CASE STUDY FREE, PRIOR AND INFORMED CONSENT … · CASE STUDY FREE, PRIOR AND INFORMED ... allowed the interviewees to give natural answers ... , teachers and women were key to drafting

FPIC: THE GUNA CASE, IN THE CONTEXT OF ITS AUTONOMY | 1

Rogeliano Solís, Member of Conservation International’s Indigenous Advisory Group

CASE STUDY

FREE, PRIOR AND INFORMED CONSENT IN PANAMA:THE GUNA CASE, IN THE CONTEXT OF ITS AUTONOMY

Rogeliano Solís, Member of Conservation International’s Indigenous Advisory Group

CASE STUDYFREE, PRIOR AND INFORMED CONSENT:THE GUNA CASE, IN THE CONTEXT OF ITS AUTONOMY

2 | ROGGELIANO SOLÍS


TAblE OF CONTENTS I.Executivesummary 5

II.Methodology 6

1.0 Background

1.1TheRepublicofPanama 61.2TheindigenouspeoplesofPanama 71.3Thecreationoftheindigenousregions 81.4TheNationalCoordinatorforIndigenousPeoplesofPanama 9

2.0 Localcontext

2.1TheGunaYalaregion 112.2TheGunapeopleandtheirstruggleforaregion 112.3ThepoliticalautonomyoftheGunapeople 122.4AnmarIgar(Gunaregulations) 132.5Decision-making 15

3.0 UnderstandingthenatureofFree,PriorandInformedConsent(FPIC)

3.1FPIC 153.2FPICtheGunaway 16

4.0 TheFPICprocessbetweentheGunas(twoexamples)

4.1InterculturalBilingualEducation-IBE 184.2JointdesignandimplementationofaREDD+pilotprojectintheGunaYalaRegion 19

5.0 Conclusionsandrecommendations

5.1Conclusions 205.2Recommendations 22

Bibliography24

Websites24

Interviews24



I. EXECUTIvE SUMMARY

ThiscasestudyonFree,PriorandInformedConsent(FPIC),inthecontextofGunaautonomy,comesfromtheneedtocheckhowtheindigenousregionofPanama,GunaYala,appliesFPICmeasureswhenitisfacedwithanewprogramorproject,ofdifferentnatures(environmental,social,politicalandeco-nomic),putforwardbythenationalgovernment,privatebusinessornon-governmentalorganizations,amongstothers.

Thereiscurrentlyawiderangeofrequestsandsocialinitiativesbeingcarriedoutinsomeoftheregion’scommunities.ThevastmajorityofthemhavebeendevelopedbasedonadebateandconsultationprocessintheGunaGeneralCongress(CongresoGeneralGuna),thepeople’shighestauthority.Nonetheless,thiscongressstilldoesnothaveaspecificmanualonFPIC,nordothe49communitieswhichmakeuptheregion.Inlightofthissituation,theAnmarIgar(Gunaregulations)hasworkedwelluntilnowtocheckforanypossibleirregularitiesonthismatter.Inadditiontothis,Gunacommunitiesalsousetheirowninternalregulations,which,accordingtocommunitymembersalsoworkefficiently.Therefore,itishopedthatthisstudywillmakeacontributiontosubsequentworkswithregardtograntingpermissionforlaunchinganewprojectintheregion.Themechanismsforgrantingpermissiontobeginanewprogramorprojectontheterritoriesofindigenouspeoplesareheterogeneousbetweenthecultures;inallcasesitisadecision-makingprocess.

Basedonthispointofview,thisdocumentexplorestherelationshipbetweenthePanamanianStateandtheGunapeopleandhowitisexpressedthroughpublicpolicies,whatdevelopmentprojectsarelikeandlocalmanagement.Thisresearchleadstounderstandingthatsocietieshavetheirownmechanismsfordiscussingadecisionandforestablishingtheirownimplementationmethods.Moreover,thetimeandplaceinwhichdecisionsaremadecanalsovaryfromonegrouptoanother.Bearingthisinmindspecifi-cally,indigenouspeoplesuniteinternationallytoadaptalawcommontothem,recognizingtheirrightsasdifferentpeoples.

Takingthismosaicofdifferencesintoaccount,throughthisstudytheGunapeoplehopethattheirexperi-enceontherighttoself-determinationgivesyoufoodforthought.

Rogeliano Solís González


II. METHODOlOGY

Withtheaimofcarryingoutthiscasestudy,firstlyinformationfrombooks,magazinesandotherpublica-tionsrelatingtothetopicwascollected.Then,aquestionnaireregardingFPICwasprepared.

Theuseofashortquestionnaire(guidingquestions)allowedtheintervieweestogivenaturalanswers,ac-cordingtotheirexistingknowledgeontheissue.

Theresearcheralsoattendeddifferentmeetingssuchas:TheGeneralCongressofGunaCulture(ontwooccasions),regionalcongresses,localcongresses(in5communities)andcommunitycongresses,togath-ermoreinformationtoenhancethestudy.TherewerealsomeetingswithpeoplewhoknowaboutGunaculture,inparticulartheSailas1ofdifferentcommunities,chosenatrandom.Inaddition,surveysfromstudents,teachersandwomenwerekeytodraftingthisstudy.

Themethodologyappliedwasefficient;however,whenreceivingopinionsfromanon-specialistaudienceandwhichspeaksadifferentlanguage,itislogicalthatanswerswillbeshortandprecise.

1.0 bACkGROUND

1.1 THE REPUbLIC OF PANAMATheRepublicofPanamaislocatedinthefarsoutheastofCentralAmericaandismadeupofnineprov-incesandfiveindigenousregions.Itcoversanareaof75.517Km2.Accordingtothefiguresfromthe2010census,ithasapopulationof3.405,813.

Withsevenindigenouspeopleslocatedintheeastandwestofthecountry,Panamacannotdenythatitisapluralandmulticulturalnation,withadiverseandvariedpopulation.Nonetheless,Panamanianlegisla-tiondoesnotacceptthisfact,orratherdoesnotrecognizetheseaspects.ThisiscorroboratedinArticle1ofthePoliticalConstitution,whichstatesthat“thePanamaniannationisorganizedasasovereignandindependentState”, that is to say recognizing that there isonlyonenation.To that effect, theStateofPanamaisnotproudofhavingamulticultural,multilingualandmultinationalnation.Asaresult,thismeansthatinlegalterms,sincethestartofthePanamanianRepublic,indigenouspeopleshavebeenleftoutofPanamaniansociety,whichisdefinitelymadeupofdifferentcultureswiththeirownlanguages,asisthecaseofthesevenindigenouspeoples;theyalsoconstitutenationswithintheStateofPanama.

Throughoutitshistory,Panamahasfacedaseriesofvindicatingprotestsbyindigenouspeoplesindif-ferentspheres,whodemandtheirfundamentalrights.ThesesocialpressureshavecausedthenationofPanamatoexperiencechangeinitsrelationshipwithindigenouspeoples,political,regulatoryandlegalchangeswhichhavebelatedlyandgraduallyacknowledgedindigenouspeoples’rights.

Withregardtointernationalnorms,Panamahassignedcountlessconventions,covenantsandlaws,mostofwhichhavebeenratifiedbytheNationalAssembly.Despitethis,PanamahasnotratifiedInternationalLabourOrganization(ILO)ConventionN°169,onIndigenousandTribalPeoplesinIndependentCoun-tries(1989).Thepreviousconvention,ConventionN°107(1957)isstillinforce.Inordertoaddressthis

1 ASailaisapoliticalandspiritualleaderinaGunacommunity.Everycommunityhastheirownsailas.


harshreality,Panamahasbeendevelopingveryvariedbutfragmentedlegislationintermsofattentionpaidtoindigenouspeoples.

Inlightofthissituation,indigenouspeopleshavenotremaineddowncast,waitingfortheirturn.Theirtenacityandabilityindealingwithproblemsthroughtheircongressesandgrassrootsorganizationshaveplayedaleadingrole,untiltheregionswereproperlyrecognizedinlegalterms.

Theycontinuethisstruggletodayastheyalwayshave,sothatthenationallegalsystemincreasinglytakestheircustomaryrightsintoaccountindifferentsectorsofsociety.

