Written by Lynda Sullivan
Photo Credit: Milton Sanchez Cubas
The struggle against
the Conga project has been a long and arduous one already (1). To summarize,
Conga is a 4.8 billion dollar project of Yanacocha – a company which combines
the interests of Newmont mining corporation (US-based), Buenaventura (Peru) and
the IFC of the World Bank. It aims to destroy the head of the water basin for
the province of Celendin, and in part that of neighboring Cajamarca and
Hualgayoc, leaving severe water shortage and contamination. This would prove
disastrous for the mainly rural provinces of the region of Cajamarca, in the
northern highlands of Peru, where the majority of dwellers live by agriculture
and cattle rearing. It would be an aggressive open pit mining project, an
Earth-destroying technique that Newmont itself initiated in the early 1960s
(2), and similar but more expansive than Yanacocha`s previous work in
Cajamarca. For this the population rejecting the project have a fair idea of
what is in store – all they need to do is look next door to the devastation
that 20 years of open pit mining has left in its wake (to see more about the
particulars of this devastation please see the aforementioned article).
The campaign against
the project is growing stronger, constantly renewing itself as the pressure
crushes the spirits of some and makes space for others. The struggle doesn`t
belong to any one person, or any particular high-profile figure, as the mass
media would have you believe, rather the struggle is of the people, and for
this it remains strong. Though it is this very fact that has led to an
intensification of the repression and criminalization of the resistance – as
the government and Yanacocha become ever more desperate to push the project
through 'by blood and by fire' (3).
The Woman of the Blue
Lagoon
A woman who is
shining example of the resistance, some say the embodiment of it, is Doña
Maxima Acuña Chaupe who leads her family in their fight to defend their land –
which happens to sit in the heart of Conga. The mining company, once they
realized that their dogged attempts to buy up all the land destined for
exploitation had left a few holes – one hole being the Chaupe family`s land,
they tried to drive the family away by violence and intimidation. Due to
courage and perseverance against all the odds, the family successfully
resisted. So now the family find themselves in a legal battle spanning years,
which has been riddled with negligence, corruption and foul play. They continue
to be harassed constantly by the police, mining security and certain locals who
are believed to have been paid by the mining company to intimidate the family.
Amnesty International recently released an Urgent Action calling for a stop to
the harassment which included death threats (4), as did the women`s network
ULAM (5). The family claim they will not give their land up as they are
the rightful owners; they believe the mountain lakes are sacred, and are
willing to protect them, and Mother Earth, at all costs. So if the mining
company continues with its mission to forcibly evict this campesino family, they would
be violating their right to a home, to a safe environment, to food (as their
land is their source of food) and perhaps even their right to life.
Criminalization of
Social Protest
The repression also
extends to the entire resistance movement and only intensifies with time.
Mirtha Vasquez, a local human rights lawyer from Cajamarca, in her report
‘Criminalization of the protest in Peru’ details how the state has assumed the
role of protector of neoliberal economic interests, and as such, deliberately
and systematically tries to eliminate elements that threaten to disturb the
working of this model (6). The arms of the state body that it uses to
crush dissent include lawmaking, the judicial system, the police and armed forces,
and the intelligence services.
Since 2002, Vasquez
explains, successive Peruvian governments have passed a series of laws limiting
the right to protest and granting greater power to the police and armed forces
in social conflicts. In 2007, the government passed laws against
organised crime, but by classifying the social protest as ‘extortion’ they are
able to use the same laws to imprison a protester for up to twenty-five years,
a sentence even greater than that handed down for some murders. Other charges
include disturbing the peace, irreverence of patriot symbols and promoting
rebellion. During the Conga conflict over the past two years there have
been over 300 people charged with various alleged crimes. However, as
Vasquez states, these are not indiscriminate charges – 90 percent are social
leaders or local authorities who have been openly critical of the government.
We saw an example of
this on 8th April when six men were apprehended on their way to a mobilization
at the mountain lakes. Amongst the group was Freddy Garcia, a candidate for the
local municipality of Huasmin (one of the districts closest to Conga), and the
only candidate who is against the Conga project and the supporting
hydroelectric project Chadin II. They were first stopped by Securitas, the
Swedish security company providing security to the mine, who then called the
police who happened to be just around the corner. The police trailed them from
the car and beat them before arresting them. They were taken to the city of
Cajamarca and then in the middle of the night they were taken to Chiclayo,
eight hours from their home province. Their arbitrary detention brought the
people out onto the streets – instantaneous protests sprung up in the cities of
Celendin, Cajamarca and Chiclayo. Groups protesting mining projects in Chiclayo
brought food to the prisoners and held vigils outside the jail. The government
quickly realized this act of repression was uniting rather than crushing
dissent and so after three days the six men were released without charge.
The authority of the
Rondas Campesinas, the local peasant patrols who have their authority inscribed
in the Peruvian constitution since 1986, is also attacked because they are
organized against the mining project. The practice of bringing an accused
person to a rondero assembly
to hear evidence and vote on the culpability and punishment has been
delegitimized and has resulted in certain rondero leaders being charged with kidnapping.
