Previous 130 / 149 Next

Protocolo Autónomo–Mandato- del Pueblo Arhuaco- de la Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta para el relacionamiento con el mundo externo incluyendo la consulta y el Consentimiento previo, libre e informado IX. DISPOSICIONES FINALES.  El presente “Protocolo Autónomo–Mandato- del Pueblo Arhuaco- de la Sierra Nevada de santa marta para el relacionamiento con el mundo externo incluyendo la consulta y el Consentimiento previo, libre e informado, por la protección, conservación y la existencia integral de la Sierra Nevada de santa marta; por el bien del planeta y la humanidad” entra en vigencia a partir de su aprobación por parte de la Asamblea General del Pueblo Arhuaco y firma de sus autoridades de gobierno el día 31 de Mayo de 2017 en Ikarwa en el Departamento del Cesar. a. Hace parte del texto de protocolo el acta de aprobación en la cual se declara aprobado por la asamblea y firmado por el Ministerio Público – Defensoría del Pueblo – en constancia del debido procedimiento para su revisión y aprobación. b. El original del presente protocolo firmado en tres textos auténticos por la Directiva General del periodo vigente, se depositan en poder del secretario general de la CIT, de la secretaría de su instancia de segundo nivel en la CTC y de la Defensoría del Pueblo regional en representación del Ministerio Público. c. En TESTIMONIO DE LO CUAL los infrascritos, debidamente autorizados a esos efectos, han firmado el presente Protocolo en las fechas indicadas. Autoridades de Gobierno: 130

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

PROTOCOLO AUTONOMO PUEBLO ARHUACO

Protocol

Geolocation

Latitude: 10.8292621

Longitude: -73.7010991

: Geolocation

Date: Jun 1, 2017

Source: http://www.hchr.org.co/files/eventos/2017/PROTOCOLO-AUTONOMO-PUEBLO-ARHUACO.pdf

Indigenous people(s)

Arhuaco

Country

South America: Colombia

Context and purpose

a) Pending development projects: Mining, Oil/Gas/ Agribusiness / Hydroelectric Dam or experience with past projects
b) Land demarcation (recognized / partially recognized / pending / no recognition)
c) A component of a broader strategy of governance assertion
d) Historical context (are there general statements that reflect this history and perspective)
e) Addressing inter/intra-community/people divisions or formalizing modalities of cooperation
f) Does the protocol have unique features that reflect the particular communities experience
h) Does the protocol address processes for updating its contents

Community governance

a) Life plans (self-determined development)
b) Territorial plans and boundaries
c) Community resolutions
d) Community governance statutes
e) Community history

Preconditions

b) Formal recognition of indigenous’ rights and governance structures
d) Timing of decisions
e) Assertion of rights in relation to natural resources
f) Concepts defined in the protocol (e.g. integral territory, culture, knowledge, sacred sites…)

Term definitions

Consent
Free
Good faith
Informed
Prior

Non-negotiables

a) Affirmations that relocation is unacceptable
b) Rejection certain types of activities / impacts that are critical
c) Affirmation of the right to decide (language used, yes/no, veto and supporting rationale)
d) Agreement to the protocol as basis for consultations
e) Rejection of development project as exchange for recognition of land rights

Core principles

a) Respect for land rights and indigenous governance
b) Good faith with elaboration of its implications
c) Criteria in relation to timeframes and processes
d) Criteria in relation to indigenous knowledge
e) Basis for right to decide and give or withhold consent
f) Negotiation in certain (or all contexts)
g) Intercultural dialogue

Protocol scope

a) A statement of principles
b) Establishes a process for negotiation of consultation procedures
c) Does it seek to define the entire consultation process
d) Does it address particular activities or is it all encompassing (projects, administrative or legislative measures etc and are these addressed separately?)

Legal frameworks invoked

a) International or regional instruments/jurisprudence
b) National laws/policies/jurisprudence
e) Reference to indigenous justice

Interfaces with external institutions and organizations

a) Municipal government
b) Specific ministries
c) NHRIs / Ombudsman
d) International oversight

Internal groups or other peoples

a) Other indigenous communities or peoples
e) Broader society

Scope of consultation

a) Single or multiple communities (of one people, or multiple peoples)

When to consult

a) Triggers for consultation
c) Reference to ESIAs

Roles in decision-making process

a) Role of representatives
b) Role of community members
c) The role of General Assemblies and other structures
e) The process of decision-making, discussion, consensus, voting.
f) What is done in the absence of consensus
g) Participation of outsiders

Conditions for consultation

a) Location of meetings
b) Dates that coincides with community activities/calendar
c) Language of consultations and choice of translators
f) Who will coordinate the meetings
g) Freedom to invite third parties, including trusted specialists
h) Actor how pasts costs for participation

Nature and sequencing of consultation phases

a) Involvement in strategic planning
b) Initial approach
d) Information meetings (content, where, with whom and partner participation)
e) Internal meetings (actors involved, decision-making processes)
f) Follow up meetings (for additional information)
h) Does it establish fixed timeframes

Language, naming and style

b) as well as the language of the State
c) are there any statements or terms in native language in the dominant language version
d) Is it referred to as a “protocol” ?
g) Is the style western legalistic
h) Is it a hybrid of customary law and western law

Who to consult

a) Elders
c) Leaders
g) Organizations

Outcomes

b) Conditions for agreements
c) Content of agreements
d) Agreement oversight and enforcement mechanisms

Issued by

Arhuaco

Primary Documents

PROTOCOLO-AUTONOMO-PUEBLO-ARHUACO.pdf
Spanish
Download View