The Assault on Imataca, Venezuela
8/10/97
*******************************
RELAYED TEXT STARTS HERE:
Headline: The Assault on Imataca, Venezuela
Source: Julio Cesar Centeno, PhD
Las Tapias, Edif. Carreto
Pent House Tel. +58-74-714576
PO Box 750 Fax +58-74-714576
Merida - Venezuela Email: JCenteno@ciens.ula.ve
http://www.ciens.ula.ve/~jcenteno/
Date: 8/10/97
THE ASSAULT ON IMATACA
Julio Cesar Centeno, PhD
August 10, 1997
A Venezuelan government plan to mine a Forest Reserve the size of
Holland has generated a heated national debate, due to resistance
encountered among the general public, political and academic circles,
and environmental and social groups. In an unprecedented measure, the
Executive Branch of Government distributed the Forest Reserve of Imataca
among loggers and miners, condemning local indigenous people to be
prisoners in their own land, violating national regulations and
international agreements on human rights and environmental protection.
Part of the indignation stems from the Government's attempt to mislead
public opinion through a farcical "public consultation", in violation of
established national regulations, and of fundamental ethical and
democratic principles. The case is before the Supreme Court of Justice.
WHAT IS IMATACA?
Imataca is a forest reserve of 3.6 million hectares, the size of
Holland, nearly as large as Switzerland. It is located at the foot
of the Guayana Shield, in the Northeast of Venezuela. In the language of
the Warao, Imataca means "Drop of Water in the Dark of Night".
It is covered with rich, pristine tropical forests. It is also rich in
gold, diamonds, iron-ore, bauxite, manganese, and other minerals.
Furthermore, its wealth of ecosystems, biodiversity, and genetic
resources is rivaled by few places on Earth. It is one of the key
legacies to future generations of Venezuelans. Its protection is a
matter of national interest.
Part of this territory is also home to five indigenous groups, whose
survival and cultural legacy depend on the surrounding natural
environment: the Warao, Arawako, Kari a, Akawaio and Pemon.
Its geopolitical importance is enhanced by the fact that it includes
about three-quarters of the Venezuelan border with Guyana.
In recognition of its natural wealth and fragility, the area was
delimited as a Forest Reserve and a Protected Area in the early 60s.
Such a legal structure is meant to permanently protect its natural
resources and ecological processes, while allowing the selective
harvesting of industrial timber and non-timber forest products, through
long-term concessions, and 30 to 40 year management plans. About half of
the reserve has been allocated in forest concessions.
During the 80s and 90s, a relatively small part of the region was
invaded by thousands of small miners, seeking mainly for gold and
diamonds. The anarchical nature of their activities, and the absence of
law and government in the area, has resulted in the smuggling of some 10
tons of gold each year, plus a heavy toll on the environment and the
local population. By the end of 1996, small gold miners had invaded
about ten percent of the area.
The large deposits of gold and diamonds also brought the attention of
international mining companies, encouraged by a government policy of
"apertura minera". The official plan aims to increase the production of
gold alone from 15 to 50 tons per year, turning Venezuela into one of
the main producers of gold in the world. Gold deposits within the
Reserve are estimated at 10,000 metric tons. But the expansion of mining
in Imataca was hampered by applicable environmental regulations, given
the character of the area as a Forest Reserve and a Protected Area. To
overcome these difficulties, the mining lobby pushed for a modification
of the legal framework controlling the reserve.
The Ministry of Mines and the Venezuelan Guayana Corporation came into
play, quickly allocating nearly 700 concessions or contracts to mining
companies, most of them on questionable legal grounds. While the
Ministry of the Environment prepared a management plan for the reserve,
which would allow for such activities, through the modification of
existing regulations.
PUBLIC CONSULTATION OR PUBLIC INSULT?
On May 7, 1997, the Ministry of the Environment and the Ministry of
Mines called a meeting to present their Management Plan for the Forest
Reserve of Imataca to public scrutiny, as required by law. Most of the
selected group of people invited to the meeting received the document
the day before. The Governor of the State of Bol-var, within whose
jurisdiction is most of the reserve, expressed his annoyance and concern
for not being consulted in advance, receiving the document only two days
before. The official representing the Venezuelan Corporation of Guayana
(CVG) expressed the same sentiments, as almost everyone else in the
public. It was agreed the participants would have until the 30th of May
to present their observations.
But, surprisingly, on the 14th of May the Plan was approved by the
Cabinet of Ministers, revealing that the "public consultation" of the
7th of May was a farce, a parody of what such a consultation would be in
a truly democratic country. The decision by the Cabinet of Ministers
came into effect on May 28, with the publication of Presidential Decree
1850, in the Official Gazette No. 36.215.
