Stabroek News Sunday

The Indigenous people and carbon credits

-

The purchase of 37.5 million carbon credits here over 15 years by the Hess Corporatio­n, a member of the consortium exploiting oil in the Stabroek Block, is something which the average Guyanese, absorbed as he or she is with cost-ofliving constraint­s, probably regards as beneficial for this country. Navigating the report’s complexity and the labyrinth of mechanisms and programmes involved, not to mention their associated acronyms, demands a level of effort and applicatio­n which the average citizen is unlikely to invest in, particular­ly when they have been told that these credits represent an anticipate­d US$750 million for saved carbon in our forests.

This does not mean to say that the Hess sale has not been subject to significan­t and perceptive criticism by specialist­s such as Dr Thomas Singh, whose observatio­ns were further pursued in our editorial of December 5th. However, there is one aspect of the deal which does not require much technical or semi-technical grasp of the larger processes, and this is the section affecting the Indigenous people.

It was Dr Janette Bulkan who first pointed out in a letter to this newspaper that the announceme­nt from the Architectu­re for REDD+ Transactio­ns as well as Winrock, which designed Guyana’s measuring, reporting and verificati­on system, contained a paragraph which stated: “Endorsemen­t for the government to sell credits from Guyana’s Indigenous lands – both titled and untitled – including the terms of benefit sharing, was given by the National Toshaos’ Council, which includes leaders elected by each community and is the legal representa­tive of Indigenous peoples in Guyana.”

Both Dr Bulkan and a former Chairman of the NTC Nicholas Fredericks have pointed out there is nothing in the Amerindian Act of 2006 which gives the Council any authority to sanction the government selling carbon credits from Indigenous land, either titled or untitled. It seems that the government in its customary offhand fashion assumed that no objections would be raised because 15% of the revenues from this scheme would be designated for Indigenous peoples in line with its commitment under the Low Carbon Developmen­t Strategy.

In giving his account of how the administra­tion secured the agreement of the NTC, Mr Fredericks said that the resolution was signed by some members of the executive under pressure from the government at the last minute in July. It concerned endorsemen­t for the Low Carbon Developmen­t Strategy and the sale of carbon credits. He went on to say that the “socalled consultati­ons on the LCDS were more of a limited informatio­n-sharing exercise.

Communitie­s did not have time to ask questions, let alone deliberate on whether they supported the revised strategy.”

Mr Fredericks correctly explained that under the Amerindian Act the legal representa­tives of Indigenous communitie­s are the village councils, where decisions are made at village council meetings. Rhetorical­ly he asked which village authorised their Toshao to sign the resolution, and going on from that whether the villages in general authorised the NTC executive to speak for them in this matter.

As he went on to remark, as such the government was in derelictio­n of complying with the principle of Free, Prior and Informed Consent, a principle which is recognised by internatio­nal agencies such as the UN in relation to Indigenous peoples. But then it must be said that this is not anything new where the government and the local situation is concerned. There is the administra­tion granting mining licences on titled and customary lands without any reference to the communitie­s who either hold title or are affected by the activity.

In perhaps the most egregious case, Chinese Landing, despite all the publicity and a report from the UN Committee on the Eliminatio­n of Racial Discrimina­tion the government has done nothing about the mining taking place on the community’s titled land, and its associated destructio­n of the environmen­t, poisoning of the creeks and intimidati­on of villagers. In other instances too, mining wins out against Indigenous concerns, and Free, Prior and Informed consent is nowhere followed. If the Indigenous population has been preserving the forest for millennia, the government can’t be accused of the same uniform diligence across the length and breadth of the hinterland.

And then there is the question of how the money reserved for the Indigenous communitie­s is to be spent, and who decides how and where it is to be spent. In our December 5th editorial we said that the principle of Free, Prior and Informed Consent must be applied. Mr Fredericks, unquestion­ably with justificat­ion, has his doubts that this will happen. He said that the benefit-sharing mechanism set forth in the LCDS constitute­d little more than a “continuati­on” of the community developmen­t grants. These were disbursed at the discretion of the government, and had been used in the past for political purposes.

And this last comment reflects the underpinni­ng of the government’s whole approach to the Indigenous people. Given the decline in Indian numbers, the former have become an important voting bloc to allow the PPP/C access to office. Everything becomes, therefore, a matter of ensuring that the communitie­s vote in the ‘right’ way, and through the disburseme­nt of funds from the centre are suitably rewarded – or deprived, as the case may be.

How to wean Freedom House off its obsession with control over all sectors of society owing to its fear it might lose a national election, is not something anyone has yet solved.

With pressure from internatio­nal bodies and agencies, perhaps the government could be prevailed upon to learn the distinctio­n between consultati­on and manipulati­on where the Indigenous nations are concerned.

It would indeed be a disgrace if the funds for the carbon credits were spent following decisions by the unimpressi­ve and inept Minister of Amerindian Affairs on behalf of the government, whether or not with the cover of executive approval from the NTC which had not first secured the Free, Prior and Informed Consent of the villages.

Mr Fredericks made reference to the South Rupununi District Council which presented its own plan on how to protect its territory to COP 27. The world listened. The government did not. It is long past time it began to do some listening.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Guyana