, the University of of the mining companies due to the presence of mining Michigan did a study about the and others are opposed, exploration and extraction. metal levels in the blood and have become divided. Homes have been damaged by urine of the mine workers and dynamite explosions or heavy ii) The lifestyle of people the people living close to the transportation in San Miguel mine. The results showed that in communities Ixtahuacan, San Marcos and those living close to the mine (recreational activities, surrounding areas. At least one were exposed to metals through consumer habits, world of the wells that provides water their work or environment. The vision) has been disrupted for the land that is destined levels of lead, mercury, arsenic, due to the presence of for growing food, has dried up zinc and copper in the urine of strangers. because of the redirection of those living close to the mine the water sources. iii) The damages to the (usually adjacent or downriver environment (forestry, The levels of violence, drug from the mines) were higher changes to their ecosystem, addiction, alcoholism and than those living farther away. water pollution) have prostitution have increased “Aside from this, in 2010, the caused the loss of in the municipalities and Ministry of Health and Social important sources of surrounding communities Assistance pointed out that subsistence. where the mines are located. skin diseases are the third iv) The repression and c) Health most common reason for persecution of community The impacts on health have seeking medical assistance leaders has created an been both physical and mental, in both Sipakapa and San environment of terror. This due to the traumas suffered by Miguel Ixtahuacán, although is reminiscent of the armed the people and their families it is in tenth place in the rest internal conflict, during who have been persecuted and of the country. Van de Wau, which time homes were attacked. Houses of community Evens and Machiels of the raided, people were members and leaders have University of Ghent in Belgium persecuted for long periods been flattened. found the arsenic levels of

18 KAIROS Participatory Research with partners on Free, Prior and Informed Consent: CEIBA’s experience in Guatemala the groundwater in areas exposed to the dangers of capital or El Salvador. However, close to the mine to be above falling structures. their products are beginning acceptable safe drinking water to be rejected due to concerns Women who are on the front levels. Urine also held alarming that they are contaminated lines of the struggle for the land, concentrations of arsenic. The by the mining activity located are victims of sexual abuse, rape illnesses caused by arsenic two kilometres away from the and other forms of intimidation are generalized and require municipality. immediate action to be taken”. perpetrated by different (COPAE, 2012) company and security agents. Another important consideration Women have taken a strong is the direct contamination of d) Impacts on women’s lives lead in the defense of their water sources by cyanide, which Impacts of mining and its effects territories, demonstrated by the causes irreversible damage to have been more devastating for fact that more than 50% of the the environment. Underground the women of the communities. participants in the community or open pit mining requires Women are more frequently in consultations, are women. direct contact with water and around five million litres of water therefore more exposed to the e) The environment a day, which makes water scarce problems produced by polluted The Municipality of San Rafael for other uses such as irrigating water. Another problem is the in Santa Rosa lives off coffee, crops, livestock and drinking. destruction of homes caused beans, corn and vegetables. by dynamite explosions. Since All surplus products are sold in The following graph details the women remain for longer neighboring communities, the environmental damages caused periods in the home, they are urban areas of the Guatemalan by mining activity:

PROCESS ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS EFFECTS ON

Global Energy Water warming

Removal of vegetation – soil removal – Destruction of the vegetation – migration of native species    separation of fertile soil and rock Liquid waste   

Elimination of fertile soil   

Air pollution related to pulverization 0  

Noise emissions 0  0

Dynamite detonations   0

Transportation of material Air pollution due to carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide emissions   

Accumulation and unloading material to Air pollution due to carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide, noise emissions,    the rock crusher – Vibration feeders and use of water and energy. breakers

Sag mill, vibration screen, static security Air pollution due to carbon monoxide and dioxide, noise emissions, use of water    screen, feeding pump, ball mill and and energy cyclones, cone breaker.

Merrill-Crowe leaching process, grinding Toxicity in biotic and abiotic organisms caused by direct contact or vapours of    condenser, grinding condenser pump, chemical substances, water and energy use. leaching tanks

Source: Asociación para la promoción y el desarrollo de la comunidad CEIBA, La Ruta del Oro, Página 24, Actualización año 2012. A check mark “√” signifies there is a direct impact from the processes mentioned. A zero “0” indicates that there is no direct impact.