Toreducethenumberofindigenouspeoples’mosturgentproblemsdifferentbodiesattachedtotheMin-istryofGovernmentandJusticeandtheMinistryofthePresidencyhavebeensetupinPanama.

1.TheDepartmentforIndigenousAffairs,(LawN°.18,February14th1952),whoseaimwasto“civi-lize indigenouspeoples” todistance themfromtheir traditionalmodusvivendiandmake thembecomeapartof“progress”.Thislawlastedsixyears;anewonewasthenintroduced.

2.TheIndigenousandAnthropologyInstitute,(LawN°.27,January30th1958)repealedLawN°.18February14th1952,whichwasinturnrepealedbyLawN°.10,March7th1997.

3.The National Council for Indigenous Development (Executive Decree N° 1, January 2000), at-tached to the Ministry of the Presidency, as an advisory and deliberative body on policies andpublicactionsaimedatindigenouspeoples.

4.TheIndigenousPolicyAuthority,whichisinthestructureoftheMinistryofGovernmentandJus-ticeandwhichonanoperationallevelcurrentlylackscoordinationwiththeindigenouspeoples’authorities,anddoesnothavealegalinstrumenttoregulatehowtheadministrativeunitworks.

1.2 THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLES OF PANAMATheConstitutioninPanamahasbeenfaint-heartedlycontemplatingindigenousrights.Thiskindofcon-templationcanbeseeninthelaws,decreesandagreements.TheachievementscelebrateduntilnowbytheindigenouspeopleshavenotbeenduetotheState’sinterests,butarerathertheresultsofthetirelessstruggleofindigenouspeoplestodemandtheirrightsinnationalandinternationalspheres.Thatiswhereindigenousregionswerebornfrom,withtheirownlawsconstitutingtheirautonomy.

AnexampleofthisthatcanbegivenisLaw59(1908),whichspecifiedhowindigenouspeoplehadtobegovernedwithouthavingaskedfortheiropinionorposition.The1904ConstitutionwasreformedwhentheDuleRevolutionof1925brokeout.Forthefirsttime,theideaofcreatingregionsunderspeciallawsemerged,causingthepoliticaldivisionofthecountryin1941.

Ontheotherhand,theideaofcallingindigenousgroups“indigenouspeople”appearedforthefirsttimeamongsttheKunasofPanamain1953,withthecreationofLawN°16oftheKunaYalaregion.Inthisregard,wecanhighlightthattheKunapeoplehavebeenamodelforotherpeoplesonanationalandin-ternationallevelintermsofautonomy.

TherearesevenindigenouspeoplesinPanama:theNgäbes,Buglé,NasosandBri-BriarelocatedinthewesternpartofthecountryandtheGunas,EmberáandWounanarelocatedintheeast.


1.3 LAwS ON CREATING THE REGIONSBelowisalistofthelawswhichcreatedthefiveindigenousregionsofficiallyrecognizedbythePana-maniangovernment.

1.LawN°16,February19th1953underwhichtheSanBlasRegionwasorganized(OfficialGazetteN°12042,April7th1953).ThroughLawN°99,December23rd1998itisnamedtheRegionofKunaYala.

2.LawN°22,November8th1983underwhich theEmberá-WounanRegionwascreated (OfficialGazetteN°19976,April17th1984).TheAdministrativeStatureoftheEmberá-WounanregionwasadoptedunderExecutiveDecreeN°84,April9th1999.

3.LawN°24,January12th1996,underwhichtheKunadeMadungandiRegionwascreated(OfficialGazetteN°22951,January15th1996).TheAdministrativeStatutewasadoptedunderExecutiveDecreeN°228,December3rd1999.

4.LawN°10,March7th1997underwhichtheNgäbe-BugléRegionwascreated(OfficialGazetteN°23242,ofMarch11th1997).TheAdministrativeStatutewasadoptedunderExecutiveDecreeN°194,August25th1999.

5.LawN°34,July25th2000underwhichtheKunadeWargandiRegionwascreated(OfficialGazetteN°24106,July28th2000).

Itisimportantforustostoponthissectioninordertobetterunderstandtheterm“region”2giventhatallindigenouspeoplesinPanamaaspiretoacquireitbylaw.TheconceptwasusedinCentralAmericaduringColonizationtodesignatearegion,peopleorprovince,especiallylocatedinaplacefarawayanddifficulttoaccess,requiringspecialadministration.Itshistoricaluse,however,suggestsacultural,borderandindigenousregion.(Herrera,1982,p.75)

Consequently,a region is indigenous landwithsemi-autonomouspoliticalorganizationunder thejurisdictionofthenationalgovernment;ithasageopoliticaldivisionandadministrativesystemwithgeographical limitsandinternalregulations; it isnotindependentfromtheState.Rather,theStaterecognizestheuniquetraitsof indigenoussociety,whicharedifferentfromthenational,andbothnationalandindigenousgovernmentsreachgeneralagreements:indigenouspeoplesaccommodatesomeofthesovereignState’sinterests,regardingissuesofsecurityandtheexploitationofresources,inordertogaintheirownland.Theyaretheoneswhomakemostdecisionsoncultural,economicandpoliticalaspectswhichaffecttheirpopulations.Withinthe limitsofthisgeopoliticaladminis-trativeregion,theindigenouspeoplesgovernthemselves,forthemostpart,accordingtotheirownpoliticalsystemwhilestillremainingloyaltotheState.(Herlihy,1995,p.81)

InPanama,theconceptof“region”hasconnotationswhichontheonehandimplyitisterritorygeo-graphicallyfarfromthecenterofpoliticalpower,offeringaflexibleconcessionforindigenouspeoplestousetheland,withoutthisaffectingtheState’ssovereignrights.Ontheotherhand,itisclearlystatedthatisdoesnotmeanownershipoftheland.

2 ComarcainSpanish,differentfromthewordregion.


“Thatiswhyourheroesoptedforregioninsteadofreserveorreservation,astheyunderstoodreservetomeanguardingsomethinginorderforittobeusedatanappropriatemoment;thereisnopointlookingafterourlandsothatnon-indigenouspeoplescancomeandsnatchitwhenevertheywant.ThatiswhyaftertheGunarevolutionended,ittookthegovernmentofPanamafiveyearstoacknowl-edgeourterritory,withLaw59,asanindigenousreserve.BecauseofthisweclearlyhadtocontinueputtingpressureonthecentralgovernmentuntilLawN°2(1938)andfinallyLawN°16(1953)ap-peared.Thesameishappeningwiththereservation:wefeelthatwiththiswearebeingheldhostage,havingthe landseized; thereforeautonomydoesnotmeanthefreedomfor itsrespectivedevelop-ment.”(Interview with argar Gilberto Arias (saila dummad) retired on December 15 2008.)

1.4 NATIONAL COORDINATOR FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES – COONAPIPDespitetheeffortsmadebytheMinistryofGovernmentandJusticeandtheMinistryofthePresidency,toestablishbodiessuchas“IndigenousAffairs”andthe“IndigenousandAnthropologyInstitute”tomeetthe fundamentalneedsof indigenouspeoples,everything indicates that theresultshavenotbeenablesatisfytheindigenouspeoples;essentiallyduetoalackofFPICwhenprojectsonindigenousterritoriesarecarriedout.

Asaresult,indigenousleadershadtheideaoffindingcoordinationmechanismstodealwiththeirprob-lemsinaunifiedmanner.AsaresultthePanamanianIndigenousAssociation(ASIPA)andtheNationalAssociationofIndigenousPeoplesofPanama(ANIP)werecreated,aswellastheNationalCoordinatorofIndigenousPeoplesinPanama(COONAPIP),whichwasfoundedonJanuary21st1991.

TheNationalCoordinatorofIndigenousPeoplesinPanamabeganworkingasanumbrellaorganizationbringingtogetherthesevenindigenouspeoplesofPanama.However,over timetheGunapeoplereal-izedthattheobjectivessetoutatthebeginningwerenotbeingmetinfull.Asaresult,becausetheywereunsatisfied,theydecidedtoleavethebody,leavingituptotheremainingindigenouspeoplestocontinuedownthesameroad,fightingtogether,ashadbeenimaginedfromthestart.

