Box 2: The Case of Kako Village, Upper Mazaruni, Region 7 44 In July 2011 a miner presented herself in Kako village (Upper Mazaruni) informing the Toshao that she had a mining permit that allowed her to prospect for minerals past the village along Kako river. The villagers were very alarmed by this news as they had never been consulted or informed about any mining activity in the area, which comprises the traditional lands of Kako and many of its neighbouring communities. After a village meeting the Toshao informed the miner that the village unanimously opposed her planned activities because they occupy the land and waters according to tradition for hunting, fishing, and farming and settlement sites. Villagers expressed concern about the contamination of the Kako River upstream of the village and potential harmful impacts on the community’s numerous riverine homesteads. They also informed the miner that they were concerned that the area to be mined is included in the Upper Mazaruni aboriginal title case (see Section 2). Despite the opposition by the village, the miner returned in March 2012 and put up notice boards on trees in Kako’s traditional land stating that the area was her mining concession. A few months later, in July, she returned attempting to transport mining equipment through the village via the Kako River. Even though no environmental or social impact assessment has been conducted in relation to this operation, the letter from the GGMC inexplicably asserted that the GGMC is satisfied that “said locations will not provide harmful effects to your village”. The community nonetheless prevented the miner from accessing the concession and did so on other occasions, on 21 August and 5 October 2012, when she again tried to transport mining equipment up the Kako River. On 18 September 2012, the miner filed for an injunction in the High Court, which was granted on 20 September 2012 and restrained the Kako village Council from preventing her water dredge and other mining equipment “from safe passage through the Kako River.” Further, on 5 November 2012, as a result of Kako’s repeated objections to the entry of the miner, a ‘Notice of Motion’ was submitted to the High Court requesting that “the Toshao of Kako village be committed to the Georgetown Prison for his wilful and brazen disobedience and contempt of the Order of the Judge granted the 18th day of September 2012.” The ‘Notice of Motion’ was rejected in February 2014 due to failures related to the way it had been put forward by the plaintiff. On March 25th 2014, the injunction was also discharged, as the judge stated that due to the actions carried out by the defendants, the civil court is not the right forum for the case.45. These two developments might have given immediate relief to the people of Kako, but they do not entail any long-lasting victory. Newly acquired maps show that the traditional lands of the communities involved in the Upper Mazaruni aboriginal title case are covered with mining concessions (see Section 2). The insecurity and potential violation of land and resource rights posed by these imposed mineral properties was already made clear in March 2014 when another injunction was filed for against Kako village by a second miner claiming to possess mining claims up Kako River. The hearing for this case is set to start the 8th of May 2014. The dispute is ongoing and unresolved, while the land rights case has been stuck in the High Court since 1998 and is proceeding at a painfully slow pace.
44 Guyana court ruling violates indigenous peoples’ rights APA Press release, 28 January 2013, http://www.forestpeoples.org/ topics/rights-land-natural-resources/news/2013/01/press-release-guyana-court-ruling-violates-indigen 45 Stabroek News, 26 March 2014, Injunction granted to miner against Kako toshao discharged, http://www.stabroeknews. com/2014/news/stories/03/26/injunction-granted-miner-kako-toshao-discharged/
APA, FPP 2014
Indigenous peoples’ rights, forests and climate policies in Guyana
PAGE 27