Inter-american court of human rights
Dispossession and illegal logging on the collective territory
Download 2.23 Mb.
|
Dispossession and illegal logging on the collective territoryAs already noted, the area of the Cacarica River basin is located in a region recognized to have abundant natural resources. The forest wealth of the area is also important for the survival of the communities who inhabit the Cacarica River basin, whose livelihood is based on agriculture, artisanal fishing, hunting, and also logging (supra para. 87). In 1967, Colombia’s Congress approved Law 31,273 recognizing to the “black communities” the right to collective ownership of the territories they occupied ancestrally and, consequently, the right to use and exploit its lands and woods, the latter by law or by prior authorization of the environmental authority, in accordance with the Natural Resources Code.274 Law 70 was promulgated on August 31, 1993, recognizing “to the black communities that have been occupying vacant land in the rural areas on the banks of the rivers of the Pacific Basin, in keeping with their traditional production methods, the right to collective ownership, as established in the following articles.”275 Regarding the logging in the Cacarica River basin, in August 1981, Maderas del Darién S.A. (hereinafter “MADARIÉN”) asked the National Renewable Natural Resources and Environmental Institute (hereinafter “INDERENA”) to grant it two logging permits (hereinafter also “PAF”) for the sites of Sábalos and Larga Boba. Subsequently, in 1982, the same company applied to the National Corporation for the Development of Chocó (“CODECHOCÓ”) for a PAF for the Balsa II Project, located in the area of Puerto Escondido. Following a long procedure, resulting above all from the involvement of INDERENA and CODECHOCÓ, entities that shared jurisdiction and applied different rules under the Natural Resources Code, in 1992 and 1993, the CODECHOCÓ Board of Directors approved several of the permits that had been requested.276 As regards the situation of the Cacarica communities, in 1992, the Government created the Special Commission for the Black Communities under transitory article 55 of the Constitution, which expressed concern about the logging in the area of the Cacarica River because of the river was being blocked owing to the transportation of logs and the deforestation of the last reserves of cativa trees in the country. In addition, it revealed complaints filed by social organizations owing to the procedures by which CODECHOCÓ had granted forestry exploitation and logging permits to the detriment of the communities, and violating transitory article 55. The commissioners insisted in the need to suspend the concession of large-scale forestry permits until the collective titling of the territories of the black communities had been regulated and appropriate policies had been elaborated to protect the environment.277 Then, on April 13, 1993, the Superior Court of the Judicial District of Quibdó issued an order to protect the fundamental right to work of the employees of Maderas del Darién S.A. and ordered CODECHOCÓ to officialize, by contracts, the forestry exploitation permits granted by resolution 3595 of December 1992 to the said logging company. This decision was revoked in May 1993 by the Supreme Court of Justice278 and, on October 22, 1993, the Third Review Chamber of the Constitutional Court confirmed the Supreme Court’s ruling.279 Immediately after the first instance decision of the Superior Court of the Judicial District of Quibdó, at the end of April 1993, CODECHOCÓ signed the contracts for the Balsa II and Guamal forestry exploitation projects (corresponding to resolutions 3595 and 3596 of 1992, supra para. 132) and the PAF for Sábalos and Larga Boba (corresponding to resolutions 655 and 656 of 1993, supra para. 132). On July 27, 1995, the Ombudsman asked the Superior Court of the Judicial District of Chocó to annul resolutions 3595 and 3596, and order CODECHOCÓ to adopt measures to comply with the said rulings. After examining the request, the Superior Court ordered CODECHOCÓ to comply with the prior decisions of the Constitutional Court and of the Supreme Court. In addition, it sanctioned the Director of CODECHOCÓ for contempt, but the Labor Cassation Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice annulled the sanction, considering that it had been imposed in relation to an inexistent judicial order. Even though CODECHOCÓ ordered the suspension of all logging activities in the Cacarica River basin by resolution 1180 of September 7, 1999, on December 9 that year CODECHOCÓ issued resolution 1486 authorizing the Balsita Community Council to log cativa trees. In addition, some months later, on June 2, 2000, in a note addressed to the legal representative of Madarien, CODECHOCÓ authorized the resumption of the Balsa II PAF, which had been suspended since 1997. Meanwhile, some weeks previously, on April 26, 1999, by resolution 0841 of the Colombian Agrarian Reform Institute (hereinafter “INCORA”), 23 black communities members of the Community Council of the Cacarica River basin280 had been granted title to collective