AlreadyyearshavepassedsincetheGunastemporarilychosetoleavetheCOONAPIP.Ontheotherland,ontheinternationalstage,forestleaders,environmentalists,scientists,indigenouspeoplesandcommuni-tieswhodependontheforestshavebeendebatingclimatechangeandtheirstrategyforReducingEmis-sions fromDeforestationandDegradation(REDD)tomitigate thescourgesofnaturalphenomena,asreferredtointheBaliActionPlan.3

Inlightofthis,in2008sailadummad(thehighestauthority)fromtheGeneralGunaCongress,Mr.Gil-bertoArias,decidedtoattendthe14thConferenceoftheParties(COP14)oftheUnitedNationsFrame-workConventiononClimateChangeinPoznan,Polandfromthe1sttothe12thofDecember2008.Dur-ingthattime,COP14workedontheActionPlanagreedoninBalionmitigation,adaptation,technologyandfinancingaswellastheso-called“shared-vision”

3 DuringtheUnitedNationsClimateChangeConferenceinBali,inDecember2007,countriesagreedtoincreasetheireffortstofightclimatechangeandadoptedthe“BaliRoadMap”anditsActionPlan,whichchartsthewayforanewnegotiationpro-cesswithintheUNFCCC.Therefore,theBaliActionPlanfocusesonfourmainpillars:mitigation,adaptation,technologyandfinancing,aswellascreatingasharedvisionofcooperationwhichincludesaglobalandlong-termgoalforreducingemissions.


Nonetheless, saila dummad Arias left the European country greatly concerned by the results of COP14,becausehebelievednoprogresshadbeenmadetowardsaglobalagreementonclimatechange.ThePoznanSummitdidnothingmorethanwarnofseriousconcernsaboutthefutureofthisissueandindus-trializedcountriesdidnotstepuptotheirobligations.Inparticular,Australia,Canada,Japan,theUnitedStatesandtheEuropeanUniondidnotcommitthemselvestoreducingtheirgreenhousegasemissions.

WhenhereturnedfromEurope,sailadummadAriastookuptheideaofbringingtogethertheauthoritiesofthesevenindigenouspeoplesofPanamaagain,tounifythecommoneffortonthesubjectofclimatechangeandtheREDDstrategy,knowingthatPanamawasaREDDcountryandthatmostofthecoun-try’sforestswerelocatedpreciselyintheterritoriesofthesesevenindigenouspeoples.Becauseofthis,hesuspectedthatsoonerorlatertheNationalEnvironmentalAuthority(ANAM)wouldpresentitsREDDproposaltotheindigenouspeoplesandthatinthiscaseitwasbettertofacethisasagroup.Therefore,theallianceoftheIndigenousPeopleswithCOONAPIPwasstrengthenedonceagain.

Inlinewiththis,sailadummadAriaslookedforinformationonCOP14andexpressedhisconcernstohiscounterpartsfromotherindigenouspeoples.Atthesametimeheputforwardhisproposalofpool-ingtheireffortsandcreatinganotherorganizationwhichwouldbecalledtheNativeAuthoritiesoftheIndigenousPeoplesofPanama(AOPIP). Whathewantedtoachievewiththis ideawasthatthesameauthoritiesofeachindigenouspeopletakeontheroleofadministrators.Nonetheless,lateron,thelead-ersofthesevenindigenouspeoplesreachedaconsensusanddecidedtorevertbacktousingthepreviousnameCOONAPIP.

Asaresult,theNationalCoordinatoroftheIndigenousPeoplesofPanamaisnowtherepresentativeau-thorityoftheindigenouspeoplesofPanama.

Allofthisoccurredbecauseofdesiretoestablishunityamongsteveryone;notonlytodealwiththeissueofclimatechange,aswasthoughtatthebeginningbutalsotodealwithothersubjectsofparamountim-portancesuchasterritorialsecurity,theinvasionofindigenouslandsbysettlers,theoverlappingofpro-tectedareasonlandwhichbelongstotheindigenouspeoples,andthedraftingofregulationsinnationallawsonindigenousrights,amongstothers.

ThisisoneofthestrategiesusedbytheGunatomaintaintheirautonomywhentheyarethreatened.TheyhaverecoursetothestrategicalliancebasedontheBaluWala4philosophy,partoftheGunapeople’stra-ditionalknowledge.

4 BaluWalaliterallymeans“treeofsalt”.Sincetimeimmemorialtherewasatreeinthemiddleofavalleywhichonlyafewani-mals,whichcouldclimbandfly,hadaccessto,inordertotasteitsfruits.Atthesametime,therewereotheranimalswhichdidnotenjoythisprivilegeandcouldonlyreachitsrootsandeatthescraps.OnedayIbelerdecidedtofellthetreesothateveryonecouldhavethesameaccess;andthatiswhathedid.ThereforeBaluWalaphilosophyisappliedinthiscasebecauseinordertomitigatethescourgesofclimatechange,cooperationbetweeneveryone,richandpoor,isneeded.Whenreferringtothisphiloso-phy,generalchiefGilbertoAriasaskedtheWorldBanktolookaftereveryoneequally,andnotjusttherichcountries;tonotleaveindigenouspeoplestobemerelisteners,tovaluetheircontributionsandtotakethemintoconsideration.


2.0 lOCAl CONTEXT

2.1 THE GUNA YALA REGIONAccordingtothe2010census,thetotalpopulationoftheGunaYalaregionwas33,109inhabitants,whichaccountsfor22%ofthetotalindigenouspopulationofPanama.

TheGunaYala region is located in thenortheastofPanamaand ithas49Guna- speakingcommuni-ties.Ofthetotal38liveoncoralislands,9arecoastalcommunitiesonlandand2arelocatedinlandintheregion.Inaddition,therearetwoSpanish-speakingcommunitiesintheterritory, on the eastern side, on theborderwithColombia.

The49GunacommunitiesintheGunaYalaregionhavetheirownlocalcon-gress(onmaggednega)inwhichbothmaleandfemalecommunitymembersmeettodiscussthedifferentproblemsfacedbythecommunity.Itisnotonlysocialissuesthataredebatedbutthefaithofthosewhoattenditisalsoexpressed.Theonmaggednegaisledbythehighestcommunityauthority,calledthesaila.

TakingintoaccounttheroleplayedbythislocalcongressineachGunacommunity,thesailaisbothareligiousleaderandinchargeofthesocio-politicalmanagementofthecommunity.Asaresult,the49Gunacommunitiesaresemi-autonomousbetweenthemselvesanditisthecoalitionofthesecommunitieswhichmakeuptheGunaYalaregion.

ThetotalsurfaceareaoftheGunaYalaregionis2,358.2Km2;ithas320,600hectaresofmountainousfor-estonthecontinentalpart,addedtothe400kilometersofmarineandcoastalareas,andaseriesofcaysmakingupanextensivearchipelago.Theregion’smountainousforestshavenotyetbeenstudiedscientifi-callyandgiventheamountofrainwhichfallsinthearea,oneexpectsahighlevelofendemism.In2008,theGunaYalaregionhad87%forestcoveranditscoralreefswereconsideredasthebestpre-servedon theBiographicCoastof theNorthwesternAtlantic andCentralCaribbeanBioregion (TNC1998).AstudycarriedoutbytheSmithsonianTropicalResearchInstitute,showedthat theGunaYalaregionhasthehighestdiversityofcoralspeciesaswellasthebestdevelopmentofreefsintheRepublicofPanama(Guzmánandco.2002).2.2 THE GUNA PEOPLE AND THEIR STRUGGLE FOR THEIR OwN REGIONTheGunaYalaasaregionhasoriginsdatingbackto1870,inotherwords,alittlemorethan140years,whentheColombianStatelegallyacknowledgedtheTuleNegaregionasbelongingtotheGunas.Thiswasperhapsthefirstindigenousgroupinthehemispheretobelegallyrecognizedandhaveitsownregion.33yearslatertheStateofPanamadecidedtoseparatefromColombiain1903,notrecognizingtheregionoftheGunas.

InPanama,thefirstregionwhichwasallocatedtotheindigenouspeopleswastotheGunaYala,becauseoftheinsurrectionwhichtheystartedin1925.Tiredofbeingdowntrodden,theydecidedtobreakoff

Guna Yala Region


theirtieswiththePanamanianStateinresponsetoacompulsorypolicyofintegration.TheresultoftheuprisingwasexertedpressureonthePanamaniangovernment,whorecognizedthereservebyLawN°59(1930);butsubsequentlywithLawN°2of1938theGunaswereallocatedtheterritorywhichtheyhadlongedfor,fortherighttoexercisetheirfreeautonomy.