© KAIROS Canada, September 2014 19 The crops were much better before,” says Crisanta holding up some of the corn her family harvested this year, “but since the mine came, they don’t come out the same anymore.” | Photo credit: Allan Lissner

The environmental damage US$460 dollars per 400 people are given affects all elements of nature manzana were paid. employment as including water, earth, wind, unqualified workforce. and forest, as well as causing ii) The five million litres of The rest of the workforce global warming. All of this also water used daily are not comes from other parts of negatively affects the food paid for. the country or abroad. sovereignty of both the rural vii) Water contamination and urban populations. iii) The costs of the consequences on has caused the loss of Although mining companies human health have corn, bean and vegetable are supposed to present an not been incorporated crops. There is no available environmental reparation and into the analysis of the information regarding the exit plan for when they cease costs and benefits by the cost of environment operations, most have not done municipalities and the reparations (forests, so. The exception is Goldcorp, country. cleaning water, soil which paid an eight million recovery). Quetzal deposit, although several iv) National budgets for viii) There are some 200 studies have shown that the cost the Army and Ministry damaged homes in San for environmental reparations of the Interior have been would be much more. Miguel Ixtahuacan, which increased to provide would cost around f) Economic impacts security for mining US$5,000 dollars each to There is very little quantitative operations, using the repair. There has been information available regarding taxes of Guatemalans and a loss of opportunities economic impacts of mining in at the expense of the to initiate environmentally the communities. However, the budgets for the health, friendly activities such following relevant information educational and as coffee production, is available: infrastructural. organic flower and vegetable growth and i) The territories for mining v) Community defense ecotourism. extraction have been leaders and their families bought for ridiculously low have been forced to What follows is a cost and prices. In San Rafael Las survive on no income due benefit analysis by IPNUSAC, Flores and Mataquescuintla, to state persecution. a research institute at the parcels were bought University of Guatemala for for US$130 dollars per vi) Municipal income from the San Miguel Ixtahuacan manzana, while in San mining extraction is Municipality, where the Marlin Marcos, approximately minimal. An average of mine is located.

20 KAIROS Participatory Research with partners on Free, Prior and Informed Consent: CEIBA’s experience in Guatemala Left: Delegates from the Guatemala Study Tour in san Marcos in front of a banner, “In Defense of Mother Earth”, Counsel of Peoples of the Western Guatemala (CPO) | Photo credit: Rachel Warden Right: Natalia Atz Sunuc, general coordinator of CEIBA, at a press conference in support of community consultations | Photo credit: Rachel Warden Chart 3 Chart 3: Consolidated Costs and Benefits for San Miguel Ixtahuacan, San Marcos 2009 (Exchange rate: 7.75 Quetzal = 1 USD)

Concept Quetzal USD Benefits Royalties 26,978,178.00 3,481,055.23 Sipakapa Royalties 2,697,817.00 348,105.42 Property Taxes 557,870.00 71,983.23 Direct employment 35,970,000.00 4,641,290.32 Indirect employment 49,266,000.00 6,356,903.23 Sierra Madre Foundation 3,307,605.00 426,787.74 Sustainable Development Department 4,000,000.00 516,129.03 Purchases 66,362,980.00 8,562,965.16 Total Benefits 189,140,450.00 24,405,219.35 Costs Health 4,900.00 632.26 Reconstruction of damaged homes 4,800,000.00 619,354.84 Land (forgone revenue) 345,600,000.00 44,593,548.39 Agriculture (loss of crops) 1,510,509.00 194,904.39 Water (Use) 638,175.00 82,345.16 Water (Treatment) 2,995,920.00 386,570.32 Royalty losses 134,890,890.00 17,405,276.13 Royalty losses (Sipacapa) 13,489,085.00 1,740,527.10 Total costs 503,929,479.00 65,023,158.58 Difference between costs and benefits -314,789,029.00 -40,617,939.23 Ratio costs/benefits 2.66

Source: The Case of the Marlin Mine in San Marcos. Study of the economic dimensions of mining activity in Guatemala, by IPNUSAC (Instituto de Problemas Nacionales de la Universidad de Guatemala).

