Topic: freedom of information

RELEASE: 14 Latin American and Caribbean Countries Adopt an Ambitious Plan of Action to Improve Access Rights in the Region

Lauren Zelin — Fri, 19 Apr 2013 17:17:15 -0400

Fourteen Latin American and Caribbean countries adopted an ambitious Plan of Action to improve access rights in the region, including access to information, public participation, and access to justice. The plan, which was approved at a meeting in Guadalajara, Mexico, on April 16-17, 2013, seeks to implement the Latin American and Caribbean Declaration on Principle 10 that was signed at the Rio +20 Conference in June 2012, under which countries agreed to work towards a regional instrument to improve access rights.

The meeting began with Colombia and Honduras signing on to the LAC Declaration, a major accomplishment for all parties. The 14 countries that have now signed on include: Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Trinidad and Tobago, and Uruguay.

“The new Plan of Action shows political will to transform environmental justice and transparency in the region,” said Carole Excell, Senior Associate at the World Resources Institute and The Access Initiative. “It sets the pace and the agenda to tackle the challenges of negotiating a regional instrument to ensure access rights across Latin America and the Caribbean.”

Under the new 2013-2014 Plan of Action, the LAC countries have committed to:

Promote the Principle 10 Declaration and incorporate new signatories into the process;
Strengthen and highlight the progress made on rights of access to information, participation, and justice;
Promote active participation of civil society at the national level; and
Develop working groups to deliberate capacity-building and cooperation efforts, and determine the nature and scope of the regional instrument.

Ambassador Jose Balmaceda of Chile noted that the Plan of Action “is a strong political signal to the international community that we are responding in a responsible way to this commitment [to Principle 10] … It is the first time that government representatives from 14 countries and civil society sat down to debate – with transparency and trust – relevant issues for the future of the region. This is a testament to maturity in the region. We have been able to reach consensus on the Plan of Action that will allow us to move ahead on national processes and regional efforts. I am sure that this result will motivate other nations in the region to join the process.”

The Plan of Action includes a number of innovative provisions, including procedures for public participation in the regional process and its working groups. It will create opportunities for close South-to-South cooperation on rights to promote transparency, public participation, and access to justice, as well as a focus on increased support for effective implementation at the national level.

“We hope at the end of 2014 we can count on the development of an instrument on Principle 10 that establishes concrete actions to guarantee effective and informed participation to all citizens and communities of our region,” said Daniel Barragan, Ecuadorian Center for Environmental Law (Centro Ecuatoriane de Derecho Ambinental Ambiental), an environmental law NGO. “Soon we can have a voice and be a part of the decision making on the environment and natural resources.”

In addition to adopting the Plan of Action, members elected co-chairs to run the working groups. Costa Rica and Brazil were mandated to design the regional instrument on Principle 10 and Jamaica and Columbia were given the role to facilitate work on cooperation and capacity building.

RELEASE: Caribbean Freedom of Information Network launched at Landmark Conference

Lauren Zelin — Fri, 22 Mar 2013 13:55:32 -0400

11 Caribbean Countries Meet to Discuss Freedom of Information Laws in the Region

For the first time, Caribbean governments and civil society have come together to discuss access to information, public participation in governance, and access to justice at a landmark conference held in Kingston, Jamaica. Representatives from 11 Caribbean countries attended the “Regional Conference on Freedom of Information in the Caribbean: Improving Management for the Environment.”

At the close of the two-day conference on March 21, 2013, governments, civil society, and media announced the decision to launch a Caribbean network on freedom of information to support processes to improve standards for access to information in the region.

Dr. Carolyn Gomes, chairperson of the Access to Information Advisory Stakeholders’ Committee and Executive Director of Jamaicans for Justice (JFJ) said, “freedom of information is the most powerful tool for ordinary citizens to arm themselves with the information they need to change their lives. Launching this freedom of information network will build opportunities for collaboration, learning and capacity building among information commissioners, civil society and media across the region.”