However, theGunashad tofight for35years toget their regionback,duly recognizedby law.Subse-quentlytheyhadtowaitanother15yearsinorderfor,throughLawN°16(February19th1953),theSanBlasregiontobereorganized.Andfinally,itwasunderLawN°.99,December23rd1998,thatitwaslegallyrecognizedastheGunaYalaregion.

Despite that fact thatnowadays theGunasbenefit fromautonomyintheirownterritory, theyarestillfightingtoensurethatlandthatwasnotincludedaspartoftheregionisincluded.Becauseofthis,theGunaGeneralCongresshaspresentedanamendmenttothenationalgovernmentsofLaw16(1953);ev-erynewgovernmenthaspromisedtodosoandthentheyshelvethesacredGunademand.

2.3 THE POLITICAL AUTONOMY OF THE GUNA PEOPLEManyacademicsfromdifferentfieldshavewrittenabouttheGunas,inparticularabouttheirautonomy.

Inthissection,wewillexplainhowtheGunashaveachievedthisandwhatstrategieshavebeenusedtoachievethisautonomy,whichindigenouspeoplesoftheworldalsoaspireto.Inordertobetterunder-standthisitisnecessarytotakeaquicklookattheirhistorytodate.

Itisworthpointingoutthatin2011,adelegationoftheindigenouspeoplesofCostaRica,Mexico,Gua-temalaandHondurascametotheGunaGeneralCongresstolearnfirst-handabouttheirexperiencewithregardtoautonomyandterritoryandtheirdefensestrategy.Consequently,theGunaauthoritieshadtheprivilegeofsharing theexperiences theyhad livedthroughupuntilnowwith theirbrother leadersofGwalagunyala.5

TheGunapeoplehave theirownsystemofgovernance, theirownmethodsand traditional structuresformakingdecisions,forelectingtheirauthorities,forresolvingconflicts,forobtaininginformationandorganizingtheirmethodsofprotest,amongstothers;thereforewecanunderstandtheGunamodelfromaveryuniqueangle.

• The autonomy which the Gunas enjoy in their region today was never the will of the Panama-niangovernmentsthemselves.Inotherwords,theGunasfoughtstrongly,evenwithbloodshed,toachievewhattheyhavetoday.ThedemandsmadebyGunamovementswerealsolinkedtoterri-tory,languageandculture.

• Thestrategicalliance:ifwefocusonthehistoricaldevelopmentoftheGunapeopleoverthecen-turies,werealizethatsincetimeimmemorial,duringthewarbetweenBilerandIbelertogovernmotherearth,Ibelerturnedtothestrategyofalliance,withhisbrothersinsolidarityinordertodefeattheopposingforce.Bileralsodidthishimself;however,intheendIbeler,hiseightbrothersandhisstrategicallies,endedupwinningthebattle.Asaresult,Gunaautonomysurvivedthankstothestrategicalliance.

5 GwalagunyalaisanotherwayofsayingAbiyalaorAbyaYala,whichreferstotheAmericancontinentfromArgentinatoAlaska.


• On Ogiggi Diwali,6 in the times of the hero Duiren, our grandparents suffered and died at thehandsoftheirevilneighborsandthegreatleaderswerebrutallymurdered.Withthehelpofthegrandmothersandyoungpeopleof thecommunity,Duirenpreparedan ingeniousstratagemtofinishofftheenemies.Thiswasanotherwayofstrengtheningtheallianceandofproudlyincreas-ingautonomy.

• WhentheSpanisharrived,theGunagrandparentsalreadyhadtheirownsystemofgovernment.Thatiswhywhentheybegantobethreatened,theycleverlydefendedtheirterritory,theirnaturalresourcesandthefreedomofexercisingoftheirautonomy.Thisintelligenceconsistedofdevelop-ingandbroadeningthealliancestrategywiththeaimofmaintainingtheirautonomy.AtthattimetheyjoinedforceswithEnglishandthenFrenchpiratestodefendonesinglecause:theirterritory.Ofcourse,inthisnegotiationwiththeEuropeans,theylostmineralresourcessuchasgold.How-ever,inexchangethegrandparentswonthesurvivaloftheirpeople.

• Atthebeginningofthe20thcentury,whentheGunarevolutionbrokeout,aspartofthedefensetechnique,theirleaderswentbacktousingtheirusualstrategyofalliance.Thistime,theynegoti-atedwiththeUnitedStatestobeawitnessofthisstrugglefortheirautonomy.Thiskindofnegotia-tionisoftenmisinterpretedwhenitissaidthattheGunaswereencouragedbytheAmericanstotakeuparmsindefenseoftheirterritoryandculture.

• OnmaggednegaalsoplayedaveryimportantroleindefenseoftheGunaterritoryasitisinthisplacethatthedifferentsocialtopicsarediscussedandimportantdecisionsaremadewhentherearethreatsbyexternalinvasiveforces.Asthehighestfigureofthecommunity,thesaila,retellsusthestoriesaboutthegreatheroessuchasIbeorgun,IbelerandDurien,amongstmanyothers.Thesongs’messagesencouragetheGunatocontinuethestrugglefortheterritory.Thisisanotherstrat-egytoguaranteeGunaautonomy.

• Social cohesion is no less important when it is a matter of the political, cultural and social au-tonomyoftheGunaregion.

• Therefore,theGunasinsistthattheyarenottryingtoachievepoliticalindependencewiththeirau-tonomybutratherthecapacitytochoosetheirstanding,withinthenationalState,freely.Therefore,Gunaautonomyshouldnotbeconsideredinanywayasahindrancetothefullhumandevelop-mentoftheentirecountry.

• NoraretheGunasaimingtobreakuptheStatewiththeirautonomy.Rathertheywanttheirfun-damentalrighttodeterminetheirownfuture,withoutcoercion,toberecognized.Allofthislieswithintheframeworkofamulticulturalandmulti-ethnicState,suchasPanama.

2.4 ANMAR IGAR (GUNA REGULATIONS)WhenLawN°16of19537wasdrafted,free,priorandinformedconsentwasnotreliedonenough.ThelawwasessentiallydraftedwithoutdulyconsultingtheGunapeople.Therefore,whenitcametoapply-ingitasaregulation,theGunasrealizedthatthelawhadmanygaps,aswasthecasefortheestablishedlimitsoftheregionandthelackofrecognitionoftheGeneralGunaCongress’sroleasthepeople’shigh-

6Ogiggi Diwalaliterallymeans“Ogiggiriver,”whichwaswheretheyoungwarriorDuirenlivedwithhisgrandparents.ItwastherethatDuirenpreparedthewarweaponstofacetheenemyforce.

7 Law16(1953)referstotheorganizationoftheSanBlasregion(nowtheGunaYalaregion);itwaspublishedinOfficialGa-zetteNo.12042,April7th1953,decreedbytheGeneralAssemblyofPanama.


estauthority.Becauseofthis,theGunasobviouslydecidedtocountonalawmadebythemselves.Asaresult,theleadersoftheGunapeoplegavethemselvesthegargantuantaskofdraftingwhatisnowcalled:the“FundamentalLawoftheGunaYalaRegion,the“StatuteoftheRegion”andthe“RulesoftheGunaGeneralCongress”.

Currently,theFundamentalLawisconsideredastheirownasitrespondstocustomarylawandenshrinesthecurrentGunareality,despitenothavingbeenapprovedbytheStatebodiesresponsibleforthisissue.ThisLawwasapprovedbydelegatesfromthe49Gunacommunitiesin1995.TheStatuteoftheRegionwasthesubjectofdebateamongsttheGunasduringdifferentmeetingsoftheGunaGeneralCongress,since1996until2000.However,theRulesoftheGeneralGunaCongresswerediscussedduringvarioussessionsandfinallyapprovedatthebeginningof1993.

