historical records and minimal regulatory oversight due to remoteness. Xstrata commissioned
an ethnographic study of the region and facilitated discussions between traditional groups and
government authorities. A benefit sharing agreement, ‘the Jais Aben Accord’ was reached. Among
the challenges the Xstrata representative identified was the fact that ‘“community”, or “customary
group”, is not a cohesive, democratic entity; customary rights are based on oral tradition and dispute
is common; the prospect of benefits … can … detract attention away from traditional organising
principles, and agreements are not binding and liable to change’.
The Xstrata representative also raised the Las Bambas project in Peru as a case of good practice.
They explained that in 2004 the company sought consent prior to putting any drill rigs or having
‘anyone from an operational perspective there’. Subsequently, a five year process was conducted
to obtain community consent to resettlement. Culturally appropriate communication was something
they aimed at, through community radio, theatre type techniques, and site visits to the Tintaya mine.
The Xstrata representative also claimed that the company had done ‘a lot of work on helping [the
community] with legal ownership of the land because they didn’t really have legal title to the land’.
Despite the challenges of operating in Peru they felt they had ‘managed to maintain good relations
with the community, [which] from a position of extreme ignorance about what a mining project looks
like, is now much better informed’. The project was described as being ‘at a stage where consultation
and the consent process for mining is well underway, and resettlement has been agreed’.
52
Making Free, Prior and Informed Consent a Reality