CAMPAIGNS

Food not Bullets!

Drought-stricken Farmers & Lumads seeking Food Aid, Killed & Dispersed

On March 30, 2016, around 6000 farmers and Lumads (indigenous people of Mindanao) from all over North Cotabato marched to Kidapawan City and picketed the National Food Authority (NFA).  They demanded the release of food aid to alleviate hunger due to massive crop failures caused by El Nino. On the third day of the protest, elements of the Philippine National Police opened fired and violently dispersed an otherwise peaceful assembly. The incident left 2 confirmed dead, 116 wounded (18 of them in critical condition), 89 missing (including six minors), and two, who were arrested by police elements during the dispersal, were tortured.  Aside from these, the police illegally arrested and detained at least 45 men at the Kidapawan Gym, while 27 women of which three are pregnant and two are senior citizens   at the Kidapawan City Convention Center (view this link for the actual footage of the dispersal: https://www.facebook.com/altermidya/videos/616090755207056/

By nighttime, over 4000 of the protesters sought refuge at the United Methodist Church (UMC) compound in the same city. However, the police and military cordoned off the area and cut off the electricity in the compound. The state elements prevented the entry of food, water and medical supplies for the wounded, as well as media and other concerned groups. The protesters spent a tense and hungry night expecting a police raid. Children were crying in hunger.

In a press conference, North Cotabato Governor Lala Mendoza assumed full responsibility for the incident. However, she also stated that she will block any and all assistance to the starving protesters from concerned groups and individuals, going so far as to say that this insults her governance. She also threatened to file charges against UMC Bishop Ciriaco Francisco for “harboring” the protesters.

The El Nino phenomenon has plagued the country since February 2015. By the end of February 2016, 34% of the country experienced drought, 40% by end of March, and 85% by end of April 2016 (FAO). The prevailing El Niño incurred losses of more than P5-billion to local agriculture as of March.

While Mindanao accounts for over 40% of the Philippines’ food requirements and contributes more than 30% to the national food trade, several provinces have already suffered widespread crop damage since late last year. The Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) to stabilize prices of food and basic commodities has declared a state of calamity in drought-stricken cities and provinces such as North Cotabato, Butuan, Zamboanga, General Santos, Bukidnon, Davao del Sur, Davao Occidental, Maguindanao, and Guimaras.

Hardest hit are Lumad communities who simultaneously face dislocation and loss of livelihood from their territories due to operations of extractive industries, energy projects and commercial plantations; and human rights violations arising from military operations.  

Recommended actions:

Send letters, emails or fax messages calling for:

1.       Immediate independent investigation of the incident;

2.       Pull-out of police and military elements blocking the entry and exit of protesters and support groups in the UMC compound;

3.       Release of protesters illegally detained by the PNP;

4.       Immediate distribution of the rice support and other calamity assistance to the farmers;

5.       Relief and prosecution of police officials involved in the dispersal and shooting of farmers pending an impartial investigation;

6.       The accountability of Governor Emmylou Taliño-Mendoza and all involved officials; and

7.       The Philippine Government to respect the basic fundamental rights of its citizens to freedom of association and assembly, and to provide necessary aid in disaster situations.


You may send your communications to:

H.E. Benigno C. Aquino III
President of the Republic
Malacañang Palace,
JP Laurel St., San Miguel
Manila, Philippines
Voice: (+632) 564 1451 to 80
Fax: (+632) 742-1641 / 929-3968
E-mail: op@president.gov.ph

Sec. Teresita Quintos-Deles
Presidential Adviser on the Peace Process
Office of the Presidential Adviser on the Peace Process (OPAPP)
7th Floor Agustin Building I
Emerald Avenue
Pasig City 1605
Voice:+63 (2) 636 0701 to 066
Fax:+63 (2) 638 2216
stqd.papp@opapp.gov.ph

Ret. Lt. Gen. Voltaire T. Gazmin
Secretary, Department of National Defense
Room 301 DND Building, Camp Emilio Aguinaldo,
E. de los Santos Avenue, Quezon City
Voice:+63(2) 911-6193 / 911-0488 / 982-5600
Fax:+63(2) 982-5600
Email: osnd@philonline.com, dnd.opla@gmail.com

Emmanuel L. Caparas
Secretary, Department of Justice
Padre Faura St., Manila
Direct Line 521-8344; 5213721
Trunkline: 523-84-81 loc.214
Fax: (+632) 521-1614
Email: soj@doj.gov.ph

Jose Luis Martin Gascon
Chairperson, Commission on Human Rights
SAAC Bldg., UP Complex, Commonwealth Avenue
Diliman, Quezon City, Philippines
Voice: (+632) 928-5655, 926-6188
Fax: (+632) 929 0102

Land Rights Now!

