comments on the perú’s readiness preparation proposal by ...€¦ · 1 presidential decree...

RainforestFoundationNorway‐RainforestFoundationUK‐RainforestFoundationUSEnvironmentalInvestigationAgency‐GlobalWitness

1

CommentsonthePerú’sReadinessPreparationProposalByRainforestFoundationNorway,RainforestFoundationUK,RainforestFoundationUS,EnvironmentalInvestigationAgencyandGlobalWitnessGuyana,June2010BoththeprocessofdevelopingPerú’sREDDReadinessPreparationProposal(R‐PP)andthedocumentitselfhaveseriousweaknessesandomissions.Thisisespeciallytruewithregardstocertainfundamentalissuessuchastheevaluationofthedeforestationandforestdegradationscenariosandtheirdrivers,therightsofindigenouspeoplesandlocalcommunities,participationbykeyrights‐holders,governanceandmonitoring.TheprocessandtheR‐PPproposalfailtomeettheFCPFstandardsasestablishedbytheWorldBank(SeeCharterEstablishingtheForestCarbonPartnershipFacility).Perú’sR‐PPwillnotmeetthesestandardsunlessitaddressesthefollowingissues:

‐ TheR‐PPmustprovideamorecomprehensiveanalysisoftheunderlyingdriversofdeforestationanddegradation,manyofwhicharelinkedtoexport‐orientedagriculture,timberandenergyproduction.Actionsthatdonorcountriescantaketolimitthesedriversshouldalsobeconsidered.

‐ Indigenouspeoplesandtheirlegitimaterepresentativeorganizationsarekeyactorsandrights‐holdersoverthemajorityofPeru’sforestlands,yettheyhavenotbeenproperlytakenintoaccount.

‐ TheR‐PPmustestablishamorecomprehensivevisionofconsultation.Inthecurrentdocument,“consultation”isregardedasmerelykeepingactorsinformed.

‐ DespitegoodgovernancebeinginternationallyacknowledgedaskeytoREDDsuccess,thesectionongovernanceinPerú’sR‐PP(Component2a)isbriefandpoorlydeveloped.

‐ Thereisnodiscussionofmonitoringofsocialandenvironmentalsafeguards,orofmonitoringgovernance.ItisnecessarytodevelopComponent4b.

‐ TheprocessgoingforwardshouldfollowthenewConsultationLawinPeru,whichrepresentsasignificantstepforwardforindigenousrights.

‐ Perú’sR‐PPprocesshasthusfarbeenentirelydrivenbytheMinistryofEnvironment.IfPerú’sREDDstrategyistohaveanyweightorlegitimacyfromstakeholderswithinitsowngovernment,afargreaterlevelofinter‐sectoraldiscussionandcoordinationmustoccur.

Forthereasonsweexplainbelow,wecallforathoroughreviewoftheR‐PPtoaddressthesematters.Thisshouldbedoneinatransparentandinclusiveway,andshouldengageallstakeholders,mostimportantlyindigenouspeoplesandlocalcommunities.


