Peruvian community's will flouted; expert advice ignored

Published by MAC on 2001-05-01

Tambogande Update – October 17, 2003

Tambogrande Urgent Alert: Deadline Wednesday October 22 at 5 pm
Communities opposing the Tambograde mine project in Peru have stepped up their campaign and ask groups around the world to support their protests. (for background see: www.minesandcommunities.org/Action/press44.htm and www.minesandcommunities.org/Company/tembogrande1.htm)

Public Workshops Blocked

Under the Regulation for Consultation and Participation in the EIA Approval Procedure, the Peruvian government is obliged to hold a number of public workshops in the area of influence of a proposed mining project. The purpose of the workshops is to inform the public of its rights and obligations, and to provide information about the project, particularly the project’s Environmental Impact Assessment (there is some discrepancy among lawyers in the Mesa Tecnica about whether the government is legally obliged to hold these workshops or if this is simply advised to do so).

The workshops have started but they have been an overwhelming failure. The first workshops were undertaken in Piura, Sullana and Paita. Significantly, local authorities (local and provincial mayors, councilors, representatives from the Chamber of Commerce, etc.) boycotted the workshops.

Since then, local protest has prevented the realization of any additional workshops.

The workshop planned for October 13 in the campesino community of Locuto was blocked by community members. The Ministry of Energy and Mines failed to solicit the permission of community authorities. Community members drove the organizers away and the police responded with tear gas. The workshop that was scheduled to take place the same day in the town of La Rita also failed. In that case, the MEM failed to secure a venue for the event.

A workshop planned for October 15 in Tambogrande also failed for lack of a venue. The municipality refused to permit the use of any municipal building for the workshop. Plans were then made to carry out the workshop in a local school. However, an emergency assembly of parents (400 people) was convened the night before and a decision was made that the school would not be used for the workshop given the parents’ opposition to the mine project. Plans were made by community members for a vigil the night before the workshop. Participants planned to block the entry of workshop organizers. The MEM canceled the workshop.

On October 16 approximately 300 outsiders were transported to Cruceta for the workshop that was scheduled to take place in that town. According to several documented testimonies, these outsiders were promised payment of 25 soles for their participation in the workshop (and to stir up trouble – they arrived carrying sticks, rocks and metal rods). Information about the presence of these outsiders was broadcast by radio in the community. Five hundred local residents gathered at the workshop venue and ran the outsiders out of town. Locals requested that the police (approximately 60 officers were present) identify these outsiders but this request was denied. Locals maintain that the outsiders were paid by Manhattan and that their purposes included instigating violence (so that the company could denounce the community as being violent and unreasonable) and ensuring the presence of hundreds of people at the event, so that it could be deemed a success.

On October 17 another workshop was to be realized in Las Lomas, a community that neighbours Tambogrande. The workshop was canceled by the MEM for lack of a venue and in anticipation of a local response similar to that seen the day before in Cruceta.

The MEM has announced that it will replace the workshops that have been canceled with several larger events. These larger workshops are scheduled to take place on Oct. 23 in Sullana, Oct. 24 in Piura and Oct. 30 in Lima.

Green Ribbons and Lemonade

In Tambogrande people are wearing green ribbons to express their solidarity with the fight to stop the mine. They’re also participating in nightly vigils in the town square to protest the workshops and public hearings. On November 7, they’ll prepare the world’s biggest lemonade.

Meanwhile, in Lima

The Mesa Tecnica is planning a number of events, several of which include:

-a press conference in Congress, with sympathetic members of Congress

-a breakfast with journalists that have the mining, environment and food beats – to highlight environmental issues as well as San Lorenzo’s contribution to Peruvian cuisine

-an event at the Lima public hearing that will involve hundreds of limes (pouring into the street?).

If you approve the following letter, please email your signature and that of your organisation to::

karynkeenan@cooepraccion.org.pe

To:
Dr. Alejandro Toledo
President of the Republic of Peru

Dear Mr. President:

We write out of concern for the population of the district of Tambogrande (Piura). The population of Tambogrande unequivocally expressed its opinion regarding the possibility of mineral exploitation in its district through the consulta vecinal that was organized by its municipality. The consultation revealed that the vast majority of residents in Tambogrande are opposed to the entry of mining activity, as 98.6% of voters rejected mineral development in the district.

According to technical studies (The National Institute of Natural Resources of the Ministry of Agriculture and independent consultants), the proposed mining project is environmentally, legally, economically and socially flawed:

* The project is located in the epicentre of El Niño, a climatic phenomenon that includes torrential rains. Exposed to these conditions, the proposed tailings dams and open pit would constitute a constant source of potential contamination.
* The mining project would compete with agricultural activity for scarce water resources. In addition, the area´s geology is conducive to acid formation, which affects the quality of both surface and subsurface waters. The impact of mining activity on water resources would adversely affect agriculture.
* The project requires the relocation of approximately 1,500 families from the urban settlement of Tambogrande. Such relocation would violate these residents´ rights and contravenes national laws.
* Contamination generated by the mine would affect fruit exportation which provides local farmers with approximately 15,000 jobs and an annual income of US$ 20 million.
* The population has never been consulted about the project and has not granted its consent (social licence) for the development of the project. In fact, through all democratic means available to it, the community has clearly expressed its preference for an agricultural model of local development and opposes the establishment of mining activity in the area. The deficient Environmental Impact Assessment presented by Manhattan fails to establish that the project would avoid causing environmental damage. Such damage would affect the population´s human rights, as established in the Peruvian Constitution and in international instruments such as the United Nations Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the Interamerican Convention on Human Rights.