Article4oftheFundamentalLawstipulatesthefollowing:“ThecommunitiesoftheGunaYalaregionwillbesubjecttotheirownauthorities,whichare:

a.TheGeneralCongressofGunaCulture;

b.TheGunaGeneralCongress;

c.SailaDummagan;

d.TheLocalCongress;

e.Saila

TheseauthoritieswillexercisetheirdutiesinaccordancewiththeprovisionsofthislawandinlinewithGunaregulationsandcustoms.”

WithregardtotheGeneralCongressofGunaCulture,Article7oftheAnmarIgarstipulatesthefollow-ing:“TheGeneralCongressofGunaCultureisthehighestbodyfortheexpressionofreligion,protection,conservationandraisingawarenessonthePeople’scultural-historicalheritage”.

When it comes to theGunaGeneralCongress,Article9of theGuna regulations states the following:“TheGunaGeneralCongressistheRegion’shighestpolitical-administrativebodyfordeliberationanddecision-making.Itsrulingsandresolutionsarebindingforallauthoritiesandcommunitiesoftheregion.Theirnon-compliancewillbepunishedinaccordancewiththerulesstatedintheStatuteoftheRegion”.

TheAnmarIgarareatrueexampleofGunaautonomy,establishedbytheregion’sdelegatesalmosttwodecadesago.However,someofthearticlesofthislawarenowoutdatedandthereforedonotrespondtothenewdemandsoftoday.

The Fundamental Law of the RegionRecently,intheUsdubcommunity,anextraordinarycongresswasheldtoanalyzeandmodifysomeofthearticlesintheFundamentalLaw.Asaresult,thislawisnowupdated,justastheGunapeoplehadwanted.

Duringthepreviousgeneralassembly,theproposalwasdistributedtothedelegateswhorepresentedtheircommunities.Inlinewiththis,eachcommunityhadtheopportunitytoreviseanddiscusstheproposal.Finally,intheUsdubcommunity,onthe23rd,24th,and25thofAugust2012itwasexten-


sivelydebatedthroughthefivedelegates,whowerelegitimatelyaccreditedasrepresentativesoftheircommunities.Throughthisexercise,theGunaGeneralCongressputitstraditionalsystemintoprac-tice,equivalenttoFPIC,aspartofGunaautonomy.

2.5 DECISION-MAkINGAswasmentioned,theGunaGeneralCongress(GGC)isthehighestauthorityintheregionformakingfinaldecisions.Duetoitsverynature,theGGC’sdecision-makingstyleisadaptiveandparticipative,butperiodic.ThismeansthatGunadecision-makingiscollectiveandreachedbyconsensus.

Theconsensus-baseddecision-makingprocessisnotatop-downapproach.Thatistosay,powerisnotonlyinthehandsofoneindividualwhoimposesthechainofauthority,fromthestrategicapextothelowestlevel.Thisdecision-makingmodelhastraditionallyworkedverywellamongsttheGunas,strikingabalancebetweentheconservationofnaturalresources,socialcohesionandself-determination.

Nevertheless,recentchallengesfacedbytheGunasrequirethemethodformanaginginformationtobeupdated.ItistheGunaYalaResearchandDevelopmentInstitute’s(GYRDI)intentiontocarryoutthesetasksinstages.Asaresult,theGYRDIplaysanimportantroleofmonitoringtheimpactsofdifferentproj-ectswhicharecarriedoutintheregionandpresentingnewprojectssemi-annuallytotheGunaGeneralAssemblyforeveryone’sinformation,thusfacilitatingtheadaptablemanagementoftheGGC.

Thisconsensus-baseddecision-makingmethodhasalsobeencriticizedbyoutsidepartieswhoconsiderittobeslowandcostly.However,itisstillefficientfortheGunasasitmeansthereisfree,priorandin-formedconsentwithoutanypressure,toachieveahealthyfinaldecision,whichsuitseveryone’swishes.

3.0 UNDERSTANDING THE NATURE OF FREE, PRIOR AND INFORMED CONSENT (FPIC)

3.1 FPICFree,PriorandInformedConsentorFPICisawayofgrantingordenyingpermission(givingorwith-holdingconsent).Therefore,itisarighttochooseandconsidertheoptionsinfavoroforagainstsome-thing,beforepurposefullymakingadecision.Inaddition,itisanessentialpartofindigenouspeoples’righttoself-determination.

Thisrighttoconsultationandfree,priorandinformedconsenthasbeengivenspecialattentionininter-nationalarenas,thanksespeciallytothedemandsmadebytheindigenousleadersoftheworld.Thisisallduetotheimplementationofdevelopmentprojectsonindigenousterritories.Therighttofree,priorandinformedconsentisthusaweaponfordefendinglandsandnaturalresourcesfromarangeofprojectswhich are being carried out on indigenous territories; projects for mineral extraction, building dams,protectedareasandhydropowerplants,amongstmanymore.

FPICisnowexpressedininternationalhumanrightsinstruments,suchasILOConvention169andtheUNDeclarationontheRightsofIndigenousPeoples.NationallegislationinPanama,however,stilldoesnotexpressitinfull.DespitethefactthatPanamadoesnottaketherighttoconsultationandtherighttoFPICintoconsiderationinitsnationallaws,theGunapeoplehavenotwastedtimeinlightofthelawmak-ersinactionbutnowratherhavetheirownFundamentalLaw,inwhichthebasesofFPICarementioned.


Theprocessofgrantingpermissioninordertocarryoutanyprojectvariesfromoneculturetoanotheranditispreciselyherethatthedecision-makingprocesstakesplace.Inthenextsection,wewillsharetheexperienceoftheGunapeopleintermsofFPIC.

3.2 FPIC THE GUNA wAYItisnecessarytounderlinewhatwaspreviouslysaid:thattherightofindigenouspeoples’toFPIChasstillnotbewrittenintoPanama’slaws,despitePanamabeingoneofthecountrieswhichsupportsinter-nationalinstrumentssuchastherightsofindigenouspeoplesandConventionN°.169,whichexplicitlystipulatesthedutytoconsult.

Nonetheless,culturallyspeaking,theGunashavealwayspracticedFPIC.Therefore,itisnotanewcon-ceptbutratheronethatisknownbyanothernameandwhichtheyobviouslyknowintheirownlanguageandaccordingtotheirownworldview.

The equivalent of FPIC in Guna is: idaggaggwa, odurdaggaggwa, isliggwa arbaed igar, which meanssomethingalongthelinesof:“Inorderforworktobesuccessful,theremustbeconsultationsbetweentheparties,adaptablemanagementofinformationandtransparency”.Assuch,thisconceptisnotonlyexpressedonpaper,inthereportsandtheFundamentalLaw,buttheGunasalsocreatedabodytoensurethispracticewascompliedwith.ThisisthecasefortheGunaYalaResearchandDevelopmentInstitute(GYRDI),anacademic,technicalandnon-profitunitforthedevelopmentoftheGunaYalaRegion.Itis anorganizationunder theauthorityofandbelonging to theGunaGeneralCongress,whichaswasalready mentioned, is the highest political-administrative organization for deliberation and decision-makingintheregion.

Theaimof theGYRDI is toencourage, facilitateandpromote thecomprehensivedevelopmentof theGunaYalaregioninterritorial,cultural,socio-economicterms,andintermsofconservationandprotec-tionofthenaturalenvironment.Therefore,theGYRDIessentiallyworksasanadvisorybody.Inaddition,itgivesguidancetothecommunitiesandmonitorsthedifferentprojectsbeingcarriedoutintheGunaYalaregion.

TheGYRDIhasthefollowingaims:a.Promote,encourage,carryoutanddisseminatescientificandculturalresearchwhichcontributes

totheknowledgeandthesocio-economic,environment,politicalandculturaldevelopmentoftheGunaYalaregion’scommunities.

b.Designdevelopment strategies andpolicies forGunaYala, according to theGeneralAssembly’scriteriaandtheGunapeople’sworldview.

c.CreatealternativeconservationanddevelopmentprojectswiththeparticipationoftheGunaYalaregion’scommunities.

d.OfferandfacilitatetechnicalassistancetoGunacommunities.

e.Actasabodyforconsultation,guidance,follow-up,monitoringandadviceforprivate,governmen-talandnon-governmentalinstitutions,bothnationalandinternational,whichcarryoutresearchanddevelopmentprojectsintheGunaYalaregion.

f. Establishlinkswithotherinstitutions,nationalandforeign,whichhavesimilarobjectivestothoseoftheResearchandDevelopmentInstitute.


g.Makecultural,religiousandhistoricalcollections,andotherexpressionsoftheGunapeople.

h.Permanentlyandsystematicallyorganizeandoffercapacity-buildingandeducationservicestothecommunities,pointedtowardssocio-economic,environmentalandculturaldevelopment.

i. Contribute,supportandassistotherindigenousterritoriesandruralareaswhennecessary.

