|
[ORIGINAL IN SPANISH]
Adolfo Rosellini Members of the Global Environmental Facility Council
Dear Min. Rosellini and the other Esteemed Members of the GEF Council: The undersigned representatives of the Association of Indigenous Communities of Itapúa (ACIDI), the Coordinating Committee for Indigenous Peoples Self-Determination (CAPI) of the Republic of Paraguay, and the Forest Peoples Programme (FPP), take this opportunity during your meetings in Washington, DC - held between November 12th and 17th - to put before you for your consideration and immediate attention the grave situation of the violations of the rights of the Mby'a Guarani indigenous peoples caused by the implementation of the Global Environmental Facility (GEF) project known as the "Initiative for the Protection of Wildlife Areas of Paraguay" (PAR/98/G33) or the "Paraguay Wildlife Project" (hereinafter the "Project"). We have confidence that with the attention of the GEF Council and the GEF staff, a joint effort can begin in order to initiate new actions to remedy the damages already caused and to guarantee that the Project bases its success on the respect for the rights of indigenous peoples and our mutual interest in conserving the biodiversity found within indigenous traditional lands. The Project began in the year 2001. It is driven by the Secretary of the Environment of the Republic of Paraguay (SEAM), financed by the GEF, and administered by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). The objective of the Project is the conservation of the biological diversity in Paraguay, especially in four protected wildlife areas. [1] As part of the Project, the Reserve for the San Rafael National Park (hereinafter the “Park” or “Reserve for the Park”) was created by an Executive decree in 1992 within the Itapúa and Caazapa Departments. The entire area of the Reserve for the Park was superimposed directly on top of the ancestral lands of the Mby’a Guaraní people without consulting the indigenous communities that pertain to these people and without obtaining their free, prior and informed consent. This was done in spite of the fact that the Paraguayan State recognizes that these lands are the ancestral lands of said people. [2] These actions violating indigenous rights were also taken in spite of the internal law of Paraguay that does not permit the necessary expropriation of the ancestral lands to include them in the Reserve for the Park. [3] And all of the parties involved in the mentioned project, now recognize that this consent was never obtained. We understand that the GEF believes that this Project can serve as a pilot or an example of "best practices" when biodiversity conservation is carried out with the full and effective participation of local communities, including indigenous peoples. Unfortunately, to date the Project has not been a good example of conservation based on local indigenous management; in this case, the majority of the population living within the Reserve for the Park. The reality is that there exists an imposition of a form of “conservation” in the ancestral lands of the Mby’a Guarani and in spite of the national and international laws and the policies of the institutions involved that guarantee transparency, indigenous participation, respect for human rights and the dissemination of information, there has not been compliance. In fact only recently the members of the Mby’a People have received information and documentation from SEAM relevant to the Project [4] . This information sharing, (though still limited), has only begun after ACIDI, CAPI and FPP sent more than 10 letters to SEAM, GEF and the UNDP from March of 2006 until the present, and only after involving international entities, and after putting in writing the possibility of taking legal actions to guarantee the right to information and to petition authorities, as guaranteed by the Constitution of the Republic of Paraguay. [5] Additionally, the Paraguayan State is aware of the concerns and the demands of the Mby’a Guaraní calling for the respect of the rights of their members who have lived in their ancestral lands since time immemorial (now known as the Reserve for the Park) and who are dependent on the same for their subsistence (including the survival of their family members that continue to live in voluntary isolation). Nevertheless, SEAM has continued with the development of a management plan for the Reserve for the Park without the participation of the Mbya People. [6] In prior meetings held with SEAM, the leaders of the Myb’a people have been clear that SEAM should not draft a management plan until there is a comprehensive sharing of Project information so that the indigenous peoples can propose their lines of participation in an effective and informed manner. Nevertheless, the plan was drafted without consulting said peoples. [7] Also, to date the objectives of the GEF Project have not been met. Each weekend the lands of the Mby’a Guaraní (where the Reserve for the Park is located) are systematically invaded by non-indigenous who hunt animals indiscriminately. While the rights of the indigenous peoples – the first conservationist of the area -- are violated, the toxic agrochemicals used by the agricultural industry within and outside of the area in question (particularly for the extensive cultivation of soy) continues to contaminate the aquifers and the few rivers that sustain the communities and the indigenous that live there in isolation, as well as the plants and wildlife. The few “conservationists” that work in the Park do not consult with the indigenous communities regarding their traditional and sustainable practices. And the forest that all seek to conserve, now only exists where there are settlements of the communities and groups of Mby’a Guaraní people who conserve it. In our last meeting with SEAM, its General Director informed us that within the Project the “indigenous component is still pending.” This can not be tolerated by any of our organizations in light of the advances and developments regarding the rights of indigenous peoples, including in the context of conservation. [8] Additionally, there is no justification that the first delivery of relevant information from SEAM to the Mby’a Guaraní people just recently occurred only a few weeks ago and only after SEAM received a letter indicating that the parties would sue to secure the documentation