Countries reviewed the status and effectiveness of freedom of information laws, the number of requests for information being made in each country, and institutional structures for implementation and enforcement. Jamaica is one of seven Caribbean countries (Belize, Trinidad and Tobago, Antigua and Barbuda, Dominican Republic, Jamaica, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, and the Cayman Islands) to have freedom of information laws in force. Five countries have draft laws pending, and Bahamas and Guyana have passed laws but they are not yet in force. Gaps in implementation were noted in Belize, Antigua, and St Vincent and the Grenadines, which have laws that have not yet fully been utilized by the public.

“Freedom of information laws ensure that citizens can access official documents from their governments and gives them a voice in decisions that directly impact them and the environment,” said Danielle Andrade, Legal Director of the Jamaica Environment Trust. “Using Jamaica’s Access to Information Act, we were able to obtain documents to build our legal case to compel the government to fix a non-functioning sewage treatment plant in Harbour View, Kingston.”

The event was a follow-up to the Rio+20 sustainable development conference in May of 2012, where ten countries in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) signed a declaration to work towards a legally binding, regional instrument to promote the implementation of the rights of access to information, public participation, and access to justice in environmental matters. Jamaica was the first Caribbean country to sign the Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) Declaration on Principle 10, and Trinidad and Tobago joined in 2013.

“The LAC Principle 10 regional declaration is a game changing opportunity for the region,” said Carole Excell, Senior Associate at the World Resources Institute. “Caribbean governments need to embrace new regional approaches that seek to improve transparency, reduce conflicts over environmental decisions, and build capacity to implement new rights for citizens.”

Michelle Fife, Legal Advisor to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of St. Vincent and the Grenadines stated, “this is a positive initiative which brings the region together on an important issue. Transparency is important to our government. With continued work we will build and strengthen our institutional capacity to improve access to information.”

The conference was funded by The Commonwealth Foundation, the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean, and the Information Commissioner’s Office of the Cayman Islands. Organizers included the Jamaica Environment Trust (JET), World Resources Institute (WRI), The Access Initiative (TAI), Jamaicans for Justice (JFJ), The Mona School of Business and Management, and the Access to Information Unit of Jamaica.

New Initiative Uses Environmental Lens to Promote Government Transparency in Key African Countries

Michael Oko — Tue, 05 Apr 2011 13:44:23 -0400

A new initiative was recently launched to promote government transparency and increase people’s access to information in Ghana, Uganda and South Africa. The Access to Information in Africa: Transparency Models and Lessons Learned (ATI in Africa) project is coordinated by the World Resources Institute (WRI) in partnership with the Centre for Democratic Development (CDD) in Ghana, Greenwatch in Uganda and the Open Democracy Advice Centre (ODAC) in South Africa.

“While there have been recent reforms in Africa that have helped usher in multi-party politics and elections, there are still many gaps in accountability mechanisms, such as access to information laws,” said Victor Brobbey, research fellow for Governance and Legal Policy at CDD. “This initiative is designed to advance reforms in Ghana, Uganda and South Africa that will improve the quality of governance and protect people’s rights in these countries.”

Uganda and South Africa have a comprehensive freedom of information act which grants citizens the right of access to information in the custody of public institutions. In Ghana, a freedom of information bill awaits action in the parliament.

This initiative comes on the heels of recent developments to increase people’s access to information in Liberia and Nigeria. On October 4, 2010, President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf signed into law the Liberian Freedom of Information Act. The signing made Liberia the first West African country with a comprehensive freedom of information law. More recently, on March 16, 2011, the Nigerian Senate passed the Freedom of Information Bill. This followed the passing of a similar bill by the House of Representatives. A “harmonization conference committee” has been appointed to resolve the differences between the Senate and House bills.

“These new laws are a step forward in these two countries—we are looking forward to similar measures in other African countries,” said Peter Veit, senior associate, WRI, and director of the ATI in Africa project. “Working with local partners on the ground in Ghana, Uganda and South Africa, we will be using an objective, analytical approach to explore new opportunities that lie in environmental and natural resource laws to advance people’s rights of access to information, including government-held information on land, oil, natural gas minerals, forests and water.”

The ATI in Africa project is designed improve access to information in Africa by identifying and testing sectoral approaches for citizens and civil society organizations to access information on the environment and high-value natural resources. Transparency infrastructure that provide citizens with multiple avenues to access government-held information are likely to be more robust and secure, and can better protect the right of access to information.

