However, as stated before, the government and courts largely ignore these consultation processes and their results (Americas Quarterly, n.db; Brunch & Loarca, 2013). Table 3 provides some examples of consultation processes in Guatemala. This is by no means an exhaustive list of the literature regarding these processes, however, for the purpose of this paper; these cases act as evidence or information to draw out best practices and conclusions. Table 3 Guatemala: Consultative processes in the extractive industries Participants Process Outcomes Mining exploration in the Residents met at a pre-determined location to participate in Positive process highland Municipality of a community vote. for the affected Santa Maria Chiquimula. The vote was for whether or not the Indigenous community Indigenous groups Consultation with wanted to resist the mining activities within the as it eventually Indigenous groups in the Municipality in which the Guatemalan government had became entirely Municipality. already issued a permit for. determined and Prior to the vote, the community was informed regarding controlled by (Source: This description what the vote was on. them. is on an article by The process for their community consultation originates Negative outcome Abbott, 2014) from the Mayan holy book” which states that all because neither “Kiche people over seven can be a part of the decisions making and the government voting process (para.14). nor the MNC A total of 40,000 people voted with only 1,000 voting in accept or favor of the extraction of natural resources. recognize the the vote, the communities’ leaders of the 18 decisions made by communities gave the results of the vote a panel of the Indigenous “to government Ministers from the Congressional Commission community on Indigenous Affairs, the Ministry of Energy and Mining, (Central America and the Ministry of Natural Resources” (para. 24) Data, 2014). This project was authorized to go by the Ministry of Indigenous Energy and Mines despite the negative opinion of the communities were community (Central American Data, 2014). denied their right to FPIC and thus this consultation did not meet ILO C169 FPIC Standards as it was not free, prior, informed and it did not involve consent. Mining extraction This was the first case of a referendum in Guatemala. Positive process for operations in the In 1999, a mining concession was given to Montana MNC who the affected Municipalities of San did not start purchasing land for the concession until 2005. Indigenous groups Miguel Ixtahuacán and as it eventually
However, as stated before, the government and courts largely ignore these consultation processes and their results (Americas Quarterly, n.db; Brunch & Loarca, 2013). Table 3 provides some examples of consultation processes in Guatemala. This is by no means an exhaustive list of the literature regarding these processes, however, for the purpose of this paper; these cases act as evidence or information to draw out best practices and conclusions. Table 3 Guatemala: Consultative processes in the extractive industries Participants Process Outcomes Mining exploration in the highland Municipality of Santa Maria Chiquimula. Consultation with Indigenous groups in the Municipality. (Source: This description is on an article by Abbott, 2014) Residents met at a pre-determined location to participate in a community vote. The vote was for whether or not the Indigenous community wanted to resist the mining activities within the Municipality in which the Guatemalan government had already issued a permit for. Prior to the vote, the community was informed regarding what the vote was on. The process for their community consultation originates from the “Kiche Mayan holy book” which states that all people over seven can be a part of the decisions making and voting process (para.14). A total of 40,000 people voted with only 1,000 voting in favor of the extraction of natural resources. the vote, the communities’ leaders of the 18 communities gave the results of the vote “to a panel of government Ministers from the Congressional Commission on Indigenous Affairs, the Ministry of Energy and Mining, and the Ministry of Natural Resources” (para. 24) This project was authorized to go by the Ministry of Energy and Mines despite the negative opinion of the community (Central American Data, 2014). Positive process for the affected Indigenous groups as it eventually became entirely determined and controlled by them. Negative outcome because neither the government nor the MNC accept or recognize the decisions made by the Indigenous community (Central America Data, 2014). Indigenous communities were denied their right to FPIC and thus this consultation did not meet ILO C169 FPIC Standards as it was not free, prior, informed and it did not involve consent. Mining extraction operations in the Municipalities of San Miguel Ixtahuacán and This was the first case of a referendum in Guatemala. In 1999, a mining concession was given to Montana MNC who did not start purchasing land for the concession until 2005. Positive process for the affected Indigenous groups as it eventually
Jodie_Stevens_2016_MRP_Final.docx