requested. We are certain that the GEF never contemplated implementation of its projects in this manner; that is, in manner that rejects best practices related to transparency, full disclosure of information to the public, effective participation of affected peoples, and respect for human rights. For this reason, we request the intervention of the GEF Council to secure the necessary changes to the Project in order to respond in an effective manner to the concerns and genuine claims of the Mby’a Guaraní people and to guarantee the full and successful conservation of biodiversity in Paraguay. The recent responses of the UNDP staff and the GEF Program Manager on Biodiversity and Indigenous Peoples, leave us with an increasing sense that there is political will and good faith on the part of these two institutions to secure the changes necessary to advance the implementation of the Project in the Itapúa and Caazapa Departments. For this reason we are hopeful that the GEF and the UNDP share our interest in collaborating to guarantee respect for the fundamental rights of the Mby'a Guaraní people and to conserve their resources; and that they will take the measure necessary to secure not only the full dissemination of information relevant to the Project to the indigenous peoples, but also protect the rights to their lands and to grant or withhold consent to the activities that affect them. Unfortunately, this same political will and good faith has not been demonstrated by the State of Paraguay, particularly through the entity responsible for its environmental policies and the implementation of this Project, that is SEAM. In light of the above, we respectfully request the intervention of the Council to secure the fundamental changes necessary to continue implementing this Project in the area of the Reserve for the San Rafael National Park. Taking into account the objectives of the Project and the full recognition of rights of the Mby'a Guaraní people, specifically we ask that the GEF:
The Mby'a Guaraní are confident that if the GEF, the UNDP and the State of Paraguay promote and carry out the activities described above in an effective manner, not only will we achieve conservation of the biodiversity of the Atlantic Forests and the constitutional protection of the preservation and development of the Mby'a ethnic identity, but also we will achieve a unique model of conservation that can serve as an example for other areas of Paraguay and in other countries. That is to say, the GEF together with the UNDP and the Paraguay State can assume leadership in the international discourse and activities surrounding the relationship between indigenous territories and conservation, considering the Convention on Biological Diversity that speaks to preserving, maintaining, and respecting the traditional knowledge in the context of biodiversity conservation and the sustainable development. We believe that this proposal would invite support from numerous entities interested in financing these types of models that prioritize individual and collective human rights, while obtaining the objective of conserving nature. In the hopes of receiving a formal response to this communication and with the confidence that our request will be attended to with due speed given the gravity of the matter, we thank you in advance for your attention and we remain available to continue dialoging with the GEF to resolve this situation. With warmest regards, Antoliano Caballero Hipólito Acevei Vanessa Jiménez [SIGNATURES IN ORIGINAL SPANISH LETTER] cc:
[1] The Paraguay Wildlife Project “seeks to operationalize the protection of the biological diversity of Paraguay at the level of four PWAs [protected wildlife areas] that contains an ample representation of the biological riches of the country.” (Unofficial translation). This objective is carried out through the creation of four national parks: The San Rafael National Park (PNSR) in the Atlantic Foress of Alto Parana (BAAPA); the Paso Bravo National Park (PNPB) in the Cerrado; The Río Negro National Park (PNRN) in the Chaco/Pantanal; and the Médanos de Chaco National Park (PNMCh) in the Chaco Seco. See http://www.paraguaysilvestre.org.py/elproyecto.php. [2] Communication Nº 423/07, dated June 25, 2007, sent by the President of INDI – the Paraguay State’s indigenous entity – to the Environmental Secretariat (SEAM) where it expresses: ..”clarifying that the mentioned indigenous population is distributed in 10 communities and 12 religious nucleuses (or tapyi), they occupy their traditional territory (or tekoha guazú) in the Reserve for the Park, enjoying collective rights over their ancestral lands …” (sic). Attached is a copy of this communication. [3] See Art. 24 of the Law on Protected Wildlife Areas that expressly prohibits the expropriation of “properties, title or not, with indigenous community settlements.” (Unofficial translation). And the concept of a National Park requires that the lands within them – all of them – should be property of the State of Paraguay. [4] Transmitted on October 22 of this year, through Communication CN Nº50/07, sent by Dario Mandelburger, General Director General – DGPCB – National Coordinator of the Project, to Mirta Pereira, legal advisor to ACIDI. [5] Communication sent by ACIDI to SEAM, dated 14 October 2007. [6] See Communication CN No 50/07 from Dir. Dario Mandelburger, SEAM, to Mirta Pereira, legal advisor to ACIDI (22 October 2007) (finally transmitting documents requested since March of 2006 including the delivery of the “San Rafael National Park Management Plan” dated June 2007). [7] The plan affirms out of date and erroneous information regarding indigenous peoples (example: stipulating that there exists only 4 indigenous communities within the Park) [8] Including Recommendation 8/24 (paragraph 22) of the 8th Conference of the Parties of the Convention on the Conservation of Biological Diversity (CBD), that called upon the GEF “(d) To review and revise, as appropriate, its protected areas’ policies in relation to indigenous and local communities; and (e) To support community conserved areas, ensuring the immediate, full and effective participation of indigenous peoples and local communities in the development of relevant activities.” [9] At this moment, the area of the Park is constituted from parcels titled to private parties and titled to several Mby’a indigenous communities.
|