© KAIROS Canada, September 2014 21 German Chub (in wheel chair) says he was shot in the back after witnessing the murder of anti-mining leader Adolfo Ich Chaman. “Where is the justice for the death of my husband?” asks Angelica Choc (in blue shirt). | Photo credit: Allan Lissner

The information presented ii) The communities from above shows that for every the eastern part of the 5.2 Quetzal accruing in benefits country made up mostly Impact of community the municipality lost 2.66 times of mestizos, have become resistance as much rebuilding damaged aware of the importance Both the government and homes and on health, security, of the Indigenous struggle the mining companies have and other costs. Therefore, contributed to the increase of and have advocated for the mining project in the social conflict, violence, repression organizational support. is towards community leaders and economically unsustainable. iii) A common goal is now human rights defenders. Social These expenses do not include protest has been discredited and shared by the mestizos, the costs of environmental and criminalized, and the peoples’ health reparations when the Mayas, Xincas, Garifunas, decisions have been ignored in mine closes. peasants and people of favour of other types of development. different generations: the g) Positive impacts DEFENSE OF THE LAND Community resistance has stopped the mining activity Although most of the impacts AND LIFE. have been negative, there have in Huehuetenango. However, been qualitative changes from iv) Innovative proposals in San Rafael Las Flores, the Escobal mine has been an organizational point of view: concerning agroecological operating even though their agriculture and local i) Increased participation, license should have been organization and community development suspended after a local court articulation between have been proposed as upheld a complaint filed by a communities, alternatives to the imposed community leader, a member of municipalities and regions. development model. the Xinca Parliament.

22 KAIROS Participatory Research with partners on Free, Prior and Informed Consent: CEIBA’s experience in Guatemala Vl. Canadian Aside from this, the Canadian these mining projects. Two days government is promoting a new before Rousseau participated in Connection Mining Law that will regulate this official ceremony, six men the community consultations were shot at by the Escobal 6.1 held in good faith. This new law Mine’s private security guards as Canada’s connection with is modelled on the Peruvian they walked by the company’s mining extraction projects Law that has already posed property. Two of the men were legal obstacles for the Peruvian seriously injured and had to The Marlin company, located people. be hospitalized. Tahoe’s head in San Miguel Ixtahuacan, of security was arrested for San Marcos Department, is a Other examples of Canada’s attempted murder as he was subsidiary of Goldcorp Inc. The support for mining and trying to leave the country. San Rafael mine, which extracts Canadian capital, including An illegal armed group is also silver and is located in the San interference and discrediting of operating in the area, which Rafael Las Flores Municipality, social protests are the following: has prompted several Human Santa Rosa Department, is a Rights organizations and other subsidiary of Tahoe Resources a) Santa Rosa, Guatemala: international groups to open an Inc. Both Goldcorp and Tahoe Tahoe Resources – April 2013 investigation on behalf of the Resources are Canadian “Canadian ambassador Mr. International Commission Against companies with headquarters Hughes Rousseau participated Impunity in Guatemala (CICIG). in Vancouver. Aside from these as an honorary witness in two companies, Table 1 shows the signing of an agreement Three days after the royalty the licenses granted to the between the Guatemalan agreement was signed, the Montana Exploration Company, Government and Tahoe Guatemalan government Inc., which is a Guatemalan Resources that voluntarily raised declared a state of siege in the subsidiary of Goldcorp Inc. the royalties paid by the Escobal area where the Tahoe mining silver mine upon entering into project was operating, and all 6.2 production from 1% to 5%. This civil rights, including the right Role of the Canadian agreement is another attempt to protest or public gatherings, to legitimize an unwanted Government were suspended, allowing project. Twelve community and the police to carry out raids The Canadian Embassy states municipal plebiscites have been and detentions without the that it has merely a diplomatic held in southeastern Guatemala, impediment of a court order.”11 role in Guatemala. However, its where the Tahoe project is political and legal pressure has located, and the results have b) Guatemala: Skye Resources eased conditions for Canadian been overwhelmingly against – February 2007 capital to enter the country. the mine. Ex- Canadian ambassador The Canadian Government in Guatemala, Kenneth continues to ignore the Guatemalan and Canadian Cook, appeared before an outcome of consultations that authorities are adding to the Ontario court charged with oppose the negative impacts of volatility of the situation by slander against student and extractive companies. exerting pressure in favour of cameraman Steven Schnoor.