“The ATI in Africa project’s approach to increase access to information though an environmental lens provides a unique approach to help people and improve governance in Africa,” said Tavinder Nijhawan, Senior Management Officer at the International Development Research Centre. “We are excited to be supporting this project, which should help identify new pathways to engage governments, civil society and individuals on environmental and natural resource issues that affect people’s lives and livelihoods.”

*ATI in Africa *is supported principally with funding from the International Development Research Centre (IDRC) in Canada as well as Irish Aid, Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency, and World Bank Development Grant Facility. The IDRC grant will support the project for a period of two years, and is part of IDRC’s new portfolio of investments to catalyze more open and inclusive models of development through research and outreach.

# # # #

The World Resources Institute is a global environmental think tank that goes beyond research to put ideas into action (www.wri.org).

Open Democracy Advice Center is a non-profit based in Cape Town. ODAC’s mission is to promote open and transparent democracy; foster a culture of corporate and government accountability; and assist people in South Africa to be able to realize their human rights (http://www.opendemocracy.org.za/).

Greenwatch is an environmental rights advocacy NGO in Uganda that promotes public participation in the sustainable use, management and protection of the environment and natural resources and the enforcement of the Constitutional right to a clean and healthy environment (http://www.greenwatch.or.ug/).

Ghana’s Center for Democratic Development is an independent, nonpartisan and nonprofit research-based and policy-oriented think tank in Accra, Ghana. CDD’s mission is to promote democracy, good governance and the development of liberal economic environment in Ghana in particular and Africa in general. (http://www.cddghana.org/).

International Development Research Center is a Canadian Crown corporation that works in close collaboration with researchers from the developing world in their search for the means to build healthier, more equitable, and more prosperous societies (www.idrc.ca).

Avoiding the Resource Curse: Spotlight on Uganda Oil

Janet Ranganathan — Tue, 19 Oct 2010 11:17:18 -0400

Can new SEC disclosure rules help bring transparency to Uganda’s oil sector?

This piece originally appeared on the Huffington Post.

Nestled near the end of the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (HR 4173) is Section 1504, two and half pages of text that aim to bring much needed transparency to the extractive resources industry, especially its operations in the developing world.

President Obama’s recent speech on international development to the UN General Assembly highlighted the role of transparency and accountability as ways to improve government institutions. The financial reform bill provides one such mechanism by strengthening business and government accountability in the extractive sector.

The law requires domestic and foreign companies that submit annual reports with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to publish annually how much money they pay to U.S. and foreign governments for extracting oil, gas, and minerals.

Why does this matter?

Read the Working Paper on Uganda and the SEC Rules

This type of disclosure is critical. Lack of transparency around transactions between extractive industries and governments can lead to corruption and mismanagement of both resources and the associated revenues. The result, all too often, is the so-called “resource curse”: a paradox in which countries abundant in natural resources enjoy less economic growth and poorer development outcomes than countries with fewer natural resources. By requiring transparency around how much companies pay to foreign governments for these valuable resources, SEC disclosure will empower public interest groups to track funds more accurately and hold governments accountable.

Given its great potential, what impact will this law have in practice? Uganda, one of Africa’s newest petro-states, could provide a first test case.

Uganda and the Shadow of the ‘Resource Curse’

Uganda, a country rich in natural resources, is building a foundation for a progressive democracy. For example, it is one of a handful of countries in Africa that grants its citizens the right of access to information. But the discovery of oil in 2006 has some advocates concerned that Uganda may still fall victim to the “resource curse”.

The oil discoveries in the northern part of Uganda’s Albertine Rift spurred significant investment by foreign oil companies. As of 2009, over $700 million has been spent on oil exploration in the region. Companies have so far drilled only three of the nine exploration blocks, but have already found more than two and a half billion barrels of oil, raising high expectations for when full production begins, as early as this fall.

A Lack of Transparency

As oil production and extraction ramp up in Uganda, local NGOs have campaigned to gain access to Production Share Agreements (PSAs), the contracts between governments and resource extraction companies that dictate what percentage of revenues will go to the government. PSAs provide critical information which NGOs can use to calculate production amounts and track revenues.

However, the Ugandan government has refused to make these public, claiming that doing so would undermine the government’s negotiating position in allocating the remaining oil exploration blocks.