JOIN US! We Demand Land Rights Now!

WHY GLOBAL CALL TO ACTION?

We demand #landrightsnow!

Our GOAL is to work hand in hand with all indigenous brothers and sisters across the globe, in collaboration with other sectors, groups and advocates to secure the collective land rights of more than 370 million indigenous peoples around the world. By 2020, we aim to double the area of land legally recognized as owned or controlled by indigenous peoples.

We are the guardians of this planet! We want Change!

We have nurtured and conserved our land and resources for centuries, which are the bases of our culture, identity, traditional knowledge, sustainable livelihoods and wellbeing. In spite of our invaluable roles and contributions to conservation, enhancement of biodiversity, low carbon lifestyle and sustainable resource governance, our rights to our land and resources are violated with impunity in the name of “national development” causing more inequality, discrimination, hunger and poverty. It’s time to change the dominant system that disregards indigenous peoples’ rights and empowerment; and instead uphold the sustainability of mother earth.

Securing land rights of indigenous peoples is critical in achieving the Global Agenda: 2030 (Sustainable Development Goals) and in addressing climate change. The success of eradicating poverty and hunger and “Leaving No One Behind” is hinged on securing our land rights.

Land is Life! Let’s champion this Global Call to Action and build the broadest unity and solidarity of indigenous peoples across the globe to defend our land, territories and resources! This is our duty to protect our collective survival and for the future generations.

PARTICIPANTS FROM ASIA[1]

Organizations:

208 CSOs and IPOs from India, Bangladesh, Nepal, Malaysia, Indonesia, Philippines, Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam, Thailand, Myanmar, Taiwan[2]

Indigenous Community:

1, Tananahu community, Maluku, Indonesia

WHAT HAVE BEEN DONE?

National Launch of the Call:

Malaysia, 2 March, 2016

Jaringan Orang Asal SeMalaysia (JOAS) announced their plans to map out and consolidate Orang Asal territories in conjunction with the launch of the Global Call to Action on Indigenous and Community Land Rights.

More information: http://iphrdefenders.net/malaysia-joas-map-orang-asal-traditional-lands-territories/

Myanmar, 5 March, 2016

One-day forum on land rights discussed the newly adopted National Land Use Policy— NLUP, opportunities and challenges, as well as the engagement of civil society organizations and indigenous peoples, with the country’s new government on the land rights law.

More information: https://www.facebook.com/LandRightsNow370/

Cambodia, 15 March, 2016

Gathering and press conference organized by the Cambodia Indigenous Peoples Alliance (CIPA), brought together 30 indigenous representatives from indigenous communities to share on the land rights issues and cases they are facing.

Watch the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yPaG1JEvHM

Thailand, 30-31 March, 2016

Two-day national workshop on land issues held in Chiang Mai, brought together more than 100 indigenous representatives from all over Thailand. The workshop ended with a press conference and a Declaration of the Network of Indigenous Peoples in Thailand (NIPT) on the Proposed Solutions to the Problems of Land and Resource Management by Indigenous Peoples.

More information: https://www.facebook.com/LandRightsNow370/

Asia Regional Launch of the Call:

Myanmar, 12 March, 2016

Around 60 indigenous representatives from 12 countries, namely Thailand, Cambodia, Indonesia, Vietnam, Japan, Taiwan/China, India, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Nepal, Malaysia and the Philippines, jointly launched the Campaign at the regional level. The participants, including representatives of indigenous women and youth as well as indigenous persons with disabilities, expressed their strong commitment to demand together their collective land rights as affirmed in the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP).