ownership of vacant land on its territory, located in the jurisdiction of Riosucio, Chocó department. Regarding the administration of the collective territory, the resolution established that, in keeping with article 32 of Decree 1745 of 1995, it would be administered and managed by the Board of the Community Council of the Cacarica River basin, based on the internal regulations approved by the Council’s general assembly. On September 2, 1999, the National Environmental Directorate presented a report to the Community Council of the Cacarica River basin in which it affirmed that logging was being carried out on the territories of those displaced, and logging camps had been set up. On May 10, 2000, Maderas del Darién S.A. informed CODECHOCÓ of its decision to commence activities with the participation of the communities settled in the area.281 In June 2000, in the context of monitoring and following up on the agreements signed by the national Government with the communities returning to the region, the Ombudsperson of the Justice Department of the Cacarica River Basin, the Director of the Los Katios National Park, and the Human Rights Advisers of the Public Prosecution Service denounced that logging was taking place in the territory of the communities that were in the process of returning.282 In June 2000, CODECHOCÓ asked that all logging activities in Balsita be suspended until this was authorized again, because the authorized volume had already been extracted.283 During 2000 and 2001, reports of illegal logging activities by the communities of the Cacarica River basic continued and, in response to these complaints, officials of the Public Prosecution Service, the Ombudsman’s Office and other State agencies visited the area. In May 2001, officials of the Ministry of the Environment, the Public Prosecution Service (hereinafter also “PGN”), the Social Solidarity Network, UNHCR and delegates of the returned communities (CAVIDA) and of the Justice and Peace Commission again visited the area, following which they confirmed inappropriate mechanized logging and the absence of the CAR which was not verifying the application of appropriate forestry management measures.284 On September 7, 2001, the Cundimarca Administrative Court issued an order to protect the fundamental rights of the Cacarica River communities to health in connection with life and tranquility and, among other measures, ordered the Chocó Autonomous Corporation to ensure compliance with the administrative decision that had decreed the suspension of logging in that sector (supra para. 136).285 This decision was confirmed on November 16, 2001, by the Council of State.286 On October 27, 2001, the Board of the Community Council of the Cacarica river basin denounced, in a public communication, the continuation of logging on its collective territory by Maderas del Darién S.A.287 In 2001, the Public Prosecution Service opened a disciplinary proceeding against the CODECHOCÓ Board of Directors based on their complicity with the illegal actions of the companies Maderas del Darién S.A. and Pizano S.A., by granting them logging permits, legalizing the lumber by irregular mechanisms, and contributing to the enrichment of third parties.288 On December 19, 2002, it was decided to declare the disciplinary responsibility of the Director General, the Secretary General, and the Deputy Director of Sustainable Development of the Chocó Regional Autonomous Corporation (CODECHOCÓ) and, consequently, order their removal.289 On August 22, 2003, the Disciplinary Chamber of the Public Prosecution Service decided to appeal against the first instance judgment of the Special Disciplinary Commission of December 19, 2002 (supra para. 142). On that occasion, it abstained from decided that it was null, and decided to confirm it, considering that no grounds had been presented that would invalidate the ruling delivered.290 On October 17, 2003, the Colombian Constitutional Court decided to issue an order to protect the fundamental rights threatened by the indiscriminate logging on the collective territory of the appellants.291 On April 27, 2005, CODECHOCÓ, in Resolution No. 538, imposed a preventive measure consisting in the suspension of any type of logging, except “that carried out under the law,” in the jurisdiction of the Chocó department without the respective permit, concession or authorization issued by CODECHOCÓ.292 Directory: docs -> casos -> articulos docs -> Observational Assessment of Teaching Practices Teaching Assessment Initiative Proposal Submitted to The Teachers for a New Era project docs -> Traditional British values docs -> From Warfighters to Crimefighters: The Origins of Domestic Police Militarization docs -> Borzoi Club of America Register of Merit Program I. What is a Register Of Merit docs -> Protecting the rights of the child in the context of migration docs -> United Nations E/C. 12/Esp/5 docs -> 9th May 1950 the schuman declaration docs -> Getting To Outcomes® in Services for Homeless Veterans 10 Steps for Achieving Accountability articulos -> Inter-American Court of Human Rights articulos -> Judgment of April 3, 2009 Download 2.23 Mb. Share with your friends:
|