TheGYRDIhasthreekindsofmembers:

a.Governingmembers:areallthesailagan8membersofthecommunitieswhomakeuptheGunaYalaregion.Theyhavetherighttospeakandvoteinthegeneralassembly.

b.Affiliatemembers:areallthedelegatesandcommunitiesandorganizationsaccreditedbytheGunaGeneralCongressandwhoactivelyparticipateintheInstitute’sdevelopment.Theyonlyhavetherighttospeakinthegeneralassembly.

c.Honorarymembers:areallthosepeoplewhocontributeprofessionally,economically,scientificallyandinacommunitywaytostrengtheningtheInstituteandthedevelopmentoftheGunaYalaregion.

Itisworthmentioningthatanyproject,ofanynature,whichcomesfromanationalorinternationalentitymustbeapprovedbytheGunaYalaResearchandDevelopmentInstitute,throughitsSteeringCommittee,fortheproposal’scontenttobereviewed.

Oncetheproposalhasbeenreviewed,thechairmanandexecutivedirectoroftheGYRDItakesittothegeneralassemblyoftheGeneralCongressofGunaCulturetoinformtheaudienceoftheproject’sinten-tions.Themainpeoplepresentatthecongressarethelocalauthoritiesofthe49communities,suchasthesailagan,argamarandsuaribgan,mainlyreligiousauthorities,whomeetupeverythreemonthstosingtoBabaandNana9andprofesstheircollectivefaithtothedivinecreator.

Subsequently, theythenhavetowait fortheGGCtobeheld,whichusuallyhappensaftertheGeneralCultureCongresshasbeenheld.Thistime,theproposalistakentotheordinaryassembly,whichisthehighestauthorityoftheGunapeople.

Whenthis takesplace, thenatureof theproposal isopenlydiscussed.Theaudiencehas tobewell in-formedandthenthefinaldecisionismade.Inthisregard,theproposalorprojectcanbeaccepted,reject-ed,improvedorpassedontothenextordinarycongresswhichspendssixmonthsstudyingitindepth,inorderforsubsequenteffectivedecision-makingwithoutanypressurebeingapplied.

Usuallywhenthishappens,copiesoftheproposalaremadeanddistributedamongstthe49communi-tiesinorderforthemtohavetheopportunitytoopenlydebateitintheirrespectivecommunities.And,finally,observationsmadebymaleandfemalecommunitymembersaretakentothegeneralassembly.Therefore,whatisdecidedbythemajorityafterhealthydeliberationwillbethefinaldecision.ThisistheGunaGeneral’Congress’sfinalposition.Thisishowfree,priorandinformedconsentworkswithinGunaautonomywhendealingwithanewproject.Theaimistoavoidanyfutureirregularitywhichensuresthatautonomyworkswell.

8 Thepluralofsaila,meaningtheadministrativeandreligiousauthorityoftheGunacommunity.

9 Baba(father)andNana(mother)arethesupremebeingswhichcreatedMotherEarth.


Somethingverysimilaroccursatacommunitylevel.Thatistosaythatwhenanofferforaprojectispre-sentedtoaparticularcommunity,thecommunity’ssailareceivestheproposalfromapublicorprivateentityofanynature.Subsequently,theproposalistranslatedorverballyinterpretedbythecommunity’ssecretaryatthelocalgeneralassembly.Theproposalcanalsobeimmediatelyassessedorsenttothesec-ondsystemforanin-depthanalysis.Finally,theproposalcanbeaccepted,modified,improvedorrejectedaccordingtotheunanimousdecisionmadebymaleandfemalecommunitymembers.

TheStatuteoftheGunaYalaRegionstatesthefollowingwithregardtoprojects:Art162:“EveryprojectintendedbecarriedoutwithinthelimitsofGunaYala,onascalewhichcouldimpacttheecosystemorbiodiversityofmostofoneormoreoftheRegion’scommunities,orwhichcouldharmtheGuna’ssocio-culturalvaluesinanotherway,regardlessofhowitissetup,mustbeapprovedbytheGunaGeneralCon-gress,havingbeensubmittedinwritingandindetail,beforeitsimplementation”.

4.0 THE FPIC PROCESS IN GUNA YAlA (TwO EXAMPlES)

4.1 INTERCULTURAL bILINGUAL EDUCATION – IbEAttheendofthelastcentury,thegovernmentofPanamatriedtoimplementLawN°34of199510forthefirsttime,byestablishingtheDepartmentforInterculturalBilingualEducation,abodyattachedtotheDirectorateGeneralofEducation,intheMinistryofEducation.

Noticingtheopportunity,inMarch2001theGunaGeneralCongresssignedacooperationagreementwiththeSpanishAgencyofInternationalCooperationandwiththeparticipationofthePanamaniangovern-ment,tojointlyimplementtheprogram,withfundinggivenbytheMixedHispanic-PanamanianFund.

AsaresulttheNanGarburbaOdulogedIgarwasstarted,-orGunaYalaInterculturalBilingualEducationProject,whichstartedin2005andhastodatebeenverysuccessful,constitutingamilestoneinGunahistory.

Throughthisprogram,theGunasaimtoincreasetheopportunitiesoftheschoolpopulationtostayintheeducationsystemandtoguaranteethepeopletheirrighttoaneducationwhichpreserves,developsandrespectstheiridentityandculturalheritage.Inaddition,thisinitiativealsoaimstodefineaGunamodelintermsofinterculturalbilingualeducationinPanama.

Infact,severalyearshavepassedsincethisproject,approvedbytheGunapeople,begananditsresultshaveproduceda lotof success.This iswhathappenswhenaproject isnot imposeduponaminority.Conversely,allthebasesofGunasocietywereconsultedonthisproject.Becauseofthis,itcanonceagainbesaidthatwhenprogramsareimplementedfollowingfree,priorandinformedconsent,theyarealwayssuccessfulandbeneficialtoeveryone.

10 Law34,June6th1995repealed,modified,addedandsubrogatedarticlesfromLawN°7(1946)(BasicLawonEducation).ThemodificationsmadetotheBasicLawonEducation(underLawN°34)recognizedtherightofindigenouspeoples,withre-gardtoeducation,forthefirsttime.Theaimwastoensureeducationconsistentwithindigenouscultures,ofwhichtheobviousexampleisInterculturalBilingualEducation.


4.2 JOINT DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE REDD+ PILOT PROJECT IN THE GUNA YALA REGION.InMarch2012,theAmadorFoundation,presentedaproject,throughEarthTrain,totheGunaGeneralCongress,the:WildlifeWorksProposalforthejointdesignandimplementationofaREDD+pilotprojectintheGunaYalaregion”.

ThisisbecausetheGunaGeneralCongressandEarthTrainsignedacooperationagreementin2005.Ac-cordingtoEarthTrain,followingthemeetingoftheGunaGeneralCongressinJune2011,theGunaau-thoritiesrequestedsupport,basedontheexistingcooperationagreementbetweenthem.Asaresult,EarthTrainthensoughtthesupportofWildlifeWorks,asitsbestallytomeetthedemandsoftheGunapeople.

EarthTrainandWildlifeWorksaimtofindaREDD+projectfromthevoluntarymarket,whichoffersfundstoprotectGunaYalaforestsfromsettlers,forsustainabledevelopment,forrelocationtolandgiventhepossibleriseinsealevelandtofaceotherexternalthreats.

TherepresentativesofWildlifeWorksclaimtheGunasarecurrentlythefirstpeople,anduntilnow,theonlypeopleintheworld,todevelopREDD+projectsrecognizedonthevoluntarymarket.Moreovertheyclaimtherearefundsavailable(notdonations)tosupportthecommunitiesandthattheyhavemanyalli-anceswhichallowsthisorganizationtoimplementmoreREDD+projectsaroundtheworld.