11 Original text includes a footnote that links to three articles in English: http://upsidedownworld.org/main/guatemala-archives-33/4270-state-of-siege-mining-conflict-escalates-in-guatemala; http://nisgua.blogspot.ca/2013/05/guatemalan-govt-declares-state-of-siege.html; http://www.mimundo.org/2013/05/03/2013-05-02-tahoes-san-rafael-mine-conflict-leads-to-state-of-siege/

© KAIROS Canada, September 2014 23 In February 2007, Cook merged with Skye Resources of residents that opposed made false statements about in 2008 is now facing three the Marlin mine faced 700 a documentary Schnoor law suits: 1)for the rape of soldiers and 300 police. In June filmed, which criticized the 11 women during a forced of that year, the Indigenous practices of a Canadian mining eviction, 2) the murder of a communities of Sipakapa, an company that operated in land rights activist, and 3) the area affected by the project, eastern Guatemala. In January shooting and paralysis of a held a referendum and the 2007, Schnoor filmed a short man in Sept 2009. 12 majority voted against mining documentary which depicted extraction. In other press Mayan farmers being violently c) Guatemala: Glamis Gold – articles, Ambassador Lambert evicted from their homes in November 2004 defended his controversial rural Guatemala, at the request In 2002, Glamis Gold Ltd. article, arguing that promoting of Skye Resources. Images of a (purchased by Goldcorp Inc. in Canadian interests and woman protesting loudly were 2006), began developing the Canadian values such as included in the documentary. Marlin gold mine in Guatemala. sustainable development were Marlin was the first large mining part of diplomatic obligations In a meeting at the Canadian investment in Guatemala and they did not necessarily Embassy in Guatemala City in following the neoliberal conflict, but rather increased February 2007, Ambassador reforms intended to attract Canada’s credibility in the Cook said the woman had been foreign mining capital. It was country. 13 paid to act in the video and an important test run for the that a photo, depicting a man’s mining industry. On November desperation during the event 4, 2004, a national newspaper 6.3 (taken by renowned journalist published a survey, with results What is CEIBA’s message James Rodríguez), was not taken indicating that 95.5% of the for Canadians? during the eviction but was people living close to the Marlin Both the Canadian government actually a stock image that had mine, the majority of them and the general population been published before. In June Indigenous, were opposed to 2010, Judge Pamela Thomson the project. The same day, in must become aware, and in turn ruled that the comments had the same paper, the Canadian raise awareness, of violations been defamatory and were ambassador James Lambert, to human and environmental untrue. She also stated that the published an article describing rights. At a minimum, Canada ambassador had been indiscreet the benefits that mining had must respect all international and that he “should have for around 200 Indigenous conventions. Instead of known better.” Commenting communities in Canada. The imposing the development on the importance of this case, following month, the Canadian model desired by Northern Schnoor said: “This isn’t just embassy also co-sponsored countries, Canadian companies about me and one particular a National Mining Forum, have the duty to accept the video. I am concerned that intended to promote the mining decisions of local consultations this is an example of how the industry. All of this convinced and respect Indigenous self- Government of Canada is quick the Guatemalan public that the determination based on to discount the voices of people Embassy was more interested development models that who are harmed by Canadian in promoting Canadian mining have existed since before mining companies.” interests than human rights. colonization.