One such leader was looking at 32 years in prison for leading the interception
of a group of soldiers who were taking advantage of underage girls. The abuse
of underage girls was a regular occurrence during the states of emergency and
left at least ten minors as single mothers. After a long legal battle the ronderoleader escaped prison but
had to pay a hefty fine.
Impunity grows
In stark contrast,
the police and armed forces enjoy an increasing degree of impunity for their
actions during social conflicts. Amongst other liberties, they can hold a
protester incommunicado for an excess of twenty-four hours; they can remove
bodies from a scene without the presence of state investigators; and, as of 14
January 2014, neither the police nor the armed forces can be held accountable
in a criminal court for injuries or deaths from using their arms or ‘other
means of defense’ while on duty (7).
This seems to be a
shocking development but in reality this impunity has long been in
existence. Not a single member of the security forces has been held
responsible for the brutality, the allegations of torture, the scores of
serious injuries, nor the five deaths - all acts perpetrated in the name of
`crowd control`. Eye witnesses tell how the police and military scanned the
streets for bullet casings the day after the fatal shootings on 3rd July,
so as to leave the shooters unidentifiable. The Public Prosecutor of Celendin
at the time wrote in his report how young 16 year old Cesar Medina received a
fatal bullet to the head, and that this bullet came from an army helicopter
above. On 28 January 2014 the National Coordinator of Human Rights in Peru
(CDDHH) announced that the case seeking justice for the five murdered
protesters had been archived due to a lack of evidence (8). The CDDHH is
appealing this decision.
A particularly
worrying aspect of this situation is that the police are not only taking orders
from the state, but also directly from the mining company. Law 27238
enables police directors to sign agreements with private companies to provide
security services. They can do this in conjunction with or separate from
their state duties, but are all the while permitted to wear police uniforms and
use state-provided weapons. So while the police are using violent aggression
against the protesters and violating each citizen`s right to protest, it is
unclear if they are doing it under orders from the state or from the mine.
Other human rights
regularly abused are the right to free transit – as the mining security block
communal roads, the right to organize, to freedom of assembly, and the right to
consultation as this project is being forced through despite an obvious lack of
social license. This is not to mention the rights that would be trampled on if
the project goes ahead (right to water, safe environment, livelihood, health,
life).
However the
population do not sit quietly accepting these abuses, they have learned that
they have to force the authorities to respect their rights. On 22nd April
people from every corner of the province of Celendin congregated in the city
and marched to the Public Prosecutor`s office demanding that he come out and
explain why he was judicially persecuting so many local community leaders. He
sent out his apologies at first then, when he saw the people weren`t going away
he finally emerged. In the end he promised to respect the law of the Rondas
Campesinas and to investigate the litany of legal charges against the community
leaders. Only time will tell if he keeps his promise, but he knows that if he
doesn`t, the people will return. They now know that justice has to be fought
for in the streets.
Newmont, Are You Listening?
Newmont is well aware
of the opinion of the local people. Motions have been brought by local groups
to the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights, the EU and the UN. The Denver
Justice and Peace Committee - an activist group in Denver, Colorado where
Newmont is based, stages regular protests in front of the company`s offices
amongst other advocacy work. Recently a US-based NGO EarthWorks led a letter,
which was presented at Newmont`s shareholder meeting, proclaiming against the
injustice of the intimidation and harassment of protesters in Cajamarca and
over 50 other organizations joined their call. Earlier in the year delegations
from Cajamarca marched to Newmont`s offices in Lima to once again declare the
position of the people, an act commemorating the National Water March in
February 2012 where hundreds of thousands marched from Cajamarca to Lima.
But what shows more
than anything that the people of Celendin, Cajamarca and Hualgayoc will not
give up this fight is their constant presence and vigilance up at the mountain
lakes. Despite all the repression and attempts to install fear into the hearts
of the protesters, the Guardians of the Lagoons continue to protect the lagoons
that give them life. They know that if this destructive project goes ahead it
would mean the end to their way of living as agriculturalists, the end to their
health and the health of their animals, the end to the future of their children
and the generations to come. They will not give up, because they can’t.
Newmont on the other
hand has admitted that it can take its investment elsewhere if needs be (9).
Whether it was a thinly veiled threat to the Peruvian government or a genuine
intention, the fact remains that, unlike the campesinos in Cajamarca, they have other options.
Newmont is the second biggest gold producer in the world, after Barrick Gold
(talks were recently held between the two gold giants about a possible merger
but for the moment they were not successful), and, apart from Peru, has
projects in Nevada, Australia, the USA, Ghana and Indonesia. If it continues to
push for this particular project it will only see more opposition and it will
be accountable for the acts of repression that the police carry out in its name
– perhaps worse than we have yet seen. Would this be an attractive story for
the shareholders? For its worldly image? As this conflict nears ever closer to
its end the question we should be asking is not so much `Who will win?’ but
rather, `Who can lose?’