2

1. EvaluationofthesituationintermsofdeforestationandforestdegradationTheR‐PPpaintsabiasedandinadequatepictureofPerú’sreality.Crucially,itignoresseriousproblemsthatstronglyaffectindigenouspeoplesandotherforestdependentcommunities,anddoesnotthoroughlyidentifytheunderlyingdriversofdeforestationandforestdegradation.Logging(bothlegalandillegal),extractiveindustriesandlarge‐scaleinfrastructureprojectsareonlybrieflymentionedinpassingandarenotclearlyacknowledgedasmajorcausesofdeforestationandforestdegradation.AnationalREDDStrategycannotignoretheallocationofforestconcessions,agriculturalorbiofuelplantations,hydroelectricdamsand/orminingconcessions.TheseactivitiesinPerú,aselsewhere,havehistoricallybeencarriedoutinwaysthathavedetrimentalimpactsonindigenouspeoplesandotherlocalcommunities,aswellasonbiodiversity.Furthermore,nomatterhowwelltheyareimplemented,theywillresultinincreasedemissionsthatmustbeconsideredintheplanningprocess.ThePeruviannationalgovernmenthasreiterateditsinterestinattractingnationalandinternationalcapitalthroughnaturalresourceexploitation–thereisevenadecreedeclaringinvestmentsinbiofuelcropsasapriorityofnationalinterest.1Insteadoftakingadvantageofalreadydeforestedlands,investorsaredemandingintactlands,ideallyinriparianhabitat.Therecentcaseoftheproject“PalmadelOriente2”inthedistrictofBarranquita,provinceofLamas,departmentofSanMartin–whereearlierthisyearthousandsofhectaresofnaturalforestswereclear‐cutinordertopreparethelandforbiofuelcrops–illustratesthescaleofthethreathangingoverPeruvianforests.Itisimportanttonotethattheselarge‐scaleplantationsforbiofuels–aswellassomenewhydroelectricinvestmentprojectssuchasInambari3–aredevelopedinlargepartinresponsetointernationaldemandoriginatingindevelopedcountriesthatarethedonorstotheFCPF4.Thisdynamichighlightstheneedfordonorcountriestocommit,withinthecontextoftheFCPF,totakingactionsbeyondfundingthataddresstheroleoftheirowndemandforproductsthatgeneratedeforestationandforestdegradationinREDDcountries.ThePeruvianR‐PPalsofailstoaccountfortheroleofillegalloggingasacatalystfordeforestationandforestdegradation.Inthesearchforincreasinglyremotestandsofcommerciallyvaluableold‐growthmahogany,cedarandotherspeciesremainingonprotectedareas,indigenouslandsorstateforests,illegalloggersopenpathsandroadsthatthenprovideaccesstootheractors,furtherincreasingdeforestationandforestdegradation.

1 PresidentialDecree(DecretoSupremo)004‐2008‐AG,January2008,declarescertainbiofuelcropsasofnationalinterest.2 TheprojectPalmadelOriente,bytheAgricolaCaynarachi,isownedbytheRomerogroup,themostimportantPeruvianinvestor

group.OncethelocalcommunitieswereabletoprovethedeforestationgeneratedbytheRomerogroupinBarranquita,theMinistryofEnvironmentintervenedtostoptheproject.

3 ThehydroelectricprojectofInambariwouldbethelargestinPeruandfifthlargestinLatinAmerica,andwouldprovideenergytoBrazilasthelargestofsixhydroelectricprojectsinprocess.Theprojecthasgeneratedstrongoppositionfromthelocalcommunitiesaffected:65communitiesinthreeregionsofthecountrywouldhavetoberelocated.Formoredetails,seetheBankInformationCenterwebsite:http://www.bicusa.org/en/Project.aspx?id=10078.

4 AccordingtothePeruvianElComercionewspaper,theRomerogroupexporteditsfirstshipmentofethanoltotheNetherlands,lastDecember.TheprojectionsforthisyeararethatRomerogroupandMaplewouldproduceabout800,000litersofethanoladay,almostallofwhichwouldbeexportedmainlytoEurope.(ElComercio,December13,2009:“Laexportacióndeetanolperuanoyaesunarealidad”.)


3

Theproposalidentifies“subsistenceagriculture”and“migratoryagriculture”asthemaincausesofdeforestation.Itarguesthatdeforestationratesarehigherinindigenousareas.Thisstatementcontradictsrecentstudies(Olivieraetal2007;Hvalkoff20065).Theproposaldoesnotanalyze,nordoesitdefine,whotheactorsbehinddeforestationare.ThisisproblematicgiventhehighratesoflegalandillegaldeforestationthataffectthePeruvianforestsandwhichinvolvepowerfuleconomicgroups.Thedocumentbrieflymentionsnationalpoliciesthathavedrivendeforestation,butitdoesnotproposehowtochangethem.