Hudbay Minerals, which bought On January 11, 2005, after a Canadians citizens should seek the Phoenix nickel project and 40-day-blockade, hundreds alternative information from

12 Original includes footnote links to articles in English: http://www.schnoorversuscanada.ca/ y http://www.chocversushudbay.com/ 13 Canadian Network on Corporate Accountability, “Dirty Business, Dirty Practices: How the Federal Government Supports Canadian Mining, Oil and Gas Companies Abroad.” May 2007. http://www.halifaxinitiative.org/sites/halifaxinitiative.org/files/DirtyPractices.pdf

24 KAIROS Participatory Research with partners on Free, Prior and Informed Consent: CEIBA’s experience in Guatemala Top left: Community Planning Meeting, the International Health Tribunal in San Miguel Ixtahuacán, San Marcos, Guatemala. | Photo credit: Allan Lissner Top right: Reyna does her laundry in the river with her brother Alex. “We don’t have any water at the house and our well has dried up, so we have to come down here.” | Photo credit: Allan Lissner Bottom left: Rosalia stands on what used to be part of her families’ farm until the mine expanded a single lane dirt road to accommodate large mining trucks. Rosalia’s family says they were never consulted or compensated for the loss of their land. | Photo credit: Allan Lissner Bottom right: A farmer in Sipakapa inspects his crops. | Photo credit: Allan Lissner

trustworthy sources to inform the irresponsible consumption funds are tainted with blood, their opinions and decide that is promoted by capitalism. because of the criminalization, whether or not they support persecution and murder of Canadians must demand of the foreign investments of human rights defenders and their governments, employers Canadian companies. Listening those who are defending land and investment firms full only to mainstream media that and the environment.” disclosure as to where their omit key information, such as pension funds are invested. If KAIROS can provide support by the reasons for community these are in mining extraction, participating in and promoting resistance, is inadequate for megaprojects or monocultures, campaigns that raise awareness making sound decisions. they must demand that their about the human rights money be withdrawn from violations that are occurring in Resistance to destructive these investments. countries affected by mining mining practices has to go two extraction. It can keep the ways. Not only will affected Oscar Morales, a community general population informed countries continue to resist leader from San Rafael Las of the environmental, social, destructive mining extraction, Flores, Santa Rosa, stated: cultural, and economic costs and the countries that are consumers “Northern countries and their impacts that companies cause, of these resources must resist pension and investment and demand public audits.

© KAIROS Canada, September 2014 25 Vll.

Recommendations 3) We recommend the general • strengthen community population inform itself and economy to achieve real 1) The most important divest from all funds that development for may contribute to negative recommendation for our Indigenous communities. impacts of mining extraction National Government, all on communities and the 5) We ask KAIROS to continue companies and the Canadian environment, as well as denounce its work of strengthening social Government is to respect human rights violations. organizations and denouncing sovereignty, self-determination the violations that are a 4) We ask the Guatemalan and the results and decisions consequence of the extractive government to of over 78 community activities and megaprojects. We consultations of good faith held • respect national and ask, as well, that KAIROS maintain in 12 Guatemalan Departments, international laws ongoing communication with in which well over 90% of regarding human rights; Guatemalan organizations to work the people have stated their on influencing Canadian policy. position: “NO TO MINING, YES • respect community organizational forms, TO LIFE AND LAND.” 6) We ask for the Indigenous their particular consultation peoples of Canada to show their traditions, avoiding 2) International organizations solidarity with the Indigenous attempts to standardize the and institutions must support peoples of Guatemala. campaigns and raise awareness procedures for all communities; so that human rights are 7) We ask the Canadian respected. Initiatives that seek • respect the dignity, government to ensure that to promote other sustainable collective and individual Canadian companies do not development models such as rights of the Mayan people violate human and collective Living Well, must be supported. of Guatemala; rights in Guatemala.