Since 2007, journalists have filed at least three pleadings in Ugandan courts over the release of PSAs—two in magistrate courts and one in the High Court. In the first case, heard in February of 2010, the Magistrate ruled in favor of the government by declaring that the PSAs are confidential documents based on an interpretation of the country’s Access to Information Act. In pleadings to the High Court in 2010, Greenwatch (a public-interest environmental law NGO) argued that it needs access to the PSAs in order to assess oil project impacts on the environment and public health to protect citizens’ Constitutional right to a clean and healthy environment. This case is scheduled to be heard shortly.

Help from the SEC?

Given these developments in Uganda at the national level, civil society groups in Uganda may need to look to the international arena for legislation such as the Dodd-Frank Act to gain transparency around the oil sector. The SEC rule-making period, which lasts until April 2011, will be critical in determining how the Act will play out on the ground.

Tullow Oil, the major oil exploration company with concessions in Uganda, is listed primarily on the London Stock Exchange and does not file annual reports with SEC. Tullow, however, is seeking to sell one-third of its shares to Total S.A., a French extractives company, and another one-third of its shares to the China National Offshore Oil Company (CNOOC), which are both registered with the SEC and file annual reports.

If the SEC rule-making process establishes regulations that cast a wide net, it will help Ugandan civil society get the information they need to hold their government accountable. WRI and partners will continue to track these issues and collaborate on how to build capacity of advocates, local NGO leaders and parliamentarians to learn how to acquire this information from the SEC. Only then can this new U.S. law help shift the balance of power from the government of Uganda to its citizens, and enable civil society to use this data to work with the government to improve environmental governance.

Download WRI’s Comments on the SEC Draft Regulations for Section 1504 (PDF, 124 Kb)

Freedom of Information Laws Spreading Around the World

Lalanath de Silva — Sun, 26 Sep 2010 11:55:13 -0400

Lalanath de Silva, Director of WRI’s Access Initiative, answers questions on how the “right to know” is evolving in both developed and developing countries.

September 28th is the 8th International Right to Know Day, which focuses attention on issues of government transparency. What do you think when you look back on the “Right to Know” movement in recent years?

This year we have much cause to celebrate, because there has been an explosion of new Freedom of Information Acts (FOIAs) around the world. By the last count, over 80 countries have enacted some form of FOIA, and the vast majority of these have been introduced in the past five or six years. FOIA laws are quickly becoming the norm. Transparency is becoming the global norm. And governments that do not adhere to these principles are having much more trouble justifying their positions. That said, there is still a lot that needs to be done to improve implementation of these laws. Our research has shown that practice lags behind.

What is behind the recent boom in Freedom of Information Acts?

When a government is transparent, there is less room for corruption and more room for accountability. That’s why FOIAs are becoming standard good practice in the international community. International organizations, Multilateral Development Banks, and bilateral donors including USAID are all looking to see whether government transparency is part of the legal system as they decide where to give aid. But this isn’t just about international pressure. There has also been increasing demand from within countries. Civil society and citizens’ groups have really made some impressive progress. As the old saying goes, “sunshine is the best disinfectant.”

Why is promoting freedom of information laws important to an environmental organization like WRI?

Making the right environmental choices - as consumers, voters and shareholders – depends on having access to accurate information on the issues that confront us every day, from the quality of the food we eat, to the impacts of corporate supply chains, to the voting records of parliamentarians. Much of this data is held by or can only be forced into the open by government.

Where have you seen progress on Freedom of Information?

Bangladesh and India have made good progress. Chile too has just passed new FOI legislation. Indonesia passed a FOIA in the past few years, and has been making special efforts to be more transparent.

On this issue, the division between developing and developed countries is shrinking.

Mexico has one of the best examples of a well-functioning FOIA. In Mexico, information isn’t just released to the person who requested it. It’s released to everyone. This means that different people do not have to reinvent the wheel each time with different FOIA requests, which saves a lot of time and effort. When it’s released once, it’s public for everyone. IFAI, the Instituto Federal de Acceso a la Informacion, puts information online and also webcasts hearings on information request appeals. The vast majority of requests so far have been for personal information, like birth certificates or pension records. Before the new law, people had trouble accessing this kind of information even about themselves. Interestingly, the new law is also used by government agencies to get information from other government agencies!