2. Landtenureandrespectfortherightsofindigenouspeoples

TheR‐PPdoesnotrecognizeindigenouspeoplesasrights‐holders,despitethisbeingguaranteedbythePeruvianConstitutionandinternationalinstrumentsrecognizedoradoptedbyPerú,suchastheInternationalLaborOrganization,ILO169andtheUnitedNationsDeclarationofIndigenousPeoples.Thisisaseriousflaw.Furthermore,itneglectstheorganizationalprocessesofthesepeoples.Itmentionsnativecommunities,butitdoesnotrefertotheexistingindigenousorganizations.Indigenouspeoplesandtheirorganizationsarekeyactorsandrights‐holders,yettheyhavenotbeenproperlytakenintoaccount.TheproposalfailstocomprehensivelyacknowledgethatthePeruvianenvironmentallegislationandthelegalframeworkforindigenouspeoples’rightshaveseriousdeficiencies.Indeed,thePeruvianlegalframeworkfortherecognitionofindigenousancestrallandsisoneoftheweakestandmostinadequateintheregion.Legislationinneighbouringcountries–Brazil,Bolivia,EcuadorandColombia–hasbeenmodifiedandcurrentlyrecognises,toagreaterorlesserextent,thesocialandenvironmentalimportanceoftitlingsufficienttractsoflandthatareinaccordancewiththeuseandancestralpossessionofthevariousindigenousgroups.However,theonlypropertyrightsforindigenousgroupsrecognizedbyPeruvianlegislationarethosewhicharealsoguaranteedtonativeandpeasantcommunities.Theareaoflandgrantedissmallandfarfromcoincidingwithancestraluses.Moreover,inrecentyears,severalgovernmentaldecreeshaveattemptedtofurtherweakenbothenvironmentallegislationandthelimitedrightsofforestcommunities.Thereisnoreferencetotheconflictsresultingfromtheinsufficientrecognitionofindigenousterritoriesandthelackofanadequatelandtitlingpolicy.Thecurrentstateoftitlingenablestheseterritoriestoberegardedas“freeareas”forREDDprojectsorlarge‐scaleexploitation.TheR‐PPnotonlyignorestheweaknessofthePeruvianframeworkwithrespecttoindigenouslandsandterritories,butalsofailstomentionthattherehavebeenseriousproblemsinitsimplementation.Currently,therearemorethan300newcommunitiesawaitinglandtitling,andanother500waitingfortheexpansionoftheirexistingtitles;atthesametime,thetechnicaldossiersoftheproposalstocreatecommunalreservesandterritoriesforcommunitiesinvoluntaryisolationpresentedtothegovernmentarestillpendingapproval.

5 Oliveira,P.C.,G.P.Asner,D.E.Knapp,A.Almeyda,R.GalvánGildemeister,S.Keene,R.F.Raybin,R.C.Smith.2007.“Land‐Use

AllocationProtectsthePeruvianAmazon”,Science317.(5842):1233–1236.Hvalkof,S.2006“ProgressoftheVictims.PoliticalEcologyinthePeruvianAmazon”.In:ReimaginingPoliticalEcology,“EcologiesfortheTwenty‐FirstCenturySeries”pp.195‐233,(eds.)AlettaBiersackandJamesB.Greenberg,DukeUniversityPress,Durham.


4

TheR‐PPmentionsthatunderthePeruvianConstitutionallforestsbelongtotheState.However,theproposaldoesnotmentiontheneedtodefineusufructrights.IftheindigenouspeoplescanharvestandsellnontimberforestproductssuchasBrazilnuts,cantheydothesameforcarbon?TheR‐PPdoesnotaddressquestionsrelatedtocarbonownership.Thebenefits,includingcarbonrights,shouldbelongtoindigenouspeoplesandlocalcommunitiesthatconservetheforeststhroughtheirsustainableproductionsystems.Theproposalmentionstheneedtocompletealanduseplanningprocessaswellasthecreationofaforestregistryasimportantpartsofaforestrypolicyinthecountry.However,itdoesnotdescribehowtheStatewillensurecivilsocietyparticipation,particularlythatofindigenouspeoplesandtheirlegitimaterepresentatives,inthisprocess.Thisisofgreatconcerngiventhattheprocessasproposedwillcertainlyaffectsomeoftheindigenouspeoples’landsandterritories.