26 KAIROS Participatory Research with partners on Free, Prior and Informed Consent: CEIBA’s experience in Guatemala REFERENCES

Asociación para la promoción COPAE, C. P. Los problemas Instituto Centroamericano de y el desarrollo de la creados por la Mina Marlin Estudios Fiscales (ICEFI). comunidad CEIBA, La Ruta - GOLDCORP- en San Marcos Minería en Guatemala: del Oro (2012 edition). Guatemala. Articulos Copae, realidad y desafíos frente a Page 24. 1. 2012. la Democracia y el Desarrollo. 2014. Bank of Guatemala. Gross Editorial. El Períodico. Estado Pages 19-20. Domestic Product, 2001 de Sitio. May 8, 2013. database. Instituto de Problemas http://www.banguat.gob.gt Gamarro, U. Presupuesto sube Nacionales de la Universidad 5.3% para el 2014. Prensa de Guatemala (IPNUSAC). Canadian Network on Corporate Libre. (August 31, 2013). Estudio sobre las Accountability. “Dirty Gobierno de Guatemala y dimensiones económicas Business, Dirty Practices: de la actividad minera en How the Federal Unidad Revolucionaria Nacional Guatemalteca. Guatemala. El Caso de la Government Supports Mina Marlin, en San Marcos. Canadian Mining, Oil Acuerdo sobre Identidad and Gas Companies y Derechos de los Pueblos Mining Watch and the Center Abroad.” May 2007. Indígenas. México, D. F. for International http://www.halifaxinitiative. March 1995. P. 11. Environmental Law. News org/sites/halifaxinitiative. http://upsidedownworld.org/ Release. “Human Rights org/files/DirtyPractices.pdf main/guatemala-archives- Commission’s Climbdown a Carlos Estuardo Loarca 33/4270-state-of-siege-mining- Wake-up Call for Human Solórzano, Consultant with conflict-escalates-in-guatemala Rights Defenders in the Centro Legal de Defensores http://nisgua.blogspot. America, Not Indicator del Medio Ambiente for ca/2013/05/guatemalan-govt- of Goldcorp’s Performance.” the V REDLAR Mesoamerican declares-state-of-siege.html Ottawa and Washington. Encuentro in Boquete, January 5, 2012. Panamá. April 22-25, 2009. http://www.mimundo. http://www.edlc.org/es/ org/2013/05/03/2013-05-02- Mapas y Catastro Derechos tahoes-san-rafael-mine-conflict- Mineros en Guatemala. Carmen, A. Los Pueblos leads-to-state-of-siege/ Ministerio de Energía y indígenas y el derecho de Minas (MEM). February 2014. Consentimiento Libre Previo http://www. e Informado. 1-2. 2008. schnoorversuscanada.ca/y Territorios indígenas y democracia guatemalteca http://www.chocversushudbay. bajo presiones. July 2, 2008. com/ Pages 1-8.

© KAIROS Canada, September 2014 27 ANNEX 1 List of community, Good Faith and municipal consultations held in Guatemala up until April 2014