What does Freedom of Information mean in more developed countries?

Well, the United Kingdom did not even have a right to information five years ago. But in 2009, because of their new law a young journalist made a request for Members’ of Parliament (MP) expenditure statements. Her request was denied by th Speaker of parliament but she won her appeals including one in the country’s Highest Court – the House of Lords – which ordered the release of the information. When the reports were released, all of this questionable spending with public funds came to light – pool cleanings, replacing chandeliers, etc. There was a huge public uproar, and the Speaker ended up resigning. It rocked the entire government establishment, all as a direct impact of a freedom of information request. And now, people can access their MPs’ expense reports online.

In the United States, the debate has evolved towards a more modern sense of what “Freedom of Information” should mean. Today, citizens have the right to ask the government for information, to pull that information out, but the process can take multiple requests and a lot of time and effort. Much less burdensome would be for the government to push information out. Since President Obama’s Open Government Executive Order, the government has been much more proactive about getting information out to people. More than 20 U.S. agencies have implemented the order, and websites like data.gov make information – about TARP, or the BP Oil Spill, or Congressional fundraising – much more accessible. This is quite new to the U.S.

What makes a good Freedom of Information Law?

The best laws cast the right to information in the widest possible terms with the fewest limits or exceptions. Good laws have enforcement mechanisms so that citizens can make requests and appeal if necessary to an independent body. This is why some FOIAs tend to fall short – in Indonesia for example, many are dissatisfied with the number of exceptions and limits to the rules, and the lack of strong enforcement.

What should be the focus of this movement in the coming year?

We need to keep the momentum going. I would like to see a big push from governments of all countries to establish transparency as the norm and bring it into the international process. President Obama’s global open government initiative announced last Thursday at the UN promises to be a good vehicle for doing exactly that. Some countries, like Sweden and Denmark, have had their FOI laws since the 1700s, but there are leaders in this area among developing countries too, like Mexico, Brazil, and India. On this issue, the division between developing and developed countries is shrinking.

This is the right moment for some cross-north/south leadership that could tip the balance towards transparency even further. That’s what we should be working for this year.

India's Environmental Detectives

Monika Kerdeman — Mon, 22 Mar 2010 14:58:56 -0400

Lawyers in India advocate for environmental rights, one case at a time.

After six hours in a small basement office here in Delhi, India, I am overwhelmed by the activities of the day. From one minute to the next, it has been unpredictable and unplanned, but surprisingly productive. There is no such thing as a scheduled meeting, and adaptability is key. I’m visiting the office of the Legal Initiative for Forest and Environment (LIFE), an Indian advocacy and law group that helps people who have been affected by environmentally harmful development projects. The people at LIFE are more than just lawyers to their clients. They serve as the voices of local people in an often voiceless world.

LIFE’s four full time lawyers (Ritwick Dutta, Rahul Chaudhary, Promod Kumar, and Soumyarup Sahu) try over 70 cases a year with the Indian Supreme Court, the National Environmental Appellant Authority (NEAA) and the Central Empowerment Committee (CEC). Their goal is to keep the government accountable for its environmental decisions, and make sure that existing laws are enforced. This work, and the work of so many Access Initiative partners like them, is a fundamental building block of sustainable development.

LIFE Attorneys Rahul Chaudhary, Promod Kumar, and Ritwick Dutta

LIFE attorneys serve as watchdogs when business and the government fail to follow the best practices mandated by law, such as holding public hearings, consultations and Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs). They perform quite a bit of detective work, piecing together evidence to ensure laws are being followed. They also help teach civil servants how to implement the laws, and help organizations and people connect with one another on cases taking place all over the country.

In one of their cases, runoff from a cement company had created brackish water in neighboring communities. In another, thermal power plants built without environmental testing had hurt local mango farmers. They take on these cases and others like them for only a nominal fee, if they charge at all.

In one such case I attended with Ritwick Dutta, he was appealing to the courts to enforce a law meant to protect Asiatic lions in the Girnar Sanctuary. Dutta’s client, the Gir Nature Youth Club, had used India’s Right to Information Act to obtain information about the building of an Ashram on land designated for wildlife. Through the petitions process, the club discovered that the Ashram had in fact been encroaching on protected forest lands for years, even after the courts had ordered them to stop.