InKenya (Africa)alone,projectscoveringmore than200,000hectaresof landweredeveloped,whichcurrentlygeneratemorethan1,000,000tonsofVerifiedEmissionsReductions(VERs).Itsoldmorethan2,000,000VERsonthemarketandhavealotofexperienceinruralsustainabledevelopment.

Consultation workshopsThe Guna General Congress Authorities received the Wildlife Works/ Earth Train proposal whentheYansibDiwarcommunity’sordinaryassemblywasbeingheld.Therefore,inordertofollowthetraditionalrouteoffree,priorandinformedconsent,theGunaauthoritiespassedthedocumentontothecorrespondingexpertbody(GYRDI)forittoobjectivelyanalyzeandstudytheproposal’saims.

Inturn,astheexpertsfromtheGYRDIrealizedthatthiswasanewproposal,unprecedentedintheregion,especiallyasitrelatedtoREDD+,theycalledonotherGunaexpertstocarryoutajointin-depthanalysis.

Inlinewiththis,tenGunaexpertsfromdifferentfieldsattendedaninformativeworkshopinthemid-dleofApril2012,ontheproposal“StudyonthefeasibilityofimplementingaREDD+pilotproject”presentedbyWildlifeWorks/EarthTrain.Theaimoftheworkshopwastoobtainmoreinformationonthetopicandtostudytheproject’sviabilityonGunaterritory.

The proposal assessed by the GYRDI and its collaborators was submitted to the general assemblywhichwasheldintheGardiSugdubcommunityinMay2012.IntheassemblyadecisionwasmadetocontinueanalyzingthenatureoftheproposalandcarryoutmoreconsultationswithpeoplewhohadnothadtheopportunityofattendingtheGeneralCongress.Duetothisrequest,theentireGeneralCongressinstructedtheGYRDItoorganizeaconsultationprocessesandtocreateateamtothisaim.


The Guna communities analyze the REDD+ proposalOnthe29thand30thofJune2012, intheYandubcommunitythefirst informativeworkshopwasheldontheWildlifeWorks/EarthTrainproposalcalled“StudyonthefeasibilityofimplementingaREDD+pilotprojectandcooperationproposalinGunaYala”.ThistimetheworkshopwasledbytheUbgisuggun,Niadub,Digir,AggwanusadubandYandubcommunitiesandWargandubfromNarganasubdivisionNo.1.

ThesecondcommunityworkshoponClimateChangeandREDD+tookplaceonthe30thand31stof July 2012 in the Mirya Ubgigandub community. Nine Guna communities took part: Urgandi,Nusadub,Moraggedub,MiryaUbgigandub,GardiMuladub,GardiSugdub,GardiYandubandGardiDubbir,alsofromNarganasubdivisionNo.1.

Bytheendof2012,15communitieshadtakenpartininformativeworkshopsandtherearestill13communitiesleft,fromthesamesubdivision.ThenthisexperimentwillgotoothersubdivisionssuchasAiligandiandDubwala.Thefinalaimisforall49communitieswhichmakeuptheGunaYalare-giontotakepart.Then,afterthis,inoneoftheordinarygeneralassemblies,itwillfinallybedecidedwhethertheproposalforsellingcarbononthevoluntarymarket,promotedbyWildlifeWorksandEarthTrainonGunaterritory,isacceptedorrejected.

Duringthecommunityworkshops,thetopicthatmostdrewtheGuna’sattentionwaswhatreferredtotheconceptofsellingcarbon(sellingcarbonversustheoffertheGunasreceive).ItisverydifficultforGunainterpreterstotranslateorinterprettheconceptofsellingcarbontoanaudiencewhichdoesnothaveexpertiseinthisarea;thisisanotherchallenge.

Aswasalreadymentioned,in2008,87%oftheGunaYalaregionwascoveredbyforests;asaresult,theBaluWalamethodmustbeapplied,inlightoftheREDD+strategiesformitigatingthescourgesofclimatechange.TheBaluWalaconceptforthepurposeofREDD,wasusedbyargarGilbertoArias(retiredsailadummad)inPoznan,duringthefourteenthConferenceoftheParties(COP14).FormersailaAriasallegedthatBaluWalabenefitedeveryonewithoutanydiscrimination;therefore,thedif-ferentREDDactivitiesshouldstartbyrespectingcommunityprotocolsinorderfortheirstrategiestobeapprovedandvalidatedinlinewiththeneedsofeachgroupinvolved.

5.0 CONClUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 CONCLUSIONSGunaculture,likeotherindigenousculturesoftheworld,isfacingchangeduetodominantpressures:ontheonehandthereisinternalpressureduetosocialchangesandenvironmentaldegradation,ontheotherhandthereisexternalpressuretomarketnaturalresources,fromthegrowthoftourismandtheconstantthreatoflandgrabbingontheirbordersbysettlers.Therefore,inordertomaintaintheiridentity,theGu-naschooseprojectsofaculturalnatureandchoosetoupdatetheGunaregulationssotheyarebetterabletodealwithcertaindevelopmentprojects.

Since the beginning of this study, it was clearly noticed that the Gunas interviewed were unaware oftheconceptofFree,PriorandInformedConsent inthetermsbywhichit iscurrentlyknown.Atfirsttheyclaimedtheyhadneverheardofitandthentheypointedoutthattheconceptwasfromthewagas


(notGunas).However,whentheconceptwastranslatedintotheirlanguage,theyautomaticallysaidwithpride:“thatiswhatourauthoritiesinthelocalcongressandtheGunaGeneralCongressarefor”.TheyaddedthattheGunasarewillingtofightwhenthewagaswanttoimposeaprojectintheircommunities,onwhichtheyhavenotbeenconsulted.

Thepeopleinterviewedwerewillingtointroducechangescurrentlyfacedbythesocietyinwhichtheylive.Awareofdevelopment,theyinsistthattherehastobeFPICwhenaprojectcomestotheircommunities.

They state thatanyprojectwhich leads to theexploitationofnatural resources in their communitiesmusthavetheirFPIC.TheyalsorequiretheGunaGeneralCongresstobedemandingduringnegotia-tionwiththegovernmentornationalorforeignprivatecompanies.AllofthisispartofthemanagementforGunaautonomy.

Informativeworkshopsareneededforthis,workshopsonthepracticaluseofmanualsonFPIC.DespitethefactthatGunasalreadyhavetheirownthroughtheinternalregulationsofeveryoneoftheircommu-nitiesandtheFundamentalLaw,itisnecessaryforthemtobeup-to-date.

IntheGunaYalaregion,FPICcanworksuccessfullybecausecommunitymembersalreadyhaveanequiv-alentofthismechanism.Nowtheyneedtojointheexperiencesandcontributionsofotherindigenouspeoplesinordertoimprovethewayitworks.

OnamacroleveltheGunas’FundamentalLawcouldbeimprovedtofillgapsinsomeofitsarticleswhichrefertoFPIC.

IntheGunaYalaregion,whichhasaround50semiautonomouscommunities,everycommunityhasitsownregulationonenvironmentalandeconomicissues.Therefore,intermsofimplementingnewprojectsinthegeographicalvicinity,thedemandsofFPICcouldworkinfavoroftheinhabitants.

FPICtheGunaway,hasbeenconsulted inthecommunitybases; itsobjectiveswerediscussed ineverycommunityandwerefinallydebatedoninthegeneralassemblyoftheGunaGeneralCongress.However,onanationallevelthesituationofFPICanditsapplicabilityisverybadbecauseisnotpartofnationallaws.

TheGunasinterviewedbelievethatFPICcanbevaluableandthatindigenouspeoplesneedtoknowallaboutthisinstrumentinordertobetterexercisetheirrights.

Inadditiontowhathasbeenmentioned,thestudyalsoledtothefollowingconclusionsaboutFPICbe-ingdrawn:

• itiscompatiblewithindigenouspeoples’traditionalsystemofself-government.

• itcanbeappliedtoanon-expertaudience.

• itisapplicabletothesustainableuseandconservationofnaturalresources.

• itisaflexiblecoordinationframeworkbetweenthestakeholders.

• itallowsindigenouspeoplestodraftastrategicdevelopmentplanwithapoliticalimpactintheircountries.


