Tag Archives: #MiningJustice

Canada-Ecuador free trade deal sparks concern in both countries

by Jim Hodgson

As ministers signed a new free trade agreement today in Ottawa, civil society organizations in Canada and Ecuador repeated their concerns about the deal.

The 26-chapter document was signed in Ottawa today by Canada’s international trade minister, Maninder Sidhu and Ecuador’s minister of production, foreign trade and investment, Luis Alberto Jaramillo.

Ministers meet. Photo: Primicias, Ecuador.

In Canada, Common Frontiers and MiningWatch Canada said the agreement was “deeply dangerous.” From what is known about the deal, it’s clear that it “grants sweeping and undemocratic protections to Canadian investors while deepening Ecuador’s human rights crisis.”

(I have worked with both organizations and their members for the better part of three decades – since our struggles over the North American FTA, opposition to the proposed Free Trade Area of the Americas – a fight we won in 2005 – and the impacts of Canadian mining companies in Guatemala and beyond. Challenging as the current situation in Ecuador is, I am pleased to see Common Frontiers and MiningWatch fighting the good fight against these FTAs that only benefit the rich.)

Groups in both countries had previously criticized Ecuador’s ban on its largest opposition party, ongoing criminalization of ecological defenders, failure to consult with Indigenous peoples, and collaboration with the United States in military attacks on supposed drug-traffickers.

Common Frontiers and MiningWatch prepared a four-page explainer on why the deal is bad. And here is a statement on the new FTA from colleagues at Latin America is Better without Free Trade.

Most of what follows is text from the Common Frontiers-MiningWatch news release:

Minister Sidhu said the agreement will “open new opportunities for Canadian companies in a growing market, strengthen supply chains, and provide more predictable access to goods, services, and investment.” But Canada’s own assessment of the agreement projected insignificant growth in trade. Its main purpose is to attract and protect Canadian investment in Ecuador’s mining sector. 

The agreement is massively opposed by a large share of Ecuadorian civil society and Indigenous groups.

Paramount among the concerns:

  • A worsening human rights crisis in Ecuador. Ecuadorian and international human rights organizations have documented widespread, systematic human rights violations, including increasing militarization, repression of dissent, the criminalization of environmental defenders, and the imposition of executive decrees that undermine the rule of law. Much of this is exacerbated by – or in support of – existing Canadian mining investment in the country.
  • No consultation, consent, or transparency. The agreement was negotiated and signed without the free, prior, and informed consent of affected Indigenous Peoples, violating the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and Ecuador’s obligations under the Escazú Agreement.
  • Investor protections that violate Ecuador’s constitution. The agreement contains an Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanism that is prohibited by Ecuador’s constitution and was rejected in two recent plebiscites. According to former UN Rapporteur David Boyd, ISDS poses “catastrophic” consequences for climate action, environmental protection, and the realization of human rights.
  • No corporate accountability mechanism in Canada. The recent closure of the Canadian Ombudsperson for Responsible Enterprise (CORE) and the lack of due diligence legislation underscore a major accountability gap in Canada. Communities harmed by the operations of Canadian companies in Ecuador will have no standing in investor-state disputes and nowhere to turn for justice and remedy.

The agreement now heads to Parliament to be ratified. In response to repeated concerns raised by Ecuadorian civil society and Indigenous communities and echoed by prominent civil society voices in Canada, the organizations are urging Members of Parliament to reject the agreement.

In Ecuador, the Primicias news site said the trade agreement with Canada will allow almost all of the products that Ecuador exports to that market to enter with zero tariff, once it comes into force. According to the Government, the benefit covers 99.6% of items for Ecuador.

Among the products that will enter without paying tariffs are: textiles, vegetables, roses, sardines, confetti, chocolate and ceramics.

Likewise, some of the products imported from Canada that will reach Ecuador without paying tariffs, including: wheat, cell phones, cleaning products, laptops, drones, fertilizers, medicines and sporting goods.

In El Salvador, the struggle continues as AG appeals not-guilty verdict in case of Santa Marta 5

The office of El Salvador’s Attorney General has decided to appeal the acquittal Oct. 18 of five community leaders, a move quickly rejected by their community and by Salvadoran and global organizations that have worked in solidarity for more than two decades to reject a proposed gold mine that threatened water resources.

Images: ACAFREMIN (the Central American Alliance Against Mining) and CISPES (Committee in Solidarity with the People of El Salvador)

The office of El Salvador’s Attorney General has decided to appeal the acquittal Oct. 18 of five community leaders, a move quickly rejected by their community and by Salvadoran and global organizations that have worked in solidarity for more than two decades to reject a proposed gold mine that threatened water resources.

Leonel Herrera, a journalist covering the case for Diario Co Latino, calls the decision to appeal “reprehensible.” Authorities should use their time and resources “to investigate true war crimes, beginning with the massacres committed against Santa Marta which took the lives of hundreds of civilians—mostly women, the elderly and children.” 

This was never a true criminal case, Herrera added, but rather “a spurious accusation invented to persecute a group of former guerrilla fighters not for war crimes, but rather for what they do now: care for the water, protect the ecosystem and attain the continuity of lives gravely threatened by the possible re-activation of mining projects.”

Santa Marta Rejects Appeal of Acquittal of Water Defenders

Translation by CISPES (Spanish original is  here)

We reject the appeal of the Attorney General’s Office and demand that the acquittal of our environmental leaders be upheld

The Attorney General’s Office (FGR) remains determined to prevent legality and justice from prevailing for the community leaders of Santa Marta and ADES, who were definitively acquitted last October 18 by the Sentencing Court of Sensuntepeque, Cabañas. For this reason, an appeal has been filed before the Criminal Chamber of Cojutepeque.
Despite multiple calls to respect the acquittal of the environmental activists of Cabañas, the Prosecutor’s Office seeks to reverse Sentencing Court’s ruling, which is in accordance with the law and congruent with the principles of due process. The appeal is characterized by a lack of valid legal argumentation and by the disrespectful way in which the representatives of the Prosecutor’s Office refer to the honorable sentencing judges.
In this sense, we ask the magistrates of the Criminal Chamber of Cojutepeque not to admit the appeal and to ratify the decision of the Sentencing Court of Sensuntepeque, which has acted independently, in accordance with the law and without being pressured by extrajudicial factors that conspire to condemn the defenders of water, the environment and life threatened by the possible reactivation of mining.
In this regard, it is worth remembering that the ruling of the Sensuntepeque Sentencing Court responds to the mandate of the Cojutepeque Criminal Chamber, which on two occasions transferred the decision of whether or not the alleged acts constituted crimes against humanity or war crimes to the Sensuntepeque Sentencing Court.
In accordance with this mandate, the sentencing judges analyzed the case and unanimously determined that the alleged crimes presented by the prosecution did not meet the definition of a crime against humanity or a war crime, as established in the Rome Statute and the Geneva Conventions, respectively. Therefore, they ruled that the criminal action was inadmissible due to the statute of limitations of the alleged crimes and decreed a definitive dismissal for the defendants.
We alert the country and the world of this attempt by the Salvadoran Attorney General’s Office to continue using the judicial system to persecute environmental activism and manipulate restorative and transitional justice to criminalize environmental defenders who warn about the serious dangers of mining extractivism.

Definitive freedom for the community leaders of Santa Marta and ADES!
Yes to Life, No to Mining!

Cabañas, El Salvador, October 30, 2024