IN FAVOUR OF Departament # Municipality Reason for consultation YES NO Year San Marcos 1 Comitancillo EntreMares of Guatemala Inc. metal exploration 0 13,600 2005 2 Sipakapa Montana, Gold Corp, Marlín project 89 2,415 2005 3 Montana, Gold Corp., Marlin project Data unavailable 2006 4 Concepción Tutuapa Montana, Gold Corp., Marlín project 0 11,300 2007 5 Montana, Gold Corp., Marlín project 0 13,200 2008 6 Ixchiguan Montana, Gold Corp., Marlín project 0 7,617 2007 7 Tacana Montana, Gold Corp., Marlín project 15 8,215 2008 8 San José Ojetenam Montana, Gold Corp., Marlín project 3 9,733 2008 9 Tejutla Montana, Gold Corp., Marlín project 0 6,817 2008 10 Malacatán Montana, Gold Corp., Marlín project Data unavailable 2009 11 Montana, Gold Corp., Marlín project 0 4,617 2009 Zacapa 12 Rio Hondo Pasabien Hydroelectric extension 64 2,735 2005 Huehuetenango 13 Colotenango Community consultation regarding mining 50 7,811 2006 14 San Juan Atitán Community consultation regarding mining 0 5,919 2006 15 Todos Santos Cuchumatan Community consultation regarding mining 0 7,100 2006 16 Concepción Huista Community consultation regarding mining 0 4,985 2006 17 Community consultation regarding mining 0 3,100 2006 18 Santa Eulalia Community consultation regarding mining and hydroelectric plants 5 18,089 2006 19 San Miguel Acatan Community consultation regarding mining 7 12,854 2007 20 Community consultation regarding mining 0 17,741 2007 21 Community consultation regarding mining 0 5,774 2007 22 Community consultation regarding mining and hydroelectric plants 9 46,490 2007 23 Community consultation regarding mining 3 12,011 2008 24 Tectitan Community consultation regarding mining 5 4,527 2008 25 Chiantla Community consultation regarding mining 27 32,971 2008 26 Community consultation regarding mining 0 27,250 2008 27 San Ildefonso Ixtahuacán Community consultation regarding mining 0 14,469 2007 28 Nentón Community consultation regarding mining and hydroelectric plants 0 19,842 2007 29 San Sebastián Community consultation regarding mining 0 6,770 2007 30 Community consultation regarding mining 0 4,696 2008 31 Aguacatan Community consultation regarding mining 0 23,523 2008 32 San Pedro Solomá Community consultation regarding mining 4 23,764 2008 33 Community consultation regarding mining 0 12,703 2008 34 Santa Bárbara Community consultation regarding mining 0 10,236 2008 35 Community consultation regarding mining 0 3,500 2009 36 San Rafael La Independencia Community consultation regarding mining 0 5,831 2009 37 San Mateo Ixtatán Community consultation regarding mining 1 25,646 2009 38 San Gaspar Ixil Community consultation regarding mining 0 3,933 2009 39 San Sebastián Coatan Community consultation regarding mining 3 13,566 2009 40 Unión Cantinil Community consultation regarding mining 0 6,879 2009