More information: http://iphrdefenders.net/asia-regional-launch-global-call-action-indigenous-community-land-rights/

Support to land rights of Indigenous Women:

The statement of AIPP on Indigenous Women and Land Rights was issued on the occasion of the International Women’s Day on March 8, 2016 which was translated in Thai, Khmer and Burmese languages and widely circulated to AIPP members and networks.

More information: http://aippnet.org/strengthening-solidarity-for-indigenous-womens-land-rights-in-2016/

Campaign/communication materials:

WHAT ARE WE DOING NOW?

  • Producing more campaign materials: videos and translation of campaign materials to a number of national languages[3]
  • Providing technical assistance in relation to GCA activities targeting members and partners at the country level and local level when necessary;
  • Supporting community mapping for legal recognition in India; and mobilizing support for Cambodia and Malaysia;
  • Supporting local struggles in defense of land rights against mining, large dams, agribusiness, among others;
  • Documenting indigenous peoples’ sustainable resource management for awareness-raising and policy advocacy;
  • Integrating the GCA into all the programmes of AIPP and relevant events;
  • Circulating widely all relevant statements, publications, audio-visual materials at the regional and global levels;
  • Collaborating and building partnerships and networks for joint policy advocacy and support to community struggles and initiatives

WHAT’S NEXT?

  • Increase the number of awareness raising activities to mobilize more indigenous organizations and communities to sign the Call and make their land rights activities more visible;
  • Encourage National Human Rights Institutions to undertake Land Inquiries such as those done in Malaysia and Indonesia;
  • Conduct case studies on land rights issues i.e. large dams, mining and others related to trade and investments for policy advocacy and to generate support for indigenous communities;
  • Build and strengthen collaboration and networking at the national level to pursue policy advocacy on the recognition of land rights such as in Thailand and Nepal;
  • Strengthen collaboration and advocacy at the local and national levels for proper and immediate implementation of the legal collective land rights recognition in India, Malaysia, Cambodia and the Philippines, among others;
  • Prepare a report on the first year of the GCA campaign[4] covering achievements, activities, opportunities, challenges, as well as the way forward;
  • Develop concrete plan and strategies on the GCA as part of the overall strategic plan for 2017 -2020 to be adopted by the AIPP General Assembly on September, 2016;
  • Mobilize indigenous communities and organizations in Asia to take action together during the International Indigenous Peoples Day on 9 August, 2016 and beyond.
For more information, please CONTACT US: Asia Indigenous Peoples Pact www.aippnet.org Joan Carling (Ms.) Secretary General joan@aippnet.org   Patricia Miranda Wattimena (Ms.) Advocacy Coordinator patricia@aippnet.org

[1] Data per 5 May, 2016

[2] 12 countries where AIPP members and partners are

[3] Target countries: Cambodia, Thailand, Malaysia, India, Philippines, Timor Leste

[4] To be published on March, 2017

Join the indigenous peoples’ struggles to save our environment

The spate of killings of environment and land defenders in different parts of the world is a serious concern as it is ironic that our endeavors to preserve our environment is being suppressed with violent intensity. How is it that such noble causes to preserve and ensure the sustainability of our ecology to support life is paid with punitive acts like human rights violations.

From the reports of an independent international watchdog, Global Witness, it shows a significant number of environmentalists killed in the past year, averaging to three killed in a certain week. The victims are mostly activists and indigenous peoples involved in campaigns to defend the environment and indigenous land rights from the exploitation of mining, energy projects, logging and agribusiness.

It is imperative to point out the fact that the target areas of these development aggression are ancestral domains of indigenous peoples where there are large mineral deposits, home to water bodies with potentials for energy generation and wide expanse of fertile soil. These communities that mainly rely on the land for survival through agriculture and traditional livelihood are constantly threatened with displacement by big business interests, hence the need for them to stand up and lead the struggle to defend their territories from destruction or take over by private and foreign entities; territories that they’ve worked so hard to preserve its biodiversity and fertility for future generations.

For the same reason, indigenous leaders and environmental defenders become victims of human rights violations, killings, abductions, forced disappearances, harassment and slapped with trumped-up charges. Their communities, with the loss of their leaders added to the trauma of these violence are forced to flee from their homes and with resistance suppressed, private corporations are free to plunder and exploit the natural resources and leave it barren after.