The impact of the hundreds of thousands of visitors to the Ashram had taken a huge toll on the land, the wildlife in the area and the local community. Even though the courts had previously decided in favor of the Youth Club to preserve the land, local ministers had overruled them and allowed for the encroachment, undermining the purpose and intent of the protected area.

Ritwick Dutta with clients outside the courthouse

Our session in court that day, like so many others, ended without a final decision. When Ritwick and I returned to the LIFE office, I asked what motivates him to take on cases that can often drag on for years. “It’s interesting and challenging work,” he said. “I want future generations to be able to appreciate how beautiful India truly is. The environment has an inherent right to exist in the form in which it has been created. Since we are not the creator we should not be the destroyer.”

In my job with The Access Initiative (TAI), I have had the pleasure of working with some of the most amazing people around the world. Being based in DC, though, I rarely get to see them in action. Generally, I read their stories on our blog or in reports.

Sitting in LIFE’s office in Delhi, I see the ultimate value of how access laws (access to information, access to justice and public participation) are the keys to empowering people to truly have a more sustainable future.

By putting the pieces of the law puzzle together one case at a time, the lawyers at LIFE help to ensure that the courts take the environment and community rights seriously. Even though they might not win all of their cases, they have at least brought the injustices to the attention of a larger Indian population. They have also given the local people a voice to ensure better standards for the future of their country’s environmental and sustainable development. It’s a process, and a story, that continues to inspire me.

LIFE is one of hundreds of groups in the Access Initiative that are fighting for better governance and environmental protection around the world. For more information about their work and the Access Initiative network, visit http://www.accessinitiative.org.

Browse a slideshow of Monika’s trip on Flickr

View slideshow on Flickr with captions

Whose Amazon Is It?

Ruth Nogueron — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 09:35:04 -0400

Following the recent violence over natural resource use, Peru has an opportunity to balance economic development with human rights protections.

The tension between natural resource development and the protection of human rights reached a breaking point in Peru this month. In early April, indigenous groups initiated nearly 50 days of protests as a public outcry for laws that violated their right to decide if and how large-scale development happens on their territory. Fatal violence erupted when police and the military attempted to break a road blockade near the city of Bagua, in the northern region of Amazonas and close to the border with Ecuador. The victim count remains controversial. The official death toll is 33, with 24 policemen and 9 civilians killed. Other estimates range from 40 to 250 indigenous people dead.

The government responded to the protests with heavy-handed tactics, calling a state of emergency and calling in the military and national police. (A move denounced by human rights organizations). Also, there has been a national and international outcry at the use of violence by both sides. Public demonstrations and strikes were held in Lima and other cities in Perú, with protests in other major cities around the world. The International Human Rights Commission, leaders of the Peruvian Catholic Church, as well as Peruvian and international NGOs, all made statements calling for investigations and a stop to the violence.

The ingredients for violent conflict have been simmering for several years. The Peruvian government’s aggressive economic development strategy centers on promoting private investment in the natural resources based sectors. Between 2004 and 2009, the oil and gas concessions in the Peruvian Amazon increased their coverage from 15% to 72%. The vast majority of these concessions overlap with indigenous people’s territories, including titled and demarcated communities, communities in process of being titled, territorial reserves and proposed reserves. However, the government did not consult with these indigenous communities before it drew the concession boundaries and awarded the concessions to oil and gas companies.

Adding fuel to the fire is the 2006 US-Perú Trade Promotion Agreement, the free trade agreement (FTA) signed by President George W. Bush and Peru’s President, Alan García. The FTA included a variety of groundbreaking provisions for labor, public participation and consultation, and forest management, which were included after the agreement was re-negotiated in 2007. These provisions were meant to improve forest sector governance and promote legal trade in timber products. The FTA also included language meant to prohibit the weakening of existing environmental laws in both countries.

To make sure the agreement could be certified before President Bush left office in January 2009, the Peruvian Congress granted Peru’s executive branch special powers to enact laws and regulations needed to be in compliance with the FTA. Between February and June 2008, the executive branch used these powers to pass a series of Legislative Decrees meant to attract and facilitate large-scale private investment in the extractive industries, forestry and agriculture in the Peruvian Amazon.