We consider foreign investment to be necessary for Peru. However, such investment should not be made at the cost of an entire community but rather, should serve the interests of affected communities. A decision of this type should not be imposed. Moreover, the importance of agriculture to the country´s development should not be forgotten.

For the above reasons, we request that the Environmental Impact Assessment presented by the mining company Manhattan Minerals not be approved. The project proposed by Manhattan places the agriculturally-based development model chosen by the people of Tambogrande, and the exercise of their human rights, at risk.

Sincerely,

COORDINADORA NACIONAL DE DERECHOS HUMANOS, DIACONIA PARA LA JUSTICIA Y LA PAZ DE PIURA, COMISION EPISCOPAL DE ACCION SOCIAL-CEAS, FEDEPAZ, ASOCIACION PRO DERECHOS HUMANOS, ASOCIACION CIVIL LABOR, ANDES, COOPERACCION, SOCIEDAD PERUANA DE DERECHO AMBIENTAL.

CONCILIO NACIONAL EVANGELICO DEL PERU, CENTRO DE INVESTIGACIÓN DOCUMENTACIÓN Y ASESORÍA POBLACIONAL - CIDAP, CENTRO DE ASESORIA LABORAL-CEDAL, FORO ECOLOGICO, GRUPO GENERO Y ECONOMIA, COMISION DE JUSTICIA SOCIAL DE CHIMBOTE, COMISION DE DERECHOS HUMANOS DE PASCO, VICARIATO APOSTOLICO DE IQUITOS.COMISION DE DERECHOS HUMANOS DE AUCAYACU, IPEDEHP, OFICINA DE DERECHOS HUMANOS DEL PERIODISTA, ADL-PUNO,

Siguen firmas...............

c.c.
Hans Flury, Minister of Energy and Mines
Francisco González García, Minister of Agriculture
Américo Villafuerte, President of Manhattan Sechura
Beatríz Merino, President of the Cabinet
Francisco Ojeda, President of the Front in Defence of Tambogrande

The Spanish version follows:

Dr. Alejandro Toledo
Presidente de la República del Perú
Pte.-

C.C
Hans Flury, Ministro de Energía y Minas
Francisco González García, Ministro de Agricultura
Américo Villafuerte, Presidente de Manhattan Sechura
Beatríz Merino, Presidenta del Consejo de Ministros
Francisco Ojeda, Presidente del Frente de Defensa

Señor Presidente:

Nos dirijimos a usted con suma preocupación por la situación que vive la población del distrito de Tambogrande (Piura), primer productor de mangos y limones del Perú.

Según la información recibida, la población de Tambogrande a través de una Consulta Vecinal convocada por el gobierno local, expresó su opinión sobre la posible explotación minera en su distrito. El resultado mostró la disconformidad del pueblo de Tambogrande que mayoritariamente, un 98.6% de los votos válidos, manifestaron NO estar de acuerdo con la realización de la actividad minera en el distrito.

De acuerdo a estudios técnicos (INRENA, y consultores independientes) este proyecto resulta absolutamente inviable en los campos ambiental, jurídico, económico y social por las siguientes consideraciones:

* El proyecto está ubicado en el epicentro del Fenómeno de El Niño, en donde las lluvias son torrenciales, haciendo de las canchas de relave y el tajo abierto una amenaza constante de contaminación.
* El proyecto minero competiría con la agricultura por el recurso del agua, que de por si ya es escaso en la zona. Además la geología del área permitiría una rápida y peligrosa formación de ácidos que afectaría la calidad del agua superficial y subterránea. En estos dos casos la agricultura resultaría perjudicada.
* Se afectaría la zona urbana del distrito, teniendo que desalojarse aproximadamente a 1,500 familias violándose su derecho a la vivienda e incumpliéndose la normatividad nacional vigente.
* La contaminación afectaría la agroexportación de frutos que anualmente representa un ingreso de 20 millones de dólares para los agricultores locales, lo que significaría pérdida de los puestos de trabajo que brinda la agricultura en el Valle que son alrededor de 15,000.
* La población no ha otorgado la licencia social para la realización del proyecto puesto que nunca fue consultada sobre el mismo y más bien haciendo uso de los causes institucionales y democráticos manifestó su opción por el modelo agroindustrial y la no pertinencia en la zona de la actividad minera. El deficiente Estudio de Impacto Ambiental presentado por la empresa Manhattan, no hace más que reflejar la falta de argumentos para evitar el daño ambiental en la zona que se produciría afectando los derechos humanos de la población consagrados en la Constitución Política del Estado y en los Instrumentos Internacionales de Derechos Humanos como la Convención Interamericana de DDHH, el Pacto Internacional de Derechos Civiles y Políticos y el Pacto Internacional de Derechos Económicos Sociales y Culturales

Consideramos que las inversiones extranjeras son necesarias para el Perú, pero no pueden darse a costa de la vida de todo un pueblo, sino que deben servir al mismo. No se debe imponer una decisión, no se debe olvidar que el agro significa mucho para el desarrollo de todo el país.

Por lo expuesto anteriormente solicitamos que no se apruebe el Estudio de Impacto Ambiental presentado por la Empresa Minera Manhattan Minerals Corporation por tratarse de un proyecto que pone en peligro el modelo de desarrollo agroindustrial elegido por los tambograndinos así como el goce de sus derechos humanos.

Atentamente.

Siguen firmas...............

MAC: Mines and Communities

Themes

Peruvian community's will flouted; expert advice ignored