Global Witness’s study shows a staggering number of human rights violations related to land disputes from across the globe with the Philippines topping the list followed by other countries from Latin America, Africa and mostly from Asia. In most cases, the victims are indigenous peoples, the tillers and stewards of the land.

The world should not look the other way when the people who put their lives on the line to keep our environment from further degradation are criminalized or killed. Let us unite with the indigenous peoples to further the defense of our lands from exploitation.

This coming August 9th is the International Day of the World’s Indigenous Peoples; we call for solidarity and support in our campaigns to stop criminalizing indigenous activists and to join us in our struggle to defend land, life and resources. We enjoin all organizations, groups, networks and individuals to utilize all their platforms and bring global attention to the plight of indigenous peoples and the deteriorating state of our environment.

For reference:

Ms. Jill Carino

AIPNEE Coordinator

Full statement on the International Day of the World’s Indigenous Peoples August 9, 2020

Asia Indigenous peoples Network on Extractive Industries and Energy (AIPNEE) is one with the world in commemorating International Day of the World’s Indigenous Peoples. Today, we salute all indigenous peoples who have persevered in their struggles for the respect and defense of our collective rights to ancestral land, resources and self-determination.

While we applaud our gains, we equally recognize our losses and challenges. The lessons we learned from this historic struggle are our weapons as we move forward in our quest for true freedom, a healthy natural environment, and lasting peace. These are the fundamental elements for self-determination and sustainable development from the perspective of indigenous peoples.

As we advance our struggles, we confront more difficult and life-threatening challenges such as the plunder of our resources and the aggressive implementation of extractive and destructive development projects in our territories. Indigenous peoples are repeatedly victims of human or people’s right violations in various forms such as harassment, vilification, abduction, rape, incarceration for fake charges, torture, extra-judicial killing, bombing, burning of villages, massacre, etc. At worst, ethnocide and genocide could already be happening among some indigenous groups.

Today, these challenges have worsened to a level beyond expectation as we experience the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Again, among the most affected are indigenous peoples and the poor majority of the global population. The imposition by States of extreme restrictions in mobility has prevented people from working for their daily subsistence, especially with the closure of many establishments. Medical, economic and food relief support from the government are limited or none at all. Many people are experiencing hunger and mental trauma that have pushed some to commit suicide.

Ironically, transnational corporations engaged in extractive industries seem undisturbed and exempted from restrictions under the COVID-19 quarantine. Corporations continue to operate their businesses especially in the mining and energy sectors. In Asia, the pandemic is being used to further oppress the people with the imposition of various militarist policies and the implementation of anti-people development projects, which indigenous peoples strongly oppose.

In the Philippines, mining-affected people of Didipio, Nueva Ecija were locked down in their homes and communities to stop the spread of the pandemic. Meanwhile, OceanaGold Mining Company insisted on operating despite the expiration of its FTAA permit on June 20, 2019. The mining company aided by policemen, had sneaked into the mine-site to bring in fuel supplies breaking through the community barricade with a fuel tank truck. Community members who strongly protested were even charged for violation of quarantine restrictions.

In Myanmar, on July 2, 2020, a landslide at a jade mine in Hpakant, Katchin state, north Myanmar killed at least 126 mine workers and injured54 others. Reports say that many large jade mine companies are owned by families of former generals, army, cronies, and drug lords. The Katchin minority people of Myanmar have been opposing the Jade mine for decades already.

In Northeast India, an oil spill happened on May 27, 2020 at Baghjan Oilfield of India Limited (OIL) in Tinsukia district in Assam state causing a fire that lasted for 2 weeks. Around 3,000 (1,610 families) people were affected and forced to evacuate. Furthermore, the oil spill badly damaged two biodiversity areas (Maguri-Motapung wetland and Dibru-Saikhowa National Park) where at least 36 species of mammals including feral horses and at least 382 species of birds are found. It was also reported that this is not the first disaster incident at Baghjan Oilfield. In February this year, a blast at the oil pipeline had caused the Burhi Dihing river to catch fire.

