The Right of Indigenous Self-Determination and the Right to Consultation in the Peruvian Constitutional Tribunal Jurisprudence (2005-2011) by Alvaro Rodrigo Córdova Flores LL.B. University of Lima, 2002 A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF LAWS in the Faculty of Law Alvaro R. Córdova 2013 University of Victoria All rights reserved. This thesis may not be reproduced in whole or in part, by photocopy or other means, without the permission of the author. ii Supervisory Committee The Right of Indigenous Self-Determination and the Right to Consultation in the Peruvian Constitutional Tribunal Jurisprudence (2005-2011) by Alvaro Rodrigo Córdova Flores LL.B. University of Lima, 2002 Supervisory Committee Jeremy Webber, Faculty of Law Co-Supervisor Avigail Eisenberg, Department of Political Science Co-Supervisor iii Abstract Supervisory Committee Jeremy Webber, Faculty of Law Co-Supervisor Avigail Eisenberg, Department of Political Science Co-Supervisor The main argument of this study is that the right of Indigenous peoples in Peru to consultation has little practical force and effect, since the Peruvian Constitutional Tribunal is not prepared to base it on a broader right of self-determination. I centre my investigation on the 2005-2011 decisions of the Constitutional Tribunal of Peru regarding the right to consultation. In these decisions, the application of the right to consultation is divorced from a perspective informed by the right of Indigenous self-determination. The main consequence of this divorce is that it obscures the pragmatic and symbolic dimension of the right to Indigenous self-determination, debilitating the practical and symbolic potential of the right to consultation. The lack of correspondence between the right to consultation and the right of indigenous self-determination is built into the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Tribunal and reflects the bias of its judges. This bias is actually a continuation and accommodation of old prejudices of the dominant society against Indigenous peoples in Peru; it is part of the pervasive cultural discrimination that is embedded in Peruvian society and that has been translated into jurisprudential terms and language. This bias is also a symptom of the invisibility of the cultural manifestations of Indigenous peoples and the resultant obscuring of cultural differences in general. This situation illustrates that the racism that existed in the colony, and continued during the republican era in Peru, has not died, but has merely been transformed into a more subtle form of legal and constitutional colonialism. iv Table of Contents Supervisory Committee ...................................................................................................... ii Abstract .............................................................................................................................. iii Table of Contents ............................................................................................................... iv Acknowledgments .............................................................................................................. vi Dedication ......................................................................................................................... vii Chapter 1: Introduction ....................................................................................................... 1 1.1.- The Relevance of the Right to Indigenous Self-Determination ............................. 2 1.2.- Situating Myself: A Non-Indigenous Perspective on Indigenous Rights in the Peruvian Constitutional Tribunal .................................................................................... 4 1.3.- From a Monocultural to a Multicultural Approach in Analyzing the Constitutional Tribunal’s Decisions ....................................................................................................... 6 1.4. - Defining Bias ......................................................................................................... 8 1.5.- Peru’s Constitutional Tribunal: Nature and Characteristics ................................... 9 1.6.- The Judiciary in Peru and the Process of “Legal Empowerment” ....................... 10 1.7.- The “Two-Staged Judicial Reforms” and Indigenous Rights in Peru .................. 14 1.8.- Racism and Cultural Racism in Peru .................................................................... 15 Chapter 2: Setting the Historical and Social Context ....................................................... 20 2.1. - Notions and Representations of Indigenous Peoples in the Peruvian Context .... 21 2.2. - The Two Republics in the Peruvian Vice-Kingdom ........................................... 24 2.3. - Nourishing the Fear and Disdain of Indigenous Peoples; The Indigenous Uprising of the 18th Century ......................................................................................... 26 2.4. - The New Republic and the Indian Tax: Implementing the Liberal Project ......... 27 2.5. - Mid-Century Liberalism and the Post-Abolition Tax Period .............................. 29 2.6. - The Indigenous Movement and “Official Indigenismo” ..................................... 31 2.7. - The Indigenous Peoples of Amazonia (Foothills and Lowlands) ........................ 34 2.8. - The Revolutionary Government of the Armed Forces (1969-1980) ................... 36 2.9. - The Constitutional Reforms in Latin America and the Peruvian Constitution of 1979 ............................................................................................................................... 38 2.10. - The Peruvian Constitution of 1993 ................................................................... 40 2.11. - Indigenous Protest in 21st Century Peru ............................................................ 42 Chapter 3: The Constitutional Tribunal and the Right to Consultation ............................ 48 3.1.- Convention 169 and the Right to Consultation .................................................... 49 3.2.- The Inter-American Court of Human Rights Jurisprudence on the Right to Consultation .................................................................................................................. 52 3.3.- The Peruvian Constitutional Tribunal and the Right to Consultation .................. 54 3.3.1. - First References to Indigenous Peoples’ Rights in the Constitutional Tribunal Jurisprudence ............................................................................................................ 55 3.3.2.- Cases That Tangentially Address Issues Relating to Indigenous Rights ....... 57 3.3.3.- The Right to Consultation Cases ................................................................... 60 a) Lauricocha Province Case: The Veiled Unconstitutionality of ILO Convention No. 169 (2006-2009) ............................................................................................. 60 b) Cordillera Escalera Case: The U-Turn of the Tribunal ................................... 60 v c) Tuanama 1 Case: Developing the Content of the Right to Consultation (No- Veto Doctrine) ...................................................................................................... 61 d) Aidesep 1 Case: Gradual Implementation as a Setback .................................... 64 e) Aidesep 2 Case: Split Decision in Favour of Implementing the Convention at the Administrative Level ....................................................................................... 65 h) Tuanama 4-WRA Case: Changes and Reinterpretation of the Jurisprudence ... 66 3.7.- General Appreciation of the Constitutional Tribunal Jurisprudence on the Right to Consultation .................................................................................................................. 67 Chapter 4: Indigenous Peoples and the Right to Self-Determination ............................... 79 4.1.- “Right to Self-Determination” and Other Terms .................................................. 81 4.2.- Abandonment Is Not Autonomy ........................................................................... 84 4.3.- Historical Backgrounds of the Self-Determination Debate; The Process of the Re- Conceptualization of the Right to Self-determination .................................................. 85 a) The Wilsonian Formulation: Self-Determination as a Political Notion. .............. 85 b) The Decolonization Stage: Re-Dimensioning the Right to Self-Determination .. 88 c) Post-Colonial Era: Only Some Can Exercise Universal Rights? .......................... 91 4.4.- Indigenous Self-Determination in Domestic Legal Systems ................................ 94 4.5.- Self-Determination and Political Participation ..................................................... 97 4.6.- The Right to Consultation through the Right to Self-Determination ................. 104 4.7.- Indigenous Critiques of Indigenous Self-Determination .................................... 106 4.8.- Negotiating the Scope of Self-Determination through the Right to Consultation ..................................................................................................................................... 109 Chapter 5: Conclusions ................................................................................................... 114 5.1.- The Indigenous Right to Self-Determination: A Right Trapped in the Constitutional Tribunal’s Obiter Dicta ......................................................................