Mining in Colombia and Environmental Justice: How the 'Popular Consultation' Process Works in Practice
| Date | 01 May 2016 |
| Author |
46 ELR 10416 ENVIRONMENTAL LAW REPORTER 5-2016
Mining in
Colombia and
Environmental
Justice: How the
“Popular
Consultation”
Process Works in
Practice
by Luisa Ferreira-Peralta
Luisa Ferreira-Peralta is Stanford Human Rights Center Fellow
at the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.
Summary
is A rticle examines how the Latin American pro-
cedure of “popular consultation” has been used as
a mechanism for resisting the development of an
open-pit gold mine in Colombia, and ana lyzes how
Colombian communities are using the procedure
to have meaningful involvement in environmental
decisionmaking. A close study suggests that com-
munities were able to engage in popula r consulta-
tion because of certain conditions: First, most of
Colombian society was aware of this participatory
mechanism being written into the 1991 Constitu-
tion. Second, the com munity knew of t he popular
consultation’s processes and experiences in other
Latin A merican countries. ird, particular local
dynamics took place and alliances were formed.
Fourth, the general public agreed on the importance
of having meaningful involvement in environmental
decisionmaking.
For decades, environmental justice scholars, com-
munity activists, and health and environmental
protection advocates have studied dierent legal
mechanisms that enable a ll people, regardless of race, eth-
nicity, income, national origin, or education level, to have
a meaningful involvement in environmental decisionmak-
ing. While environmental justice scholars have explored
the impact of diverse procedural environmental justice
mechanisms, they have paid little attention to the Latin
American procedure of “popular consultation.”
e consulta popular, or popular consultation, “is an
institution through which a general question on a matter of
national, departmental, municipal, district or local signi-
cance, is submitted by the president, governor or mayor, for
the consideration of the people to make a formal ruling.”1
Similar to a voter referendum in the United States,2 this
participatory mecha nism is written into the constitutions
of many Latin American countries such as Argentina,
Mexico, and Peru, and specied in Colombian Law 134 of
1994. e Colombian Constitutional Court has reviewed
it on several occasions and characterizes it as a way in
which citizens can permanently participate in any process
that will signicantly aect the course of their lives.
e popular consultation is, at least on paper, the perfect
example of a procedural environmental justice mechanism
since it oers the opportunity for all people, regardless of
race, ethnicity, income, national origin, or education level,
to have meaning ful involvement in environmental deci-
sionmaking.3 Indeed, in recent years, more and more com-
munities have been turning to this mechanism to protect
the environment.
e Colombian law was written in the highly democratic
and pluralistic context of the writing of a new Constitution
in 1991, the re-founding of the Colombian state and nation.
Colombia’s internal armed conict has lasted ve decades,
marking it as one of the longest-standing conicts in the
world. With more than 220,000 people killed and over ve
million civilians forced from their homes, there have been
1. L. 134, art. 8 (1994), Por la Cual Se Dictan Normas Sobre Mecanismos de
Participación Ciudadana [Citizen Participation Mechanisms Act] (Colom.).
2. Referendums (in many U.S. states and Colombia) allow citizens to place
new legislation on a popular ballot, or to place legislation that has recently
been passed by a legislature on the ballot for a popular vote. e popular
consultation goes beyond that; it is a citizen participation mechanism that
allows citizens to decide about some aspect of vital importance, though it
does not have to be a law.
3. Global Justice and Environment, What Is Environmental Justice, https://
www.sta.ncl.ac.uk/g.m.long/environmental_justice.html (last visited Feb.
6, 2016).
Copyright © 2016 Environmental Law Institute®, Washington, DC. Reprinted with permission from ELR®, http://www.eli.org, 1-800-433-5120.
5-2016 NEWS & ANALYSIS 46 ELR 10417
many initiatives to end this bloody war.4 e 1991 Consti-
tution’s goal was to be the backbone of a peaceful country.
Some of the most important changes of the new Constitu-
tion were: (1)the recognition of fundamental socioeconomic
and collective rights; (2)the introduction of principles of
autonomy and decentralization; and (3)the insertion of new
democratic participatory mechanisms, including the popu-
lar consultation.5 Since 1994, 35 popular consultations have
taken place, almost one-third (28.5%) of which have been
about environmental justice at local levels.6
e debate so far about the popular consultation as a
procedural mechanism has been largely political, centering
on to what degree municipalities’ independence and deci-
sionmaking is desirable for the country. However, scholars
have largely overlooked popular consultations’ eects on
environmental justice. A s popular consultations increas-
ingly take place, it has become more relevant to under-
stand them in action.
