[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
dam-l A VIEW OF RALCO FROM CANADA
>HEADLINE: A VIEW OF RALCO FROM CANADA
>Chilean Lawyer Contrasts Indigenous Rights in Canada and Chile
>KEYWORDS: INDIGENOUS PEOPLE; ENVIRONMENT; POLITICS
>SOURCE: SANTIAGO TIMES
>TEXT: (Ed. note: The following is a piece written by Jose Aylwin, a
>distinguished Chilean human rights attorney now studying
>international indigenous law in Canada.)
> I write this from Canada, where I am doing a doctorate in
>law. I have tried to follow the political and social events in Chile,
>my country. Unfortunately, the news which arrives through the
>electronic press has only showed the incomprehension of
>government authorities and national businesses when it comes to
>the rights of indigenous people who were the first to inhabit our
>territory.
> These attitudes are not surprising; they are consistent with
>the injustices which have characterized relations between Chilean
>society and the indigenous people throughout history.
> The recent events related to the Ralco hydroelectric project
>are an example of the injustices I mentioned above. Endesa, with
>the economic power it gained during the dark period in our
>history, and the arrogance which is common to certain economic
>sectors in Chile, defies law 19,253 of 1993, also known as the
>"Indigenous Law," which was democratically approved by Chile's
>parliament. The company is doing this by trying to push forward
>the Ralco project, which implies, among other things, the removal
>of 500 Pehuenche Mapuche people from their ancestral land on
>the upper Bio Bio.
> The current government, insensitive to Pehuenche protests,
>and anchored in an ancient concept of development, does not
>incorporate the vision of a community nor does it prevent the use
>of scarce natural resources, like those of the Bio Bio basin. The
>government is trying to influence the National Indigenous
>Development Board (Conadi) by firing Conadi National Director
>Domingo Namuncura and two other presidential appointed
>advisors. It has done this to seek Conadi's authorization of the
>Pehuenche land barter contracts to then facilitate the construction
>of Ralco.
> Even though these attitudes are not surprising in Chile, the
>injustice of the situation becomes more evident from a foreign
>country, because one has the opportunity to understand the way
>in which other societies treat their indigenous people.
> In the case of Canada, which signed a free trade agreement
with Chile last year, and which is many times cited as an example
of development, it is dignified to be taken into consideration in
this type of issue. In this country, which is home to many
European and Asian peoples, the indigenous people have been
recognized as original settlers in successive decisions by the
Supreme Court starting in the 1970's. For the same reason, and in
the cases when ancestral land rights had not been put down in the
past due to treaties, the Court has considered that the indigenous
people maintain rights over land, water, forests and resources
below the soil.
This situation has caused various indigenous populations to
join together with the federal and respective regional
governments, and begin a negotiation process to define and
specify their territorial rights. But what is at play in these
negotiations is not only land and natural resources, but also the
rights these people have to govern themselves, that is: decide
their own destiny; opt for their own development; and determine
the type of education they want for their children.
Up to now, around 10 of these new treaties have been
signed by different indigenous populations in Canada, covering a
relatively important part of the national territory. Even though
the treaties are different in every case, they all reaffirm the rights
these people have over their ancestral territory and their rights to
govern themselves as different populations within one country. I
find the case of the British Columbia province to be the most
interesting. Given that in the colonial period the indigenous
people, just like in Chile, did not voluntarily give up their land, the
government has began a negotiation process which involves
almost half of the provincial territory and the 50 different
indigenous groups which live there.
While Chilean bureaucrats try to resolve the fate of the
Pehuenche from their comfortable desks in Santiago, here in
Canada, the first of these territorial negotiations in British
Columbia was finalized and signed on August 4 between the
Nisga'a people and the federal and provincial governments.
According to this agreement, the Nisga'a population of 5,000, very
similar to the Pehuenche population, will be the property owners
of a 2,000 square kilometer lot. The property includes soil and
underground resources. Apart from that, they will participate in
the administration and will have extraction rights over the natural
resources in a state-owned forest area which is about 10 times
bigger than the plot they were granted.
Along with this, the same agreement recognizes the Nisga'a's
right to govern themselves through structures defined in their
own constitution, which should be compatible with the Canada
human rights letter. The Nisga'a government includes a justice
system and their own police which deal with issues defined in the
treaty, and in coordination with the provincial government.
Finally, the treaty includes the payment to this population of close
to 200 million Canadian dollars in compensation for territorial
rights this population renounces in the name of their future
development.
The agreement with the Nisga'a shows us a different way to
treat different populations, and is without a doubt much more
respectful than the agreement between Chile and the Pehuenche.
In the case of Ralco, the historical patterns of denial of the other
and imposition of the will of the stronger have remained. Here in
Canada, what sticks out is the recognition of the other and of its
rights as the first inhabitants of this territory. Even more, what
sticks out is the capacity these indigenous populations have to
decide their own future as a part of Canadian society.
Some may argue that this type of agreement is only possible
in the context of developed countries like Canada. What I have
tried to point out is that these agreements do not only involve
economic resources, but also an attitude of dialogue, negotiation
and respect which exists today in Canada with respect to its
indigenous peoples.
If that attitude existed in Chile, projects like Ralco and
others being planned on different indigenous territories all over
the country, would not be allowed to happen. We have a lot to
learn. If we do not show a greater respect for the dignity of
indigenous people and groups, Chilean democracy will continue
being, as it is now, limited and incomplete.
At least it is for the Pehuenche - without a doubt.
*
Chile Information Project
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Aleta Brown
Campaign Associate
International Rivers Network
1847 Berkeley Way
Berkeley, CA 94703 USA
Phone: 1.510.848.1155
Fax: 1.510.848.1008
email: aleta@irn.org
http://www.irn.org