In Indonesia, land use conversion for commercial purposes is continuing. 15 million hectares of rainforests on ancestral lands plus another 15 million hectares are being converted into oil palm plantations. In addition, more than 93 million hectares of land are covered by mining concessions, part of which are lands owned by indigenous peoples.

The cases mentioned here illustrate how the tandem of transnational corporations and governments with their armed forces in Asia are advancing

their businesses for huge profits- amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Adversely affected areindigenous peoples, their territories, environment and biodiversity. Now more than ever, we indigenous peoples should act as one in confronting these challenges. We need to persevere in fighting for our rights to land and self-determination, as we strengthen our solidarity with other oppressed sectors around the globe for the common good of the people and the planet.

Long live Indigenous Peoples in Asia! Log live Indigenous Peoples of the World! Long live International Solidarity!

SOLIDARITY STATEMENT FOR THE ONGOING DIDIPIO BARRICADE: Relentlessly assert our collective rights to land and resources!

We are adding our voice to amplify the calls of the residents of Didipio, Kasibu, Nueva Vizcaya, Philippines. With renewed fervor, we pledge our full support to the ongoing peoples’ barricade against Oceanagold Philippines, Inc. (OGPI) and congratulate them on their perseverance to stop the unlawful and destructive mining operations.

Indigenous peoples and the community of Didipio in Nueva Vizcaya mounted a peoples barricade to stop the large scale gold and copper mining operations of Oceanagold, an Australian-Canadian mining corporation. The local government unit has issued a restraining order after the foreign mine’s Financial or Technical Assistance Agreement (FTAA) expired last June 20, 2019 on its 25th year. The mining giant, however, has defied these orders claiming that it can continue operating on the premise that their application for FTAA renewal has been endorsed by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) and its Mines and Geosciences Bureau (MGB) to the office of the Philippine President.

Pending the President’s approval of their application, Oceanagold filed a petition for preliminary injunction. The Regional Trial Court denied this finding no sufficient evidence to support the claim of Oceanagold that they are authorized to continue mining operations thru the endorsement of line agencies. Thus, any continued operation by the mining corporation is illegal.

The years of exploitation and the environmental destruction that the mining caused has earned the ire of the community, environmental advocates and groups and even the local government officials. The ongoing barricade they have mounted since the beginning of this month is a testament to the peoples objection to the company’s attempt to extend their plunder of Didipio’s mineral reserves.

We stand with the indigenous peoples and the community of Didipio in their fight to protect land and resources and put an end to corporate greed. We enjoin everyone to amplify the calls and bring this issue to a wider platform to consolidate the peoples strength and voice against OGPI.

Oceanagold, out of Nueva Vizcaya now! No go for Oceanagold!

For Reference:

Jill Carino, AIPNEE Coordinator

AIPNEE and CEMSOJ’s joint submission on Development Finance Institutions and Human Rights to the UN

Below is the joint submission made by Asia Indigenous Peoples Network on Extractive Industries and Energy (AIPNEE) and Community Empowerment and Social Justice Network (CEMSOJ) to the UN Working Group on Business and Human Rights for their forthcoming report on “Development Finance Institutions (DFIs) and Human Rights”. The submission particularly focuses on the rights of indigenous peoples based on the experiences of AIPNEE and CEMSOJ of working with indigenous and other local communities that have faced or are facing human rights impacts due to energy and trade facilitation projects financed by various DFIs.

Click here for the PDF of the submission.

Asia Indigenous Peoples Network on Extractive Industries and Energy (AIPNEE) and Community Empowerment and Social Justice Network (CEMSOJ) appreciates the opportunity to submit inputs for the report of the Working Group to the 53rd session of the Human Rights Council on “Development Finance Institutions and Human Rights”. This submission particularly focuses on the rights of indigenous peoples as it is based on our experiences of working with indigenous and other local communities that have faced or are facing human rights impacts due to energy and trade facilitation projects financed by the Asian Development Bank (ADB)1, the European Investment Bank (EIB), the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), the Japan Bank for International Cooperation (JBIC), the Bank of China (BOC)2, and the World Bank3, among other DFIs, including in the engagement of the communities with the DFIs and their “independent” accountability mechanisms (IAMs).