The Management Plan surreptitiously approved by the government in record
time, seems nothing more than a manipulation of national interest to
exploit the natural riches of the Forest Reserve of Imataca for the
benefit of a few. It also exposes the limited respect for public
opinion, and a submission to commercial interests, regardless of the
environmental and social costs incurred. Public reaction was severe, and
seems to have caught the government by surprise.
WHAT WENT WRONG WITH THE DECISION BY THE COUNCIL OF MINISTERS?
The Organic Law on Territorial Ordinance assigns to the Legislative
Power the competence of determining the modality of use of the national
territory. Mining implies a change in the nature of use of the Forest
Reserve of Imataca, without authorization from Congress. The Council of
Minister is thus assuming a role that corresponds to the Legislative
Power. This is one of the arguments presented by the Congressional
Commission on the Environment of the Chamber of Deputies to demand the
annulment of Presidential Decree 1850 at the Supreme Court.
Presidential Decree 1850 also violates Article 57 of the Forestry Law,
which does not allow for the change of use of the whole or part of a
Forest Reserve without previous authorization from Congress. Forest
Reserves are part of the Areas under Special Administration, in the
terms established by Article 15 of the Organic Law on Territorial
Ordinance. Mining is not contemplated as an acceptable form of land-use
in such areas.
Presidential Decree 1850 also violates the Washington Convention of 1941
on the protection of flora, fauna and the scenic beauties of America;
the approbatory Law of the Convention on Biological Diversity,
subscribed by Venezuela at the Rio Summit in 1992; and Convention 107 of
the International Labor Organization on the protection of indigenous
people. According to the Washington Convention of 1941, a change of use
of protected areas can only occur with previous authorization from the
National Congress of the respective country.
Presidential Decree 1850 also contradicts Presidential Decree 2214 of
April 1992, on the "Norms for the Administration of Forestry Activities
in Forest Reserves, Forest Lots, Forested Areas under Protection and
Forest Areas in Private Property Destined for Production". Such
dispositions have the character of Technical Norms under the Penal Law
of the Environment.
Presidential Decree 1850 also violates Articles 27,28,30,32 and 38 of
the Organic Law on Territorial Ordinance, relative to the right of civic
society to be informed and consulted in matter related to decision of
this nature. It also violates Article 3 of the Organic Law on the
Environment, establishing public participation as a pivotal principle
for the conservation, defense and improvement of the environment. Such a
right derives as well from the Principle of Participative Governance,
developed in Articles 2 and 3 of the National Constitution.
Presidential Decree 1850 also violates Article 25 of the Law on Civic
and Political Rights, establishing the need for public participation in
the management of public matters.
WHAT ARE THE MAIN DEFICIENCIES OF THE MANAGEMENT PLAN?
The Management Plan presents the following key deficiencies and
omissions:
1) It contravenes Presidential Decree 2.214, on the ''Regulations for
the Administration of Forest Activities in Forest Reserves, Forest Lots,
Forest Areas Under Protection, and Forest Areas on Private Property
Destined for Production''.
2) It ignores territorial and other fundamental rights of indigenous
communities, who have inhabited part of this territory since ancestral
times.
3) It excludes the establishment of totally protected areas, where
forestry and mining activities are not allowed.
4) It constitutes a clear threat to the biodiversity and ecological
stability of the region.
5) It excludes the participation of the local populations, environmental
groups, and other citizen organizations, from control mechanisms.
PROTECTED AREAS
In the Management Plan, land-use areas are defined in contradiction to
those established in Presidential Decree 2214. Such is the case of the
Totally Protected Areas, defined in article 4 of this decree as follows:
"It is formed by fragile ecosystems and biotopes requiring absolute
protection, where modifications to the natural environment are not
allowed. Therefore, no human intervention or public use is permitted. In
these areas, only protective activities and scientific research will be
allowed, with prior authorization and under regulation"
The need to establish totally protected areas, to conserve fragile
ecosystems and their biological diversity, has been ignored in the new
Management Plan, establishing a dangerous precedent, which could be
extended to the rest of the country. Thus, in Article 7 of the new
Management Plan, not only the so-called "totally protected area" is
limited to 1.6 percent of the territory, but it is also limited to one
corner in the extreme south of the reserve. Ironically, the plan also
allows there the exploitation of timber and other forest products,
military installations (Articles 7, 51 and 53), as well as tourism and
recreational uses, including the construction of docks, refuges and
tourist camps (Article 47). This is not only a violation of Presidential
Decree 2214. It also absurdly presumes that in the whole of the Forest
Reserve there is no need for truly totally protected areas.