• itstrengthensindigenouscommunitiesandtheirgrassrootsorganizations.

• itallowsindigenouspeoplestoupdatetheirinternalregulations,accordingtotherealitiesinwhichtheylive.

• itallowsindigenouspeoplestocontributetothedesignofanationalstrategybasedontheirvisionoftheworld.

• iturgesindigenouspeoplestokeepfightingfortheirterritorialsecurity.

• itallowsindigenouspeoplestodemandthattheBaluWalamethodisapplied,thatistosaywithregardtocommunityprotocolstostartnegotiationondevelopmentprojects.

• itallowsindigenouspeoplestofindalliancesbetweenpeoplesonanational,regionalandgloballevelforthesakeoffightingfortheirself-determination.

• itallowsinternationalorganizations(e.g.WorldBank)todemandaformalnoticebyindigenouspeoplesfromnationalStateswhichguaranteesthatthepeoplesvoluntarilyacceptaspecificprojectwhichtheywanttoimplementontheirterritories.

5.2 RECOMMENDATIONSAllindigenouspeopleshavethroughouthistoryexperienceddisplacementorhavehadlandtakenawayby invaders inonewayoranother.Therefore thestruggle for therecognitionof their rights is similarandatthesametimetheyhavebeendemandingFree,PriorandInformedConsentwhentheyhavebeenthreatenedbyStates.InthisregardFPICisnotanewconcept.

BelowisalistofrecommendationstooptimizetheuseofFPIConindigenousterritories.

For Indigenous Peoples to:

• ConsiderusingthemanualonFPICbecausecanbeusedasanexcellentcoordinationframeworkwhichpraisesadaptivemanagement,informationmanagementandafeedbackprocessforIndig-enousPeoples’decisionmakers.

• ConsiderusingFPICbecauseitallowsthemtoensuretheirtraditionaldecision-makingwaysarerespected,whichareoftenconsensualandslowsoastoreachahealthyfinaldecision.

For national States, which:

• In order to implement a project on indigenous territories States, private companies and NGOsmustsignadocumentinwhichtheystatetheyhavefullyunderstoodtherequirementsofFPICandthattheywillrespectthem.

• Mustsupportindigenouspeoplestocontinuestrugglingagainsttheoverlapofprotectedareasintheareassurroundingtheirlands.

• Mustrespectindigenouspeoples’plansforthebenefit-sharingmechanisminlinewiththeirmo-dusvivendi.

• Mustreformtheiragriculturalpolicies.

• Mustsupportindigenouspeoplesingrantingtheearth’slegalsecurity.


• Mustcarryoutinformativeoradvisoryworkshopsforgrassrootsorganizationswherefinaldeci-sionsaremade.

• Mustusesimple,non-technicallanguagewhenapplyingFPIC.

• MustapplyFPICtothemajorityorallcommunitymembersandavoidforgeries.

• MustrespectthefactthatFPICpointsoutthatthepresentationofproposalsmustbesubmittedinwritingandbeprecise,notgeneralizedsoastoconfusethedecision-makers.

For the World Bank, which:

• Mustrequirebodiesandorganizationswhosepurposeitistodesignprojectsorprogramstotaketheindigenousworldviewintoconsideration,withregardtomotherearthandtheuseofhernatu-ralresources.

• Mustdemandmorecapacity-buildinganddisseminationofinformationforallsocialplayers,be-foreanyprojectiscarriedoutonindigenousterritories.

• Mustensurethatthebenefit-sharingmechanismarisingfromaprojectforindigenouspeoplesistransparentandclear.

• Mustsupportindigenouspeoplesinreachingaconsensusoncarbonownership.

For the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues to:

• ContinueworkinghardtocirculateFPICmanualsbecausetheystillhaveamodesteffect intheGunaregion.

• ConsiderthepossibilityoftranslatingFPICintothe languagesofeachregionsotheindigenouspeoplescantakethemintoconsideration.


bIblIOGRAPHY

bOOkS AND ARTICLESALVARADO,Eligio.PerfildelosPueblosIndígenadePanamá.Panamá2001.AuspiciadoporelBancoMundialyMinisteriodeGobiernoyJusticia.(ProfileoftheIndigenousPeoplesofPanama.Panama2001.FundedbytheWorldBankandtheGovernmentandJusticeMinistry.)

KUNAGENERALCONGRESS.AnmarIgar,KunaRegulations.

CONSTITUTION AND LAWS OF THE REPUBLIC OF PANAMA. Political Constitution of 1972,AmendedbytheAmendmentsof1978,bytheConstitutionalActof1983.

GENERALFINANCEOFFICEOFTHEREPUBLIC.2010.2010Census

INTERNATIONALLABOURORGANIZATION.ReportonthesituationofindigenouspeoplesinPan-ama(technicalsupport).CEALP.Panama,2005.

SCOTTA.Muller.BiodiversityandTourismintheframeworkontheConventiononBiologicalDiver-sity.ThecaseforthesustainableuseoftheKunaYala’smarineresourcesofKunaYala.

TURNERY.,Anayansi.Therighttoself-determinationfortheindigenouspeoplesofPanama.

VALIENTELÓPEZ,Aresio.DerechodelospueblosindígenasdePanamá:ProyectoFortalecimientodelaCapacidaddeDefensaLegaldelosPueblosIndígenasyCentrodeAsistenciaLegalPopular(CEALP),2002

WAGUA,Aiban.LosKunasentredossistemaseducativos.PropuestaeducativadelosCongresosGene-ralesKunasyrasgosdelaEducaciónBilingüeIntercultural.

WAGUA,Aiban.EnDefensadelaVidaysuArmonía.Elementosdelaespiritualidadguna.

wEbSITESGunaGeneralCongress. http://www.congresogeneralkuna.com

FinanceOfficeoftheRepublic http://www.contraloria.gob.pa/inec

UnitedNationsOrganization http://www.un.org

InternationalLabourOrganisation http://www.ilo.org

INTERvIEwS• InterviewwithDonGilbertoArias,SailaDummadretiredfromtheGunaGeneralCongress(Decem-

ber5th2008).

• InterviewwithDonBaglioPérezdeAssudub,SecondSailaoftheAssudubCommunity(March27th2012).


• InterviewwithDonClementeAristótelesdeGoedub,highestauthorityoftheGoedubcommunity(5thofMay2012).

• InterviewwithDonVirgilioHernández,highestauthorityoftheAssudubcommunity,(17thofMay2012).

OTHER• GlossaryontheEthnicandCulturalDiversityofGuatemalaCODISRA,2010.

• BillonIndigenousPeoples’Consultation,Guatemala,No.3684,2007.

• InstitutionalstructureoftheCommunalMayoralty,CPD.2009.

• LaVigenciayAplicacióndelDerechoIndígenaMayaparaelDesarrolloCulturalmenteSustentable,TzukimPop,2006.

• UrbanandRuralDevelopmentCouncilsLaw.DecreeNo.11-2002.

• NationalLanguagesLaw.DecreeNo.19-2003.

• DecentralizationGeneralLaw.DecreeNo.14-2002,2002.

• RUIZ,JuanCarlos.LaImplementacióndelDerechodeConsultaPreviadelosPueblosIndígenas,Peru.2011.



AbOUT THE AUTHOR: Rogeliano Solis is a Guna from Panama, and is a biologist and a science teacher. He is the former secretary of the Guna Congress, and he participated in the review of Panama’s REDD+ proposal to the world bank.

AbOUT CONSERvATION INTERNATIONAl’S INDIGENOUS ADvISORY GROUP:Launched at Conservation International’s (CI) board of Directors Meeting in November of 2009, the purpose of CI’s Indigenous Advisory Group (IAG) is threefold. First, it is intended to build upon and strengthen existing collaborations between indigenous peoples and NGOs on REDD+ at the local, national and global scale. Secondly, it brings direct advice and feedback from indigenous experts into the climate change strategies of conservation and development NGOs, including Conservation International. Finally, the IAG promotes understanding of the needs, priorities, concerns and programs of indigenous peoples related to REDD+.

Cover photo: public domain

Documents

CASE STUDY FREE, PRIOR AND INFORMED CONSENT … · CASE STUDY FREE, PRIOR AND INFORMED ... allowed the interviewees to give natural answers ... , teachers and women were key to drafting