DFIs’ Safeguards

The biggest challenge that we and the communities we have been working with have observed to ensure that the DFIs respect human rights in the contexts of the projects they finance is that their environmental and social framework, safeguards or standards are not in line with the international human rights standards, including the Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention (No. 169) of the International Labour Organization and the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). For example, the ADB’s Indigenous Peoples Safeguards require ascertaining consent of the indigenous peoples affected by the projects that the ADB finances for certain project activities, which is understood as a collective expression of the affected indigenous communities of broad community support for such project activities. Such requirement falls short of the rights of indigenous peoples guaranteed under the UNDRIP, which calls for obtaining the Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) of indigenous peoples prior to the approval of any project affecting them.

Worse, DFIs such as the JICA and the recently established Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) do not even require obtaining consent of indigenous peoples for their projects affecting them. The JICA’s safeguards simply states that “efforts must be made to obtain consent of indigenous peoples in a process of free, prior and informed consultation”. The AIIB’s Environmental and Social Standard 3 on Indigenous Peoples only require engaging in Free, Prior and Informed Consultation (FPICon) for certain project activities unless FPIC is mandated by the national laws where the project is located. Among the DFIs, the EIB’s Environmental and Social Standards (2022) seem to be the most progressive in terms of the respect of the rights of requirement of FPIC but that still applies to a project under certain activities but not for an entire project prior to its approval. It is not even well known if national DFIs such as the JBIC, the BOC and the Export-Import (EXIM) banks, which have been increasing their development financing, even have any environmental and social safeguards applicable for the projects they finance.

The Environmental and Social Safeguards, Standards or Framework of DFIs should be fully aligned with the international human rights law and standards, including the ILO Convention 169 and the UNDRIP in the context of the rights of indigenous peoples. Specifically, the DFIs should explicitly require obtaining the FPIC of the concerned indigenous peoples prior to approval of any project they finance affecting the indigenous peoples.

Further, for a project co-financed by various DFIs, it is very difficult for the project-affected marginalized communities to understand different Safeguards/Standards of each DFI that apply to the project. So, the Safeguards, Standards or Framework of all the DFIs should be streamlined to make them similar if not the same with the aim to achieve the best Standards and Safeguards in line with the international human rights standards instead of going for lower or existing standards as we have experienced in the ongoing Safeguards review process of the ADB. Additionally, the DFIs should ensure that their clients or project implementers as well as other stakeholders (such as concerned government authorities) fully understand the requirements under the Safeguards and their applicability beyond national legal provisions if the laws have lesser requirements to protect and respect rights.

Access to remedy

The other major challenge that we have observed is in relation to the engagement of the communities affected by the DFI-financed project to access remedy with the IAMs of the DFIs. Firstly, not all DFIs, particularly national, sub-regional and regional DFIs, have established IAMs while the existing IAMs lack mandate and scope to effectively address the grievances of the affected communities to ensure their access to remedy for the project impacts. For example, even when IAMs find credible evidence of non-compliance with the Safeguards and significant impacts on the affected communities, they cannot recommend suspension of project financing – that is often the first ask of the communities to avoid further harms – until the grievances are addressed. Their recommendations are very often ignored by the DFIs and their clients. IAMs cannot look into complaints beyond the project financed by the DFIs even when there might be cumulative or associated impacts of the project with other related undertakings of the client or the project implementer. Similarly, IAMs mostly cannot look into allegations of corruption in the project even when they are related to the environmental and social impacts of the project.

Secondly, when the communities are able to file a complaint to the IAMs, many complaints are deemed ineligible for various reasons. For example, the ADB’s Accountability Mechanism requires the affected communities to undertake good faith efforts with the Bank management to resolve their grievances before filing their complaint with the Mechanism. Often, such good faith efforts use up the communities’ limited resources and time while can even bring them risks from the Client or the project implementer as the management seek negotiated settlements between the implementer and the communities. Many complaints to the Mechanism are found ineligible for the lack of such good faith efforts prior to filing complaint. EIB’s Complaint Mechanism on the other hand does not have such requirement.