3. ConsultationandParticipationofcivilsociety,inparticularindigenouspeoplesComponent1b(StakeholderConsultationandParticipation)recognizestheimportanceofconsultationandparticipationwithstakeholdersinthedevelopmentandimplementationofnationalstrategies(p.20).Itissuggestedthatexistingplatformsforcommunicationusedbyboththegovernmentandcivilsociety–includingindigenouspeoplesandlocalcommunities–arecapitalizedon.However,thereisnodiscussionabouthowthiswillfunctioninreality,orwhowillbeinchargeofensuringthatengagementismeaningful.Itisimportanttostressthatanyconsultationprocessmustinvolveallstructurallevelsoftheindigenousorganisations,fromtherespectivevillagesandfederations,totheregionalandnationalorganization.IntheR‐PPdocument,consultationismerelyreducedtokeepingtheactorsinformed.AtnopointdoesitdiscusshowindigenouspeoplesaregoingtoparticipateinthebenefitsofREDDinitiativesorwhichactorsfromindigenouscivilsocietywillrepresenttheindigenouscommunitiesinthisprocess.IndigenouspeoplesaremainlyregardedasrecipientsofbenefitsfromREDDprojectsandnotasactorswhoseparticipationisessentialinthedesignandimplementationofaNationalREDDStrategy.ItisimportanttorememberthatthefirstdraftingoftheR‐PPwasdonewithoutanyconsultationwithindigenousorganizations,whichresultedinitsrejectionbytheWorldBank.Werecognizethatsincethattimesomeeffortshavebeenmadetorequestinputfromindigenousrepresentatives.However,theStateandotherstakeholdersmustrecognizeandtakeintoaccountthehugedemandsoninstitutionalcapacity,timeandresourcesthatareputonlegitimateindigenousrepresentativesbythenumeroussimultaneousprocessescurrentlyinplayinPerú,withrespectnotonlytoREDDbutalsotoanumberofkeylegalreforms.Moreover,theaftermathoftheBaguaconflictin2009–bothformaldialoguewiththegovernmentaswellasthepersecutionofseveralkeyleaders–hasoccupiedagreatdealoftimeandcapacity.GiventhatindigenouspeoplesarerightsholdersoverthemajorityofPerú’sforestlands,theyarenotincidentaltotheREDDstrategyprocessbutrathercentraltoit,andwearguethatthestateshouldre‐orientitsprocessesandtimelineswiththisfactinmind.


5

4.CapacityBuildingThe“REDDTechnicalGroup”mentionedintheR‐PPincludesseveralorganizationsfromcivilsocietyandgovernment,butitdoesnotincorporatetheindigenousregionalorganizations.AccordingtotheR‐PPthisgroupwillgrowinsize,haveamoreactiveroleandparticipateinthe“StrategyforthePreparationPhaseofREDDinPerú”.IndigenousorganizationsandfederationsshouldhaveanactiveroleinthedesignofpolicydocumentsonREDD.IndigenouspeoplesshouldalsoactivelyparticipateinalltheR‐PPphases:design,implementation,monitoringandbenefitsharing.DespitethefactthattheR‐PPstatestheneedforcapacitybuildingatalllevels,thereisnodiscussionaboutwhattheobjectiveandtargetgroupsshouldbeorhowandwhenitisgoingtobedelivered.Thecurrentproposaldoesnotexplain,forexample,howinformationwillbeavailableinadvanceandhowtheevaluationandsuggestionsofkeyrights‐holders,suchastheindigenouspeoplesandtheirorganizations,willbetakenintoaccount.NordoesitexplainhowquestionsraisedduringtheconsultationphasewillbeincludedintheNationalstrategyforREDDimplementationaftertheconsultationphaseiscompleted.Capacitybuildingactivitiesonlymakesenseiftheyresultinaprocessinwhichkeyrights‐holderssuchasindigenousgroupsandtheirorganizationshaverealinfluenceinthedesignoftheproposalandtheimplementationofaREDDstrategy.Howeverthereisnomechanismtoevaluatethequalityofthisparticipation.

