Public statement on the adoption of the Indigenous Peoples & Mining Position Statement of the International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM)
Asia Indigenous Peoples Network on Extractive Industries and Energy (AIPNEE) and Right Energy Partnership with Indigenous Peoples (REP) strongly denounce the Indigenous Peoples and Mining Position Statement of the International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM) adopted on 8 August 2024.
AIPNEE and REP, along with other Indigenous Peoples’ Organizations and representatives, had engaged in the review of the Position Statement in good faith and submitted comments, including revisions in the text of the draft Position Statement itself, to the ICMM. That is despite our serious concerns that we consistently raised with the ICMM about lack of meaningful engagement and wider consultations with Indigenous Peoples and other stakeholders in a transparent and timebound manner for the review.
Our foremost and gravest concern is that the Policy Statement fails to commit the ICMM members to respect the non-negotiable principle of Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) of Indigenous Peoples for their mining and mining-related projects. FPIC is not merely a procedural requirement; it is a human rights norm grounded on the fundamental rights of Indigenous Peoples to self-determination and their lands, territories and resources, among other rights, as guaranteed in the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) and other international human rights law.
The Position Statement deliberately avoids using the established terminology of FPIC, instead opting to use vague language. It merely states ICMM members’ intention to obtain agreement for impacts from their activities on Indigenous Peoples’ rights setting out equitable terms by which impacts may occur and be mitigated. While Commitment 4 provides that agreement should be achieved in accordance with the principles of FPIC, it significantly falls short of international human rights laws such as the UNDRIP, and jurisprudence of regional courts such as the Inter-American Court for Human Rights (IACHR), as well as the environmental and social standards of the multilateral institutions such as the International Finance Corporation (IFC) and the World Bank. The deviation of the Position Statement fails to meet these frameworks, which mandate projects to obtain FPIC without exception when the project 1) impacts on lands and natural resources subject to their traditional ownership or under customary use, 2) causes their relocation from such lands and natural resources, and 3) impacts their critical cultural heritage, among other things, and that that the project cannot proceed with unless FPIC has been obtained.
Even more concerning, the Position Statement acknowledges that there may be circumstances where agreement is not obtained and sets out the process that ICMM members will take in this instance. Under Commitment 5, it simply provides that ICMM members will develop a policy or approach outlining the steps they have taken to fulfil these commitments where agreement is not obtained. Thus, the Position Statement continues to infer that the FPIC of Indigenous Peoples can be overridden by a company for a project authorized by a State (as maintained in the Explanatory note). This not only violates Indigenous Peoples’ rights but also has far reaching consequences, including social unrest, environmental degradation, irreversible loss of cultural heritage, among others. History has shown that ignoring FPIC leads to long-lasting harm to Indigenous communities and exacerbates division among them, making it imperative that this principle be upheld without compromise.
We reiterate our demand that the ICMM, under the Position Statement, must commit its members to obtain FPIC of Indigenous Peoples affected by their mining and mining-related projects. ICMM members must not proceed with a project if FPIC of the affected Indigenous Peoples’ communities have not been obtained.
For existing projects, ICMM members must establish FPIC through a new agreement if the impacts to Indigenous Peoples’ rights are ongoing, including when new significant impacts are identified or occur. When obtained, FPIC must be well-documented in a written agreement validated with the entire community and the agreement should be earnestly implemented with provision of adequate resources.
Further, we are dismayed that our other concerns in relation to emphasis on the meaningful engagement of Indigenous women, youth, persons with disabilities, and other marginalized groups in the community in the FPIC, equitable benefit sharing, establishment of culturally appropriate and gender sensitive grievance mechanisms, and identification of no go zones such as areas inhabited by Indigenous Peoples in voluntary isolation and critical cultural heritage and biodiversity sites have also been completely ignored.
We deplore that the ICMM missed the opportunity of the review to achieve the highest standards in the Position Statement to fulfil its responsibility to respect human rights and the rights of Indigenous Peoples. The implications of ICMM’s Position Statement extend far beyond its membership. By adopting a policy that weakens the commitment to FPIC, ICMM risks setting a dangerous precedent that could embolden other industries and governments to undermine the rights of Indigenous Peoples. Such a stance not only threatens the survival of Indigenous Peoples but also undermines the global movement towards greater corporate responsibility and ethical governance.
We demand that ICMM and its members take immediate steps to revise the Position Statement, incorporating a full and unequivocal commitment to FPIC. This revision process must be conducted in a transparent, inclusive manner, with direct involvement from Indigenous Peoples, to demonstrate ICMM’s genuine commitment to upholding human rights. Anything less would be a failure of ICMM’s responsibility to respect the rights of Indigenous Peoples.
Download full public statement here.