28 KAIROS Participatory Research with partners on Free, Prior and Informed Consent: CEIBA’s experience in Guatemala IN FAVOUR OF Departament # Municipality Reason for consultation YES NO Year Guatemala 41 San Juan Sacatepéquez Community consultation regarding Cementos Progreso 4 8,936 2007 42 San Pedro Chuarrancho Consultation regarding El Sisimite Hydroelectric 571 2,748 2009 Quiche 43 Ixcan Consultation regarding Xalala Hydroelectric 1,829 18,992 2007 44 Cunen Consultation regarding mining and hydroelectric 0 18,924 2009 45 Santa Cruz del Quiche Consultation regarding mining and hydroelectric 0 27,778 2010 46 Uspantan Consultation regarding mining and hydroelectric 0 25,260 2010 47 Community consultation regarding natural and hydroelectric resource extraction 209 28,000 2011 48 Chinique Community consultation regarding mining 1 4,669 2012 Alta Verapaz 49 San Agustín Lanquin Community consultation regarding mining and megaprojects 15 14,065 2010 Quetzaltenango 50 Cabrican Maquivil Registry LR-O74, CALEL Registry LEXR-828, Eluvia Registry 73 13,610 2010 LEXR-010-06, Marina Registro LEXR-08-06 51 Huitan Community consultation regarding mining 30 6,758 2010 52 San Juan Ostuncalco Community consultation regarding mining 0 33,428 2011 53 Olintepeque Community consultation regarding mining 69 14,450 2011 54 San Martin Chile Verde Community consultation regarding mining 62 14,450 2011 55 Concepción Chiquirichapa Community consultation regarding mining 0 12,194 2011 56 San Miguel Siguilá Community consultation regarding mining 0 5,303 2011 57 Cajola Community consultation regarding mining Data unavailable 2013 58 San Carlos Sija Community consultation regarding mining 65 16,856 2012 59 San Martín Sacatepequez Community consultation regarding mining 62 17,871 2011 60 Sibilia Community consultation regarding mining Data unavailable 61 San Francisco La Unión Community consultation regarding TRECSA electric company cabling in the 12 4,522 2013 area and mining 62 Palestina de Community consultation regarding mining and megaprojects 89 6,639 2013 Santa Rosa 63 Nueva Santa Rosa Consultation regarding San Rafael Mine, Tahoe Resources and set of licenses 83 7,246 2011 Minera San Rafael already hold including Juan Bosco exploration license 64 Santa Rosa de Lima Consultation regarding San Rafael Mine, Tahoe Resources and set of licenses 86 5,338 2011 Minera San Rafael already hold including Juan Bosco exploration license 65 Casillas Consultation regarding San Rafael Mine, Tahoe Resources and set of licenses 71 5,043 2011 Minera San Rafael already hold including Juan Bosco exploration license 66* Los Planes community, San Rafael Las Flores Consultation regarding San Rafael Mine, Tahoe Resources Data unavailable 2012 67* El Chan community, San Rafael Las Flores Consultation regarding San Rafael Mine, Tahoe Resources Data unavailable 2013 68* El Barrio Oriental community, Consultation regarding San Rafael Mine, Tahoe Resources Data unavailable 2013 San Rafael Las Flores 69* La Cuchilla community, San Rafael Las Flores Consultation regarding San Rafael Mine, Tahoe Resources Data unavailable 2013 70* San Juan El Bosco Consultation regarding San Rafael Mine, Tahoe Resources Data unavailable 2013 Retalhuleu 71 Champerico Consultation regarding San Rafael Mine, Tahoe Resources 175 17,291 2012 Totonicapan 72 Licenses granted to Tikal Minerales S.A. subsidiary of Mayan Iron Corp. 0 54,230 2013 and Firecreek Resources, for iron and metal extraction 73 Santa Lucía La Reforma Totonicapan Community consultation regarding mining projects Data unavailable 2013 74 San Francisco el Alto Community consultation regarding mining projects 27 45,593 2013 75 Community members of San Francisco 4,257 2013 El Alto, residing in Los Angeles, California Jalapa 76 Jalapa Municipal consultation regarding extraction licenses (Centauro II) granted 399 23,152 2013 to Montana Exploradora, S.A. (Goldcorp Inc. Subsidiary) and Los Cimientos license granted to Nichromet (Australian capital) 77 Mataquescuintla Municipal consultation regarding San Rafael Mine, Tahoe Resources 625 10,375 2012 Petén 78 Las Cruces Community consultation regarding dams 120 10,814 2012 TOTAL OF PEOPLE 4,962 941,021 PERCENTAGE 1% 99% Source: Chart made by CEIBA based on data obtained from “La Ruta del Oro”, CEIBA; Madre Selva list of community consultations and list of consultations found on http://resistenciadlp.webcindario.com/consultas.html

© KAIROS Canada, September 2014 29 ANNEX 2 HUEHUETENANGO MAP OF MINING CONCESSIONS

SAN MARCOS MAP OF MINING CONCESSIONS

30 KAIROS Participatory Research with partners on Free, Prior and Informed Consent: CEIBA’s experience in Guatemala SANTA ROSA MAP OF MINING CONCESSIONS

RETALHULEU MAP OF MINING CONCESSIONS

© KAIROS Canada, September 2014 31 JALAPA MAP OF MINING CONCESSIONS

32 KAIROS Participatory Research with partners on Free, Prior and Informed Consent: CEIBA’s experience in Guatemala Above: Community consultation in Santiago, Chimaltenango. | Photo credit: CEIBA

© KAIROS Canada, September 2014 33 KAIROS: Canadian Ecumenical The members of KAIROS are: the Anglican Church of Canada, the Canadian Justice Initiatives Catholic Organization for Development and Peace, the Canadian Conference 310 Dupont Street, Suite 200 of Catholic Bishops, the Canadian Religious Conference, the Christian Reformed Toronto ON M5R 1V9 Church in North America (Canada Corporation), the Evangelical Lutheran 416-463-5312 | 1-877-403-8933 Church in Canada, Mennonite Central Committee Canada, the Presbyterian [email protected] Church in Canada, the Primate’s World Relief and Development Fund, the www.kairoscanada.org Religious Society of Friends (Quakers), and the United Church of Canada.