Additionally, the procedures of the IAMs are quite technical, complex and lengthy, which cause significant difficulties for the project affected communities to access them. At the same time, their procedures differ from each other, which cause confusion among the communities in the context of projects co-financed by various DFIs to understand the procedures of each IAM. For example, the ADB’s Accountability Mechanism does not allow for the ADB project-affected people/communities to first seek compliance review to ADB safeguards for a complaint and then move to dispute resolution. The ADB-project affected communities we worked with have felt that if non-compliance of ADB safeguards could be established  before seeking dispute resolution, that would put greater pressure on the client or the project implementer to respect the rights of the communities. Similarly, they have experienced that the processes of the IAMs are not community- or victim-centered. In a dispute resolution process, for instance, the IAMs ignore significant imbalance of power between the communities and the Client or project implementer when they seek to be equal towards both parties of the dispute. At the same time, operational level grievance mechanisms often set up under the client or the project implementer have been little useful if at all due to limitations of mandate, scope and independence while the communities are mostly not made aware about such mechanisms.

Thus, while all DFIs, including national, sub-regional, regional and international, should establish IAMs, such IAMs should be provided effective and broad mandate and scope with their full independence from the Management ensured. Specifically, the IAMs should be able to make binding recommendations that the DFIs and their client or project implementer should fully and effectively implement. The IAMs should even have the ability to recommend suspension of financing when they find serious harms caused and to avoid further harms by the project.

The processes and procedures of the IAMs should be streamlined so that they are similar if not same and easy for communities to understand. They should follow some minimum standards in their processes so as to make them community-centered, such as removing inappropriate prior requirements or procedural conditions that restrict the communities’ access to the IAMs. The DFIs and their IAMs should promote operational level grievance mechanisms for their projects in line with the effectiveness criteria of company grievance mechanisms in the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. However, such mechanisms should be independent from the client or the project implementer and set up under the DFI or its IAM. The mechanisms should be gender-sensitive to ensure participation of affected women with them and culturally appropriate in line with the customary laws and practices of indigenous peoples and other affected communities.

Furthermore, the DFIs should themselves be liable to remedy harms caused by the projects they finance. So, they should create remedy frameworks through meaningful public consultations to ensure availability of resources throughout the project cycle to remedy any harm caused. The International Finance Corporation is currently developing a draft approach to remedy. However, the draft needs to be strengthened in line with the comments from the civil society, including for IFC to directly finance remedial measures for the harms of the projects it finances.

Accountability of DFIs

At the end, we assert that since the multilateral, regional, sub-regional or national DFIs are composed by multiple or individual governments, the State duty to protect human rights should subsequently fall on the DFIs as well to some extent. In our experiences, we believe that the DFIs do not consider themselves as one of the duty bearers to protect the human rights of communities impacted by the projects they finance and merely consider themselves as a financier with limited responsibility for the rights of the affected communities. The level of duty or responsibility of DFIs to protect or respect human rights in the context of projects they finance given their intergovernmental or governmental nature should be elaborated further.

Many DFIs enjoy immunity for the impacts of the projects they finance under the national laws or their agreements with the governments. That makes it difficult for the affected communities or their representatives to challenge the actions, or lack thereof, of the DFIs to protect or respect human rights of the communities in the contexts of the projects they finance. In order to make the DFIs fully accountable for their human rights impacts, the DFIs should be stripped of such immunity so that they are subject to scrutiny under national and international laws. Accordingly, the proposed legally binding instrument to regulate, in international human rights law, the activities of transnational corporations and other business enterprises should also be applicable to the DFIs to hold them responsible for the human rights impacts of the projects they finance.

3 March 2023

______________________________________________
References:
  1. AIPNEE and CEMSOJ’s joint submission on Development Finance Institutions and Human Rights to the UN – Community Empowerment and Social Justice (CEmSoJ) Network (wordpress.com)[↩]
  2. GENED-1 Hydroelectric Power Plant in Apayao-Abulug River, Cordillera Region, The Philippines | EJAtlas[↩]
  3. Chobhar Dry Port – Community Empowerment and Social Justice (CEmSoJ) Network (wordpress.com)[↩]
______________________________________________
Load More