5. GovernanceDespitegoodgovernancebeinginternationallyacknowledgedaskeytoREDDsuccess,thesectionongovernanceinPerú’sR‐PP,presentedunderComponent2a(AssessmentofLandUse,ForestPolicyandGovernance)isbriefandpoor.ItmentionsanewNationalForestPolicybeingdeveloped,aswellasanongoingdecentralizationprocess.Languagearoundgovernanceislimitedtoasingleparagraphwherecorruptionissingledoutasoneofthemaincausesbehindweakgovernance.Nodiscussionisincludedonhowtoaddressthisproblem,andnootherreferencesaremadetogovernancechallengesorhowtoaddressthem. TheR‐PPdoesnotdealwithissuesofillegalityandenforcementinsufficientdetail.Thelackofrelevantpolicies–aNationalForestPolicy,aLandPlanningPolicy,aBiodiversityConservationPolicy,etc–ismentionedasaweaknessenablingillegalloggingtocontinue.Thereisnosubstantialdiscussion,however,abouthowillegallogging,lawenforcementandcapacityaregoingtobeaddressed. In2009and2010,inspectionsbyOSINFOR–thenationalofficeinchargeofthemonitoringandverificationofthesustainableuseofforests–foundthatin51%ofthe180verificationsconductedthetimberbeingcommercializedhadbeenextractedfromunauthorizedareas,inotherwords,illegallyextracted.Thistimberisbeinglaunderedintonationalandinternationalmarketswithlegaldocuments.Inthesamereport,OSINFORconcludedthatthe2008and2009quotasforprotectedtimberspeciesbreachedPerú’scommitmenttoCITES,demonstratingnon‐compliancewithinternationalinstruments.


6

ThecurrentR‐PPdrawsnoconnectionbetweenREDDreadinessandthesystemicgovernancefailuresthatperpetuateillegallogging.However,thissameinabilitytoexertbasiccontroloverforestsectoractivitieswillalsobeakeyconcernofanydonorsorinvestorsinREDDactivities.Thefactorsidentifiedascontributingtosystematicillegallogging6–includingunprotectedandpoorlypaidpersonnel,lackoftransparentandadequatelyresourcedcontrolsystemsorindependentmonitoring,corruptionandjudicialimpunity–arethesameissuesthatwillundermineREDDimplementation. TransparencyandthedistributionofinformationrelatedtoREDDisacknowledgedasfundamental(p.66).Thereisrecognitionoftheimportanceofthistoenablebettercitizencontrolandmonitoring.TheR‐PPalsostatesthatpermanentparticipationofallstakeholdersmustbeestablishedthroughouttheREDDprocess.Thedocumentdoesnot,however,discusshowthisparticipationandtransparencyisgoingtoberealized.Furthermore,arecenttransparencyreportcardproducedinPerú(http://www.dar.org.pe/transparenciaforestal/inicio.html)hasconcludedthatthelevelsoftransparencyintheforestsectorarelowerthantheaverageinthecountry’spublicinstitutions.TheR‐PPproposalstatestheneedforpublicconsultationinthedevelopmentofaNationalEnvironmentalStrategy(SESA).Italsomentionstheneedtohaveenvironmentalimpactstudies,andcommitsPerútoadoptingallthesocialsafeguardsrecommendedbyFCPF.Nonetheless,itdoesnotexplainwhichmeasureswillbeadoptedorhowtheyaregoingtobeimplemented.Forexample,theestablishmentofclearmechanismstoresolveconflictsrelatedtoREDDprojects,suchasconflictsoverland,carbonownershiporbenefitsharing,isnotdiscussed.AccordingtothePeruvianOmbudsman(LaDefensoríadelPueblo),over50%ofsocialconflictsinPerúareoverenvironmentalissues7.ThedramaticJune2009eventsinBaguaillustratedthatPerúlackseffectivedemocraticmechanismsfortacklingandresolvingconflicts.Theresponsefromthecurrentgovernmentwasthepersecutionandcriminalizationofindigenousleaders.Inthiscontext,itisurgenttoconsiderthecreationofappropriateconflictresolutionmechanismsandalsoclarifyhowitwillensuretheparticipationofindigenouspeoplesandtheirorganizationsandfederationsinthetreatmentandresolutionofconflictsthataffectthemdirectlyorindirectly.Inaddition,theR‐PPproposaldoesnotexplainhowthePeruvianGovernmentwillguaranteethetransparencyofthisprocessinrelationtogoals,budgets,scheduleanddistributionoftheREDDbenefits.ItisuncertainhowPeruviancivilsociety,inparticularindigenouspeoplesandtheirorganizations,willparticipateinthesematters.Withouttheactiveandfullparticipationofindigenouspeoples,theNationalREDDStrategywilllacklegitimacy.