The Management Plan also defines the island of Corocoro (68.500
hectares, equivalent to 1.9 percent of the reserve), a periodically
flooded area, as a "Coastal Protected Area". Nevertheless, it
establishes that here, also, timber extraction is allowed, as well as
military activities, tourism, recreation, and rural settlements.
According to the analysis of the Faculty of Forestry and Environmental
Science of the University of the Andes: "The Management Plan is based on
information at the scale of 1:250000. Therefore, there is no guarantee
that all the ecosystems present in the region have been included in the
areas delimited for research or protection. In Imataca there are
ecosystems not included in other protected areas of the country, such as
National Parks or Natural Monuments. Therefore, the exploitation of
resources should be prohibited in the areas identified for research or
protection, as well as in other areas to be determined by further
analysis. It is recommended that all such areas be unified in a System
of Areas for the Conservation of Biological Diversity".
The Management Plan proposed by the Government also excludes the
establishment of Gene Reserves, as required by Presidential Decree 2214,
and despite Venezuela being a contractual party of the Convention of
Biological Diversity of the United Nations.
INDIGENOUS TERRITORIES
The Management Plan surprisingly does not contemplate, or recognizes,
the territorial rights of indigenous communities, despite this being an
area inhabited by the Warao, Kari a, Arawako, Pemon and Akawaio people
since ancestral times. The treatment of the rights of indigenous
communities is shamefully deficient, limited to their importance as
tourist attractions, and as labor for the "developments" proposed.
The Management Plan distributes more than three and a half million
hectares for commercial activities, including the right to establish
infrastructure for the exploitation, processing, and commercialization
of the natural resources of the reserve. But the indigenous people,
traditional inhabitants of the area, whose rights would be recognized in
any civilized country today, not only find their territorial right
ignored. The Management Plan explicitly forbids the expansion of the
subsistence activities they now practice (Article 64). In this manner,
the indigenous communities are condemned to become impoverished
prisoners in their own land. They could only improve their well being if
they become labor force in the processes of "development" conceived by
bureaucrats in Caracas, aimed at the exploitation of timber and
minerals, without consulting local people with the anticipation and
respect they deserve.
On June 9, 1997, the Federation of Indigenous People of the state of
Bol-var disclosed a public statement opposing the Government's proposal
to mine the Forest Reserve of Imataca: "The recent approval by the
Council of Ministers of a management plan for the Forest Reserve of
Imataca reaffirms, one more, the discriminatory policy of the Venezuelan
State, as well as its violation of the human rights of indigenous
people. The Presidential Decree totally changes the nature of the Forest
Reserve of Imataca, facilitating mining, tourism, industrial
development, forest exploitation and settlements, without any
consultation with those mainly affected, the indigenous people Warao,
Arawako, Kari a, Akawaio and Pemon"
In a forum at the Central University of Venezuela on June 2, 1997, the
coordinator of the Indigenous Federation of the State of Bolivar
proclaimed, both in Pem>n and Spanish: "The forest is our home, our
laboratory, our hospital, our university. It is the source of the
knowledge we need to survive. Our fight against the Decree is a fight in
defense of life"
MINING
The Management Plan, contrary to established regulations, includes an
"Area of Mixed Management", with the explicit intention allowing for the
exploitation of gold and other minerals, through small, medium and large
scale operations. The "Mixed Management Area" extends over 1.4 million
hectares, or 38 percent of the reserve. The mining activities allowed
include not only exploitation, but any other industrial activity related
to the processing and transformation of any mineral, metallic or
non-metallic, found in the area. It includes industrial installations
for the storage and processing of these minerals, or for the disposal of
toxic and residual waste, within the limitation established in other
laws and regulations.
It is further up to the discretion of the National Government to
allocate new logging and mining concessions anywhere within the reserve,
explicitly including the "Research Area", which covers 7 percent of the
land.
ADMINISTRATION
According to the Management Plan, the administration of the Reserve is
in the hands of the Forest Service (SEFORVEN), an organization that has
proved itself incapable of monitoring or controlling the limited
activities of the timber industry. Its pronounced deficiencies and
corruption practices are notorious, placing in doubt the disposition of
the Government to effectively implement the limited commitments of the
Management Plan, or any other applicable laws and regulations.
MISLEADING INFORMATION
In a public announcement published through the national press on June 4,
1997, the Minister of Planning tried to mislead public opinion
indicating that the management plan for the Forest Reserve of Imataca
was supported by the Faculty of Forestry and Environmental Science of
the University of the Andes.
However, this same Faculty published a few days later a document
highlighting the erroneous nature of such a claim. "The Faculty of
Forestry and Environmental Science responsibly clarifies that it did not
participate in the preparation of the management plan for the Forest
Reserve of Imataca, and expresses its disagreement with it, considering
it defective and lacking consultation"
In that same statement, the Faculty of Forestry and Environmental
Science of the University of the Andes requests from the President of
the Republic the annulment of Presidential Decree 1850.