is Article provides a detailed analysis of how commu-
nities are employing the popular consultation in Colombia
and how it is helping local citizens to have a meaning-
ful involvement in environmental decisionmaking. My
research focuses specically on the controversy over open-
ing Mina La Colosa [Colossal Mine], now one of 10 envi-
ronmental popular consultations that have been held in
Colombia. Piedras, the municipality in the Department of
Tolima where the mine is located, was the rst community
in Colombia to oppose through a popular consultation the
extraction of a natural resource by a multinational mining
conglomerate, and that resistance strengthened the author-
ity and independence of local government. Moreover, the
controversy is relatively recent (resistance bega n in 2011)
and thus it was possible to nd reliable eyewitnesses, activ-
ists, and other sources. I conducted 14 interviews with
16 people related to La Colosa at dierent levels: local,
regional, national, and international.
In 2004, AngloGold Ashanti, a South African multi-
national mining company, began ocially exploring and
developing plans for Mina La Colosa.7 (e central govern-
ment often allocates extraction rights to foreign companies
for large-scale operations.) A ngloGold Ashanti plans to
nish the exploration stage by 2022.8 AngloGold Ashanti
4. Centro Nacional de Memoria Histórica,
, http://www.centrodememoriahistorica.gov.co/microsi-
tios/informeGeneral/estadisticas.html (last visited Feb. 6, 2016).
5. C P C [C.P.], tit. 4, ch. 1.
6. R N, C P, available at http://www.
registraduria.gov.co/eatipicas/2013/tolima/_E26/E_26.pdf.
7. AngloGoldAshanti-Colombia, Proyecto La Colosa, http://www.anglogold-
ashanti.com.co/nuestronegocio/Paginas/proyectolacolosa.aspx (last visited
Apr. 1, 2015).
8. Jorge Menéndez,
, C (2015), http://www.cambioin.com/
anglogold-sacara-oro-en-el-tolima-en-el-2022-con-orden-de-la-nacion.
and the Colombian national government are promoting
the project as one of the largest gold mines in the world.9
Since 2011, people in Tolima have been struggling
against AngloGold Ashanti’s project in order to protect the
environment,10 manage their resources, defend their eco-
logical and cultural heritage, dene their collective destiny,
and participate in processes that will signicantly aect the
course of their lives. In July 2013, a popular consultation
was organized in Piedras municipality in Tolima, asking
the people of Piedras if they wanted mining in their terri-
tory, with the goal of defending the traditional agricultural
occupations of the community as well as the environment.11
Part I of this Article traces the legal and political con-
text of the popular consultation in the 1991 Colombian
Constitution. Part II provides an assessment of the cur-
rent research in procedural environmental justice. Part III
oers an overview of environmental popular consultations
in Colombia. Part IV answers two questions through the
analysis of interviews held in Cajamarca, Ibagué, and Pie-
dras municipalities and in Bogotá DC: (1)How did com-
munities aected by L a Colosa get the idea and organize
the popular consultation? (2) How did this mechanism
help local citizens to have meaningful involvement in envi-
ronmental decisionmaking?
Finally, the results of the investigation will be dis-
cussed. rough interviewees’ perceptions, the data show
three key dimensions—t he genesis, importa nce, and t he
government’s rejection—of the popula r consultation. e
data also suggest that the communities turned to the pop-
ular consultation under cer tain conditions. First, Colom-
bian society was aware of t he participatory mechanism
being written into the 1991 Constitution. Second, the
community knew about the popular consultation’s pro-
cesses and experiences in other Latin American countries.
ird, particular local dy namics took place and alliances
were formed. Fourth, the general public agreed on the
importance of having meaningful involvement in envi-
ronmental decisionma king.
e results reveal that popular consultations have had
ambiguous eects in the environmental struggle against
La Colosa. On one hand, they brought the Constitution
to life and empowered people by giving them an instru-
ment that enabled them to participate in environmental
decisions. Outside perception deepened this empower-
ment and generated a multiplier eect in nearby munici-
palities. e popular consultation a lso helped articulate
a connection between human rights and environmental
9. Environmental Justice Atlas, Mapping Environmental Justice—Colombia,
http://ejatlas.org (last visited May 5, 2015).
10. Interviewee #11. See Appendix 1 for the interview protocol and Appendix 2
for the list of interviewees.
11. Registraduría Nacional, Consulta Popular, http://www.registraduria.gov.co/-
Consulta-popular-.html (last visited May 23, 2015).
Copyright © 2016 Environmental Law Institute®, Washington, DC. Reprinted with permission from ELR®, http://www.eli.org, 1-800-433-5120.
To continue reading
Request your trial