6. MonitoringThedraftproposalidentifiesanumberofinstitutionsdirectlyandindirectlyinvolvedwithREDD(p.7‐10).ItstatesthattheimplementationofREDDschemesandtheirsupervisionandmonitoringistheresponsibilityoftheMinistryofEnvironment(MINAM),whichisalsothefocalpointoftheUNFCCC.TheagencytaskedwithsupervisingandmonitoringforestactivitiesonthegroundisOSINFOR,whichfallsunderthePresidencyoftheCouncilofMinisters.

6 SeeforexampleWorldBank(2006)“AnalisisPreliminarsobreGobernabilidadyCumplimientodelaLegislacióndelSector

ForestalenelPerú”;EnvironmentalInvestigationAgency(2010)“Peru’sForestSector:ReadyforthenewInternationalLandscape?CivilSocietyPerceptions”.

7 IvanLaNegra,AdjuntoDefensorial,“UnaReformaIncompleta.”ElComercioPerú,12May2010.


7

RegionalGovernmentsareacknowledgedtohave‘animportantrole’incontrollingforestactivitiesundertheirjurisdictionandcompliancewithnationalforestpolicy.Thereisnodiscussionofasystemofchecksandbalances,whichmakesitdifficulttoassesswhethertransparency,accountabilityandequitywillbeensured.Component4boftheR‐PP,whichistoaddressmonitoringofbenefitsandimpactsotherthancarbon,isnotincludedinthenarrativeoftheR‐PP,despitebeingreferencedinthetableofcontents.Thereisthereforenodiscussionofmonitoringofsocialandenvironmentalsafeguards,orgovernance.Onlymonitoringofcarbonisdiscussed.TheproposedmonitoringsystemisthusnotcomprehensiveandwillfailtoprovideadequateinformationonREDDimplementation.Similarly,thereisnodiscussionofhowREDDwillbemonitoredindependently,involvingcivilsocietyandstakeholders,asrequiredundercomponents4band2c.ThisshouldbeanessentialbuildingblockoftheoverallarchitectureformonitoringREDDgovernance,providingcredibilitythatPerúisimplementingeffectivelythegovernancereformsitcommitsitselftodeliver.AproperlyfunctioningsystemforindependentmonitoringwouldidentifyandpubliclyreportonsystemicfailuresthatunderminethesuccessofREDDactivitiesinPerú,andinsodoingsupportthefunctioningoflawenforcement.Independentmonitoringwouldneedtobeimplementedbyarangeofactors,ofwhichempoweredlocalcivilsocietyorganizationsarekey.AneffectivesystemforindependentmonitoringinPerúneedstobeproposedaspartofComponent4boftheR‐PPbeforeitisapproved.Thiswillrequireaparticipatoryapproachincludingindigenouspeoples,localcommunitiesandcivilsociety.

