|
22 June 2001 | Intag | By Carlos Zorrilla
The Inspection Panel Investigation Report in question refers
to the Prodeminca mining project (Prodeminca stands for: Mining
Development and Environmental Quality Project)- a project
financed through a 14 million dollar loan to Ecuador by the
World Bank, and further financing through the Swedish and
British governments.
Background
Decoin, Defensa y Conservacion Ecologica de Intag initiated
a claim in December of 1999 against the Prodeminca project
because we felt our rights would be violated, given that one
of the projectÕs primary objective was to promote mining in
Ecuador. We felt the project would threaten our lively hood
and the locally agricultural based economy, plus our environment.
Furthermore, we felt the project violated other Bank policies
by gathering mining information in protected areas.
The project collected geochemical data from 36,000 square
kilometers of Western Ecuador (3.6 million hectares), INCLUDING
7 national protected areas (National Parks, Wilderness Areas),
and DOZENS of private and public legal forest reserves. In
several cases, the sample collecting was done illegally, without
the consent of landowners.
Quick Summary of the Findings of the Inspection Panel:
The Panel found several violations of World Bank policy throughout
the project, and uncovered a impressive series of irregularities
that are detailed in the Panel Report (available at: www.inspectionpanel.org.)
Below is a very quick summary of the main violations.
We encourage you to read the whole report.
(Download
a PDF of the report in Spanish)
1) No Environmental Assessment (EA) was ever done
for the northern part of Ecuador- even though it contains
the Cotacachi-Cayapas Ecological Reserve, and belongs to 2
of Earth's Biological Hotspots: The Tropical Andean, and the
Choco-Darien-Western Ecuador Hotspot (the EA that was done
was limited to the environmental impacts of small mining in
the south of the country- an entirely different ecosystem).
2) The EA was done without ANY consultation of local
peoples. In fact, the report states that the first series
of meetings took place NEARLY 3 YEARS after the completion
of the EA. In our province (Imbabura), the meetings TO INFORM
(not to consult) the local population, started about 5 years
after the completion of the EA, and nearly at the end of the
project. (World Bank Policy calls for consultation to take
place before the completion of the EA- constituting a major
violation of Bank Policy)
3) The EA did not evaluate the potential impact the
project presented to protected areas and other natural areas,
nor did it even mention the well known extraordinary biological
diversity of the forests of northwestern Ecuador. (the potential
impacts to protected areas was pointed out by Bank experts
before the EA process took place- but never mentioned in the
EA itself)
4) The EA did not include in it's investigation one
single biotic element; nor did later investigations. (The
36 elements that were analyzed were almost exclusively useful
only to the mining industry, and included: platinum, gold,
silver, copper, cadmium, lead, molybdenum, and many other
rare metals).
INSPITE OF THE FACT THAT THE MAIN FOCUS OF THE PROJECT
WAS TO CREATE A DATABASE (MAPS AND GEOCHEMICAL INFORMATION
TO INCREASE MINING ACTIVITY IN ECUADOR), the Panel concluded
that the data (though it did not include one single biotic
element), was neutral.
The EA also totally ignored valuable input from World Bank
Latin American and Caribbean experts and higher ups that expressed
concern over the limitations of the project, and it's potential
impact on protected areas.
The whole document is worth reading, not only because it
exposes the way a Bank project operates in developing countries,
but also because after reading about all the violations of
World Bank policies and irregularities, incredibly, the Inspection
Panel inexplicable concludes that the project fundamentally
did not violate World Bank policies, in spite of the fact
that in the course of its own investigation, it uncovers a
host of very serious violations.
One important slant on all this is that Ecuador's Minister
of Energy and Mines has decided to sell the information gathered
by the Prodeminca project. This includes information within
protected areas that was gathered with the intent of promoting
mining. It's relevant to note that another of the project's
goal was to "modernize" Ecuador's mining laws. Towards the
end of the Prodeminca project, the president rammed through
a major reform of the mining legislation that did away with
most of the environmental protection and fiscal controls:
including the prohibition to mine in protected areas, and
the elimination of all royalties that mining companies would
have had to pay for exploiting the nation's minerals, which
legally belongs to the state.
In the case of our County (Cotacachi County), which in September
of 2000 declared itself an Ecological County, and where, in
a People's Assembly on that same date asked the federal government
NOT TO MAKE PUBLIC THE GEOCHEMICAL INFORMATION GATHERED WITHIN
ITS POLITICAL BOUNDRIES OR FROM ANY PROTECTED AREAS, the government
has arrogantly gone ahead with its plans to sell the information
to whomever it solicits it, thus violating the will of local
population, who have, along with County government authorities,
taken the firm decision to back sustainable economic activities,
biodiversity conservation, and clean technology through its
Ecological County declaration..
The Panel's unfortunate and unjust decision, in spite of
finding abundant violations committed by project World Bank
officials, gives a green light to the long-held plans of the
national and international mining sector of gaining access
to millions of hectares of protected areas in Ecuador for
mining, and inevitably sets the stage for endless conflicts
between mining companies, and local populations and their
local governments.
YouÕd think the World Bank and Ecuadorian officials would
have learned by now after decades of massive environmental
destruction and cultural devastation wrought by the petroleum
industry in EcuadorÕs Amazon basin that has only worsened
the average Ecuadorian standard of living, and increased dramatically
EcuadorÕs foreign debt. But then again, maybe the BankÕs fundamental
role is not so much to alleviate poverty, but to pave the
way for transnationals to secure abundant and cheap sources
of energy and metals for their industries.
|
