2010-2015 ILO Criticizes Guatemala on Mining and Indigenous Communities [Marlin]

In 2010, the International Labour Organization (ILO) Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations (CEACR) released a report criticizing Guatemala for, despite earlier comments made in 2005, 2006, and 2007, continuing to issue mining licences without consultation with indigenous communities and for failing to compensate indigenous communities for damages sustained or “make efforts to reduce the impact of exploitation”. The Committee requested “the Government to neither grant nor renew any licence for the exploration and exploitation of natural resources as referred to in Article 15 of the Convention while the participation and consultation provided for by the Convention are not being carried out, and to provide information in this regard.” These findings were made in relation to the Committee’s assessment of Guatemala’s obligations under the ILO Convention No. 169 on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries, published during its 98th Committee Session. The Committee received comments on this issue from the Union Movement, Guatemalan Indigenous and Agricultural Workers for the Defence of Workers’ Rights, of which the General Confederation of Workers of Guatemala (CGTG) forms a part, the Trade Union Confederation of Guatemala (CUSG), the National Trade Union and Peoples’ Coordinating Body (CNSP), the National Federation of Trade Unions of Public Employees of Guatemala (FENASTEG), the Trade Union Federation of Farm Workers (FESOC), the Trade Union of Health Workers of Guatemala, the Eastern Distribution Workers’ Union and the Trade Union Confederation of Guatemala (UNSITRAGUA) (ILO Report, 2010). At the time of the report’s release, the Committee had not received a response from Guatemala on the comments provided by these organizations.

At the 101st Committee Session in 2012, the CEACR considered the development of consultation processes relating to the Marlin Mine project. It noted that protective measures granted by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) in 2010, requesting that Guatemala suspend the project and “take effective measures to prevent environmental pollution pending the adoption of a decision by the IACHR concerning the substance of the petition linked to the application for protective measures” (CEACR Comments, 2012) (See the Legal Action, entitled “IACHR Petition and Precautionary Measures regarding Marlin Mine Authorization and Mayan Communities“, for more detail). The Committee, among other things: (1) urged the government to “establish mechanisms for dialogue which […] enable appropriate solutions [and] that take account of the interests and priorities of the indigenous peoples” and send detailed information about further developments; (2) urged the government “to ensure that [the Marlin Mine project does not have] a harmful impact on the health, culture and property of the communities living in the areas affected by the implementation or planning of the [project]”; and (3) requested that the government “take all the necessary measures to guarantee the integrity of persons and property in the regions affected by the projects and ensure that all the parties concerned refrain from any acts of intimidation or violence against persons who do not share their views on the projects” (Ibid). The CEACR repeated its concerns regarding the Marlin Mine project and request for detailed information regarding consultation processes in 2013 (102nd Session), 2014 (103rd Session), and 2015 (104th Session) (Ibid).