7. REDDimplementationscheduleAccordingtothescheduledraftedinthisproposal,PerúexpectstoimplementtheREDDstrategyandentercarbonmarketsin2013,onlythreeyearsfromnow.WebelievethatitisveryunlikelythatPerúwillbeabletomakeallthenecessarylegalreformsthatallowfortheimplementationofaREDDstrategythatrespectsindigenouspeoplesandlocalcommunities’rightswithinthistimeframe.Itisequallyunlikelythatallnecessarybaselinesstudieswillbecompletedorthatindigenouspeoplesandtheirorganizationswillhaveparticipatedactivelyintheseinitiatives.Moreover,itisimprobablethatnationalindigenousfederationssuchasAIDESEP,letaloneregionalindigenousorganizationsandfederationsorthecommunitiesthemselves,willhavesufficientandappropriateknowledgeandinformationabouttheimplicationsofthenationalREDDstrategyproposedbythegovernmentandREDDprojects.ItisimportanttorememberthatthedraftforestlawcurrentlyunderdiscussionhasbeenstronglycriticizedbyAIDESEPbecauseitviolatesindigenouspeoples’rights.ThePeruvianMinistryofEnvironment(MinisteriodelAmbiente‐MINAM)wasonlycreatedin2008anditisimprobablethatby2013itwillhaveenoughtechnicalcapacitytoimplementamonitoringsystemthatconsidersandrespectsthesuggestionsandexperiencesofindigenouspeoplesandothersectorsofcivilsociety.


8

Theproposalpointsoutthat19pilotprojectswillbeplannedwiththeparticipationofcivilsociety.AIDESEPandotherindigenousfederationshavenotbeeninformed,norhavetheybeeninvitedtoparticipateinthedesignofsuchprojects.

8. Non‐compliancewiththeFCPFCharterArticle3.1(d)oftheFCPFFoundingCharterprovidesthattheFCPFwill“ComplywiththeWorldBank’sOperationalPoliciesandProcedures,takingintoaccounttheneedforeffectiveparticipationofForest‐DependentIndigenousPeoplesandForestDwellersindecisionsthatmayaffectthem,respectingtheirrightsundernationallawandapplicableinternationalobligations“.NeithertheprocessfordevelopingtheR‐PPnortheR‐PPitselfmeetthisrequirement.Indigenouspeopleshavenotparticipatedintheprocess,andtheirrightsarenotsecured.Article3.1(c)oftheCharterrequirestheFCPFto“SeektoensureconsistencywiththeUNFCCCGuidanceonREDD”.AnagreementonREDDisyettobefinalizedundertheUNFCCC.However,thedrafttextincorporatessafeguards,whichincluderespectforindigenouspeoples’rightsandtheirfullandeffectiveparticipation.Perú’sR‐PPwouldfailtocomplywiththeseprovisions.

9. ImpactofPerú’sConsultationLawontheR‐PPOnMay19,2010,thePeruvianCongressapprovedthe“ConsultationLaw”8whichcodifiedforthefirsttimetheobligationstowardsitsindigenouspeoplesthatPerúhadacceptedwhenitratifiedtheInternationalLaborOrganization’sConvention169in1994.ItisworthnotingthateventheConsultationLawdoesnotentirelymeetPeru’sobligationsunderConvention169.Inparticular,thelawdoesnotexplicitlygrantindigenousgroupstherightof“veto”overlegislationorprojectsthatdirectlyimpactthem.Nevertheless,thepassageoftheConsultationLawwasgreetedasalandmarkvictorybyPerú’sindigenouscommunities,andavindicationoftheindigenouspeople’sprotestsagainstthelegislativedecreesissuedwithoutconsultationin2008thatledtotheviolenceinBaguainJune2009.AtpresentthePresidentofPerúhasyettosignandpublishthelaw,butitisexpectedtobecomebindinglawinthenearfuture.Thelawwilltakeeffect90daysafteritspublication;thustheStatecouldarguethattheConsultationLawdidnotapplytothepromulgationofthefirstdraftoftheR‐PP.However,theprocessshouldfollowthenewlegislationastheR‐PPisnowfinalized,andwillcovertheimplementationoftheR‐PP,duringwhichtimeperiodtheConsultationLawisanticipatedtoapply.Furthermore,astheConsultationLawrepresentsasignificantstepforwardforindigenousrightsinPerú,theR‐PPshouldexplicitlyrefertotheneedfortheStatetosatisfythelaw’srequirementsindevelopingPerú’snationalREDDpoliciesandREDDpilotprojects.TheConsultationLawlaysoutprinciplesofconsultationthatprovidemoredetailandstrongerrequirementsfromtheStateforconsultationthanthoselaidoutinthecurrentdraftoftheR‐PP.TheseincludetherequirementthattheStateprovideallrelevantinformationtoindigenousorganizationsandfederationswithadequatetimeforthemtousethisinformationintheirdialoguewiththeState.Italsorequiresa“reasonabletimeframe”(plazorazonable)forindigenousgroupstodiscussandcometoaconclusionabouttheirstancewithregardstoanylaworprogramaffectingthem.Thelawdoesnotdefine“reasonabletimeframe”;thisshould