Much attention has been paid to two of the more contentious decrees–Legislative Decree 1064 and Legislative Decree 1020. Decree 1064 removes previous requirements for companies to negotiate with a community prior to moving in, and it reclassifies communal land rights as subordinate to individual and private ownerships, giving favor to individuals, companies, and settlers who invade indigenous territories. Decree 1020 outlines a plan to regulate investment in the Amazon, but protesters say it frees roughly 60 percent of Peru’s forests for potential development.

As with the oil and gas concession awarding process, indigenous communities were not consulted on the content of the decrees. This is despite the fact that Peru has signed onto several international conventions and declarations that commit the government to providing specific protections to indigenous peoples, including the right to free, prior and informed consent on development activities that would threaten their territory or way of life.

Community Engagement & Natural Resource Use

WRI’s 2009 report, Breaking Ground: Engaging Communities in Extractive and Infrastructure Projects recommends 7 principles to help companies adapt to the changing rules of natural resource extraction by more effectively involving communities in project decision-making:

Prepare communities before engaging.
Determine what level of engagement is needed.
Integrate community engagement into each phase of the project cycle.
Include traditionally excluded stakeholders.
Gain free, prior and informed consent.
Resolve community grievances through dialogue.
Promote participatory monitoring by local communities.

Read the full publication here.

Last year, after public protest and indigenous peoples’ demonstrations called the decrees into question, a special investigative Commission created by the Peruvian Congress found the decrees to be unconstitutional. When debate in the Congress on the Commission’s findings was blocked and formal spaces for dialogue appeared to be ineffective, indigenous communities took to the streets to protest.

Since the events in Bagua, the Congress has repealed the controversial decrees, and President Garcia has recognized the lack of consultation and declared that it is time to start over again.

The government has set up a national working group made up by members of the executive branch, the presidents of the regional governments of the Amazonian States, and 10 indigenous representatives. The working group is tasked to prepare a sustainable development plan for the Peruvian Amazon. While the Minister of Foreign Relations has said that Peru has the support of the U.S. Government and Congress to find negotiated solutions to improve the laws, the U.S. itself has said or done very little about the situation.

An unprecedented opportunity for Peru

The “new start” offers the government an unprecedented opportunity to put effective measures in place to protect all of its citizens from the unintended negative consequences of development, and make sure that they receive its full benefits through a participatory process.

At the national level, the government needs to make sure that laws and policies:

Provide information: Give citizens adequate access to clear and accurate information about planned development, and that citizens are given an opportunity to understand the full implications of development. The government should conduct analysis and provide maps that show the location of indigenous territories and the overlaps with possible conflicting land uses for example, oil and gas concessions or forest and mining concessions.
Allow citizen participation: Give citizens formal opportunities to participate in credible decision-making processes to ensure sure that their views and opinions are reflected in final decisions.
Provide access to justice: Give citizens access to effective forms of justice so that if they have a grievance, they don’t feel they need to take the law into their own hands.

Finally, companies operating on indigenous territory should also play their part. Since the majority of oil and gas concessions in the Peruvian Amazon overlap indigenous territories, those operating in these concessions should have a policy regarding indigenous peoples, and an effective policy on community engagement and free prior and informed consent.

Forest Management in Gabon (Aménagement Forestier au Gabon)

Payson Schwin — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 11:33:33 -0400

As the official poster for the Gabon Interactive Atlas project, this map provides an overview of current logging titles and protected areas in Gabon as of December 2008.

Working Towards Greater Forest Sector Transparency in Gabon

Matthew Steil — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 08:44:52 -0400

The first-ever Interactive Forest Atlas for Gabon offers data and tools to support the sustainable management of Gabon’s forests.

At the launch event in May, S.E. Emile Doumba, the Gabonese Minister of Forest Economy, Water, Fishing, and Aquaculture, said:

With this dynamic atlas, the government of Gabon affirms its commitment to transparency and good governance in forest management. The forest data produced by this partnership [with WRI] are now available for public use.

No more than a year ago, Mr. Doumba’s speech would have been impossible to give in the Republic of Gabon.