It further considers that the Council of Ministers violated articles
27,28,30,32 and 38 of the Organic Law on Territorial Ordinance, which
guarantee the right of the general public to information and
participation in decision making.
It also indicates that the management plan ignores the differences
between the several types of mining activities. "For the Ministry of the
Environment there is only one king of mining, with similar consequences
regardless of how it's practiced. This is an inadequate and absolutely
unrealistic consideration"
The public announcement of the Faculty of Forestry continues: "The
Faculty believes that a mining macro-project of the enormous economic
implications as the one proposed for Imataca must seek a better
environmental, economic and political consensus, in the country and
among those directly affected; it should not be arbitrarily imposed".
PUBLIC REACTION
The Process leading towards the annulment of Presidential Decree 1850
was initiated through a letter presented on May 17, 1997, to the
President of the Republic by a group of 20 environmental groups and a
larger number of private citizens, requesting from the Executive Branch
to leave without effect the decision to open the Forest Reserve of
Imataca to mining activities, and to initiate an transparent, democratic
and participatory public consultation on the subject, as required by
law.
On May 02, 1997, the College of Sociologists and Anthropologists of
Venezuela, together with Fundafauna, request the intervention of the
Attorney General to leave without effect Presidential Decree 1850.
On June 8, 1997, the Federation of Indigenous People of the state of
Bol-var publishes an announcement opposing the Management Plan for the
Forest Reserve of Imataca, and requesting to revoke Presidential Decree
1850.
On June 12, 1997, the Congressional Commission on the Environment
questions the Ministers of Environment, Planning, and Energy and Mines,
regarding Imataca. The President of the Commission concludes that
Congress would find itself in the need to bring the case to the Supreme
Court to request the annulment of Presidential Decree 1850, if the
Executive Branch does not voluntarily proceed to leave it without
effect.
On June 14, 1997, the Faculty of Forestry and Environmental Science of
the University of the Andes published a statement requesting from the
President of the Republic to revoke Presidential Decree 1850.
On June 17, 1997, the Federation of Environmental Organizations, FORJA,
and the Conservation Society of Guayana, announce their decision to
initiate legal procedures at the office of the Attorney General against
Presidential Decree 1850.
On June 30, 1997, former Minister of the Environment, Colmenares Finol,
publicly requests the intervention of the Supreme Court to annul
Presidential Decree 1850.
On the first of July, 1997, Chiefs and delegates from the indigenous
communities of Waramasen, San Antonio de Morichal, Maurak, Agua Fria,
Monte Bello, Paraitepuy de Roraima, San Francisco de Yuruani, San Rafael
de Kamoiran, Tuauken, Kanayeut y Kamarata, together with
representatives of indigenous communities in urban centers of Bolivar
state, presented a document to Congress rejecting Presidential Decree
1850.
On June 2, 1997, the President of the College of Sociologists and
Anthropologists of Venezuela introduces a legal demand at the Supreme
Court of Justice requesting the annulment of Presidential Decree 1850,
for illegal and unconstitutional
On June 3, 1997, a public march takes place in Caracas demanding from
the Government to revoke Presidential Decree 1850. That same day the
Commission on the Environment of the Senate announces its decision to
request from the President of the Republic the annulment of Presidential
Decree 1850, for illegal and unconstitutional.
On June 13, 1997, the national authorities of the Catholic Church meet
with the President and request the revision of Presidential Decree 1850.
On July 27, 1997, the Christian Democratic Party, COPEI, requests from
the Government the revision of the norms applying to the Forest Reserve
of Imataca.
On July 28, 1997, the Congressional Commission on Science and Technology
Request a moratorium on Presidential Decree 1850.
On August 12, 1997, the political party Causa R, led by the former
Governor of the State of Bolivar, Andr,s Vel squez, introduced at the
Supreme Court of Justice a request for the annulment of Presidential
Decree 1850 for illegal and unconstitutional.
On August 2, 1997, the Supreme Court of Justice admits the request for
annulment of Presidential Decree 1850, presented by environmental groups
and the College of Sociologists and Anthropologists of Venezuela. The
Supreme Court also admits a second resource with the same objective,
introduced by the Commission on the Environment of the Chamber of
Deputies.
_______________________________________________
Julio Cesar Centeno, PhD
Las Tapias, Edif. Carreto
Pent House Tel. +58-74-714576
PO Box 750 Fax +58-74-714576
Merida - Venezuela Email: JCenteno@ciens.ula.ve
http://www.ciens.ula.ve/~jcenteno/
_______________________________________________