8 Thefullnameofthelawis“LeydelDerechoalaConsultaPreviaalosPueblosIndígenasuOriginariosReconocidoenelConvenio

No.169delaOrganizaciónInternacionaldelTrabajo”,andisknowninSpanishasthe“LeydeConsulta”.


9

thereforebedefinedintheR‐PPasthetimeneededbyindigenousorganizationsandfederationstoreachaninformeddecisionundertherequirementsoftheirinternallawsandcustoms.Thelawstatesthatthegoaloftheconsultationsshouldbe“anagreementorconsent”(unacuerdooconsentimiento,emphasisinoriginal)betweentheindigenousfederationsandtheState,andfurtherthatsuchagreementisobligatoryforbothsides.However,thelawalsoallowsforthegovernmenttomakethefinaldecisionregardingtheimplementationofthelegislationorprogram,anditassertsthatincasesinwhichthe“obligatory”agreementisnotreached,theStatecanthenimplementthelaworprogramsolongasitalsoadoptsallmeasuresnecessarytoguaranteethecollectiverightsofindigenouspeoples(“adoptartodaslasmedidasqueresultennecesariasparagarantizarlosderechoscolectivosdelospueblosindígenasuoriginarios”).Thisisavagueandcontradictorystandard;thustheR‐PPshouldclarifythatinfollowingtherequirementsoftheConsultationLawanyREDDnationalpolicyorpilotprogramwillonlybefinalizediftheStatedoesindeedformalizesuch“obligatory”agreementswithdirectlyimpactedindigenousfederations.

10. InstitutioninvolvedinREDDplanningPerú’sR‐PPprocesshasthusfarbeenentirelydrivenbytheMinistryofEnvironment.Therehasbeennoconcertedattempttocoordinateeffortswith,forexample,theMinistryofAgriculture‐inwhichtheForestryAuthoritysits–ortheMinistriesofMiningandOil,Trade,Energy,Housing,EconomyorTransport.Inpractice,stakeholdermeetingsfocusedontheR‐PPhaveoverlappedwithmeetingsabouttheForestryLawmakingattendanceatbothmeetingsimpossible,asthoughthelatterwerenotintegrallyrelatedtodeforestationanddegradationandviceversa.DecisionsaboutallocationofagriculturalandtimberconcessionsaremadebytheMinistryofAgriculture.DecisionsaboutallocationofminesaremadebytheMinistryofMiningandOil.LandtitlingandzoningistheresponsibilityoftheMinistryofHousing.Decisionsaboutroadsandinfrastructure,energypolicy,andfinancialincentivesaremadebyotherministries.ThereislittleindicationthatanyseriouscoordinationamongMinistrieshasoccurred.TheMinistryofEnvironmenthasonlyexistedfortwoyearsandisquitelimitedinitspoliticalcapacitywithinthePeruviangovernment,whilemoretraditionalMinistries–especiallythoseattractingandmanaginglarge‐scaleinternationalinvestmentprojects–haveconsiderablymorepoliticalpowerandinfluencewiththePresident.IfPerú’sREDDstrategyistohaveanyweightorlegitimacyfromstakeholderswithinitsowngovernment,afargreaterlevelofinter‐sectoraldiscussionandcoordinationmustoccur.Guyana,June2010RainforestFoundationNorway–www.rainforest.noRainforestFoundationUK–www.rainforestfoundationuk.orgRainforestFoundationUS–www.rainforestfoundation.orgEnvironmentalInvestigationAgency–www.eia‐global.orgGlobalWitness–www.globalwitness.org

comments on the perú’s readiness preparation proposal by ...€¦ · 1 presidential decree...

Documents