Human Rights Impact Assessment Marlin Mine (original) (raw)
Related papers
The Marlin mining project implemented in Guatemala by Goldcorp, a transnational company, is a paradigmatic example of environmental and human rights violations caused by extractive industries affecting and devaluating social and environmental conditions in developing countries, under the excuse of the economic development. This “developmental paradigm” based in part, on the extraction of gold, was prevalent since the times of Conquest of America by the Europeans, asserting “acquiring gold” was the highest value for the new colony, and no other values, such as social wellbeing, human rights, or the protection of the environment, could prevail over it. This tradition has continued throughout history, until the present, especially in weak democracies where the imposition of such extractive industries by developed economies and their arms, transnational corporations, still prevails. This paper aims to demonstrate that the international principle of Sustainable Development, can lead to questions concerning “developmental discourse” and give rise to concrete obligations that the State act in accordance with its Public Interest. This principle is pivotal in situations where the State has the obligation to balance different interests and rights at stake in the decision making process of such projects or activities. This principle is, in our opinion, the international legal basis to oblige the State consider the costs and benefits of such “development projects”, under a more egalitarian hierarchy of rights to be protected. Setting a more integrated balance as a core goal is the obligation of the Guatemala State, which already has articles in its Constitution mandating prior consideration and evaluation of economic, human rights, and environmental concerns. In addition to this substantial right, the paper explores another international law principle, the Precautionary Principle and its different interpretations in international cases, with the idea to give the Guatemalan case some arguments to be constructed in favor of shifting the burden of proof to the State and the company, as a possible reinterpretation of the convention of placing the responsibility on the people to argue damages, and reevaluate the State’s duties to implement measures to avoid risks in this case. This principle is also already implemented in domestic legislation in Guatemala through the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment. The paper argues that a more flexible interpretation, has to be made to protect the peoples’ lives, their wellbeing, and finally to reevaluate the public interest in the case. The conclusions seek to connect the obligations of the State under its national law to evaluate integrally and with precision all the interests and rights around the project, also giving opportunity to an international tribunal, such as the Inter-American Court, to review the State’s compliance with its obligations, and setting new and relevant criteria through the interpretation of environmental rights based on property rights and on international principles of Sustainable Development and the Precautionary Principle.
NokokoPod, 2020
This issue of NokokoPod presents a discussion on responsible sourcing and management of minerals and metals, within the context of a sector that is confronting serious allegations of human rights violations. The annotated PDF is available on the Nokoko journal website. This conversation took place on May 5th, with Logan Cochrane and Joanne Lebert both in Canada. This version of the PDF has been reviewed by Logan Cochrane and Joanne Lebert. In addition to the conversation, a set of annotations have been added as footnotes so as to strengthen the value of these publications and enable them to act as a resource for listeners and readers who want to have additional context and/or find additional resources on the topics discussed.
Testimonio: Canadian Mining in the Aftermath of Genocides in Guatemala
Testimonio: Canadian Mining in the Aftermath of Genocides in Guatemala, 2021
What is land? A resource to be exploited? A commodity to be traded? A home to cherish? In Guatemala, a country still reeling from thirty-six years of US-backed state repression and genocides, dominant Canadian mining interests cash in on the transformation of land into “property,” while those responsible act with near-total impunity. Editors Catherine Nolin and Grahame Russell draw on over thirty years of community-based research and direct community support work in Guatemala to expose the ruthless state machinery that benefits the Canadian mining industry—a staggeringly profitable juggernaut of exploitation, sanctioned and supported every step of the way by the Canadian government. This edited collection calls on Canadians to hold our government and companies fully to account for their role in enabling and profiting from violence in Guatemala. The text stands apart in featuring a series of unflinching testimonios (testimonies) authored by Indigenous community leaders in Guatemala, as well as wide-ranging contributions from investigative journalists, scholars, lawyers, activists, and documentarians on the ground.
In this thesis, the authors look into the issue of indigenous resistance against large-scale mining projects in Latin America. It is based on three months of qualitative fieldwork in San Miguel Ixtahuacán, close to the Marlin Mine, Guatemala. The thesis exposes the ways in which the indigenous communities contest the dominant discourses of powerful actors: Montana Exploradora and the Guatemalan state with regard to gold mining, development, resistance, closure, and impacts of mining. It provides a unique perspective because it 1) in contrast with most literature, focuses on a long-established mine, including the subject of mine closure and 2) equally pays attention to the way Montana Exploradora and state actors shape their discourse. The authors find that in the case of San Miguel Ixtahuacán, it is impossible to speak of a discourse of the indigenous community as a whole; different groups exist that shape their discourses differently, and are not exclusively negative about mining. They conclude that the main issue that from the beginning stood in the way of an honest dialogue between the two sides, has not been environmental destruction, contamination, or the method of working of the company, but the existence of uneven power relations and the patronizing way in which the mining company approaches the indigenous population and the municipality.