Covered 80% by lush tropical forest, Gabon contains some of the world’s most valuable, biodiverse forested regions. During past decades, however, forest data and maps were guarded from the public – creating dangerous confusion on the ground and forming a significant obstacle to sustainable forest management.

It was commonplace for citizens living within Gabon’s forests to witness logging operations crossing into their communities or customary lands unannounced, posing a serious threat to their livelihoods. Companies operating in logging concessions faced a similar predicament, unable to secure their concession borders and prevent neighboring companies from poaching trees.

In the absence of clearly defined, publicly available logging boundaries, forest communities and companies alike had no platform from which to defend their rights.

Acknowledging these problems, Gabon began to enact reforms during the 1990s to strengthen management of its forest resources and better address the access rights of its citizens. A new forest code, promulgated in 2001, mandated improvements in key areas, including:

sustainable forest management of production forests – including the necessary informational management infrastructure;
a multi-use approach to forest resources – away from a purely extractive focus;
decentralization of forest resource management through community forestry; and
explicit conservation and ecosystem protection objectives.

In 2006, WRI signed an MOU with the Ministry of Forest Economy, Water, Fishing, and Aquaculture (MEFEPA) to collect data and create tools necessary to support sustainable management of Gabon’s forests. These efforts culminated in the creation of the first-ever Interactive Forest Atlas for Gabon, which WRI launched this May in Libreville.

Through an interactive collection of maps and data sets, the CD-ROM Atlas and accompanying report provide the government and – equally important – the public with an accurate presentation of activity occurring within Gabon’s forest sector.

Designed in an accessible, user-friendly format, the Atlas will serve as a standardized base of reference, transforming the way Gabon collects, manages, and distributes forest information. Above all, the Atlas gives all stakeholders, from government agencies and private companies to NGOs and forest communities, an avenue to access accurate forest information in pursuit of enforcing regulations and defending their rights.

Forest Management in Gabon: As the official poster for the Gabon Interactive Atlas project, this map provides an overview of current logging titles and protected areas in Gabon as of December 2008.

Gabon’s small population and the high revenues stemming from oil production have historically sheltered its forest resources from agricultural and industrial pressures. However, with global demand for wood and other forest resources on the rise - particularly from Asian markets – forests have become a central economic resource. Gabon’s forest sector currently accounts for 13 percent of national exports (2.5 percent of GDP) and employs 28,000 citizens – 28 percent of the working population.

The new Atlas will help ensure that forests continue to play a key role in Gabon’s economy, while at the same time helping the government make certain that forest operations are legal, sustainable, and respectful of local rights to resources. Moreover, the Atlas project is strengthening the technical expertise and capacity of the Gabonese government, ultimately allowing it to more effectively monitor and manage the nation’s forests.

WRI and MEFEPA are committed to regularly updating the information contained within the Interactive Forest Atlas, as well as to expanding its application through subsequent versions. A revised version of the Gabon Forestry Atlas is scheduled for release next year and will expand data in several key areas, notably small logging permits, annual harvestable areas, forest plantations, and production/export statistics.

As international attention turns towards the connection between deforestation and climate change, Gabon—along with its Central African neighbors—faces a novel suite of opportunities related to the future of forest resource use. Through the right set of policies, institutions and incentives Gabon may be able to move from the status quo of economic development versus environmental conservation and towards a future where these two objectives better converge.

Jean Sylvestre Makak is the Libreville-based National Coordinator for WRI’s Forest Information and Governance project in Gabon.

Gabon: Conservation de la biodiversité

Payson Schwin — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 16:28:52 -0400

Gabon: Évolution de l'approbation des CFAD

Payson Schwin — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 16:26:53 -0400

Gabon: Évolution de la signature des conventions provisoires

Payson Schwin — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 16:25:29 -0400

Gabon: Exemples de permis constituant une CFAD (Rougier et CBG)

Payson Schwin — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 16:21:40 -0400

Gabon: Sociétés majeures titulaires des CFAD et concessions sous CPAET

Payson Schwin — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 16:19:16 -0400

Gabon: Intérêt des sociétés titulaires des CFAD et concessions sous CPAET

Payson Schwin — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 16:15:07 -0400