We write in relation to the current impasse between the residents of the Amerindian titled village of Hururu and the Bauxite Company Guyana Inc (BCGI). We would like to extend our thanks to the Ministries of Amerindian Affairs and Natural Resources and the Environment for the assistance offered to the residents of Hururu at this difficult time. We will however be including the Regional Council of Region 10 in future discussions with BCGI.
We would like to point out that our interaction with BCGI thus far, has been characterized by an absence of appreciation of our culture and by threats and intimidation. The most recent of these has been the unilateral declaration of a deadline of May 1, 2013 for us to take or leave the conditions proposed by BCGI. We the residents of Hururu consider ourselves to be equal partners in our discussions with BCGI. The resort to intimidation by BCGI as reflected in the unilateral imposition of deadlines and conditions is not indicative of the acceptance by BCGI of the residents of Hururu as equal partners in the development of the resource which lies within our titled lands.
We would like to propose that international best practices be utilized to ensure a mutually satisfactory resolution to the current impasse. Region 10 has brought to our attention the International Finance Corporation (IFC) Performance Standards. We would like to draw your attention specifically to Performance Standard 7 (PS7) “Indigenous Peoples,” International Best Practices as proposed by PS 7 recognize that Indigenous Peoples play a role in sustainable development by promoting and managing activities as partners in development. The objectives of PS 7 are:
- To ensure that the development process fosters full respect for the dignity, human rights, aspirations, cultures and natural resource-based livelihoods of Indigenous peoples
- To avoid adverse impacts of projects on communities of Indigenous Peoples, or when avoidance is not feasible to minimize, mitigate or compensate for such impacts, and to provide opportunities for development benefits in a culturally appropriate way
- To establish and maintain an ongoing relationship with the affected Indigenous Peoples throughout the life of the project
- To respect and preserve the culture, knowledge and practices of Indigenous Peoples
International Best Practices require that the action be implemented through the development of social and environmental management systems as outlined in Performance Standard 1 (PS1) and should ensure the avoidance of adverse impacts and include information disclosure, consultation and informed participation and development benefits. A further requirement of PS7 is the development of an ongoing relationship with affected Indigenous communities in project planning and throughout the life of the project. In instances where the communities are affected by project activities, the consultation process shall facilitate their informed participation on matters that affect them. The process shall include the following steps:
- Involve Indigenous Peoples’ representative bodies
- Be inclusive of both men and women of various age groups
- Provide sufficient time for Indigenous Peoples’ collective decision-making process
- Ensure that the grievance mechanism established for the project is accessible
The unilateral imposition of a cutoff date, by BCGI, for the acceptance of their conditions directly contradicts the guidelines established by PS 7.
It should be clearly established that we would like to see the BCGI development proceed. It must however be predicated on sustainable development of our community since our community will be directly impacted by the proposed development. The money proposed to be paid to us by BCGI would not result in the development of our community. We are also aware of guidelines for mining minerals and sustainable development which were developed with the involvement of several international mining companies including ALCOA, ALCAN, Rio Tinto and BHP Billiton. We would like these guidelines to be applied to the development proposed by BCGI to occur within our titled lands. Specifically we would like to engage BCGI in the development of an Indigenous People Development Plan (IPDP) formulated in accordance with the IFC and World Bank Guidelines.
Development of the IDPD shall incorporate considerations for the long term sustainable development of Hururu. We would like to identify for consideration the installation of independent generation capacity for the value-added development of timber, the extraction of which has been natural a resource-based livelihood activity of the residents of Hururu for more than 100 years. We would like to meet through the ministry to discuss and agree on the form of independent generation capacity. We would however like to establish at this point that it will be based on resources within out titled lands.
We would further like to establish our total dissatisfaction with the value apportioned to the land, within our titled area, currently being requested by BCGI for the establishment of the wharf and other facilities. We would like to request that an economic evaluation of environmental impacts of the proposed action be conducted to determine a cost mechanism for that land. Environmental benefits to Hururu residents include the cost of the timber resources and access to all parts of our titled land. The proposal presented to us by BCGI has no consideration of the environmental costs to the community associated with loss of access to that resource.
We understand that the EPA Act 1996 mandates Environmental and Social Impact Assessments (ESIA) and the development of Environmental and Social Impact Management Plans for developments such as those proposed by BCGI within our titled area. We would like to request that the ESIA conducted by BCGI be audited by an Environmental Compliance firm recognized by the World Bank/IFC.
A pillar of PS 7 is the avoidance of adverse impacts of projects on communities of Indigenous Peoples, or when avoidance is not feasible, to minimize, mitigate or compensate for such impacts, and to provide opportunities for development benefits in a culturally appropriate way. This principle has already been violated by BCGI. Adverse impacts to our community include loss of potable water supplies and loss of access to a resource which is part of our livelihood activities. In accordance with PS7 we would like BCGI to mitigate or compensate for such impacts as dictated by PS 7.
Critically important to the residents of Hururu is for BCGI to provide opportunities for development benefits in a culturally appropriate way. This is only achievable through the identification of sustainable development options for Hururu. We look forward to further discussion with the ministries and with BCGI to identify sustainable development options most conducive for the success of the proposed development on our titled lands.
Yours faithfully,
Sharma Solomon
Regional Chairman, Region 10
On behalf of the residents of Hururu
