THE LA PAROTA CASE:
DEFENSE OF THE LAND IS DEFENSE OF LIFE
“The land is not to be sold. It is to be loved and defended.” (opposition slogan)

Since 2003 the Mexican government has sought to impose a vast hydroelectric dam in the south of Acapulco in the state of Guerrero. For four years the campesinos[1] , organized through the Council of Ejidos [2]and Communities Opposed to the La Parota Dam (CECOP) have firmly resisted through legal and peaceful means. Our human rights center joins in this struggle for the defense of the land and its natural resources.

1. THE LA PAROTA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
The Mexican government has been working on the La Parota project for more than thirty years, without providing information or consulting those who would be affected. A series of studies were carried out between 1976 and 2002. In 2003, the Federal Electricity Commission (CFE) brought in heavy machinery to begin construction. Today the first highways necessary for the dam’s construction are being built, even though the consent of the affected communities has not been secured, and in spite of the prohibition by the Unitary Agrarian Tribunal to enter the territory until the trials between the opposing campesinos and the government have been completed.
The dam would affect 21 communities, of which 17 are ejidos and 3 are bienes comunales [3]. La Parota would be one of the largest dams in the world. 17,300 hectares [4]of fertile and productive land would be flooded. More than 100,000 people would be affected by the dam. Directly, 25,000 people would have to be displaced because their lands would be left under water (although the CFE only recognizes that 3,000 would be directly affected). Indirectly, some 75,000 people would be affected by the diversion of the river: without water to irrigate their fields and to live, the campesinos would no longer have a means of subsistence (the CFE does not foresee any compensation for those who are indirectly affected).
The budget for La Parota is one billion dollars. Therefore, the Mexican government and the government of the state of Guerrero want to impose the project at any expense, without concern for the affected campesinos.
This hydroelectric project falls under a development concept implemented by the federal government which privileges large-scale private investment over communities and peoples located in territories rich in natural resources. This development logic has made the land the center of a dispute between campesinos, governments and transnationals. As always, it places the poorest people at a disadvantage, not only because of their lack of economic resources but also because the judicial framework does not offer protection for their territories. On top of this, the government apparatus generally resorts to disloyal practices of disinformation which essentially translate into manipulation, the use of police forces and even the criminalization of dissent.

2. IMPOSITION OF THE PROJECT BY THE MEXICAN GOVERNMENT
The campesinos affected by the project have never been given access to clear and complete information about the project. The majority do not know which villages will be flooded, how the rest of the villages will be affected by the diversion of the river, where the displaced will go or how much they will be compensated, among other things. The Federal Electricity Commission seeks to obtain the campesinos’ consent at all costs, including buying their votes or constructing public works projects, that will in any case be flooded if the dam is built.
The state and federal governments have turned to a strategy of imposing the La Parota hydroelectric project, which has materialized in the form of:
• the deceitful offering of public works, services and productive projects which have divided families and communities and set them against each other, tearing the social fabric of the communities
• the lack of information and consultation with those who will be affected by the works, violating their fundamental rights
• the convocation and carrying out of communal assemblies in violation of agrarian law and the State of law
• the disproportionate use of police forces as security at said assemblies
• the criminalization of those who have opposed the project through the issuing of arrest warrants for alleged crimes that were never confirmed to have been committed
• death threats that several opponents of the project have received
Four of the community assemblies in which the campesinos supposedly gave their consent for the expropriation of their lands were impugned. The illegality of the Assembly of Cacahuatepec has already been recognized. The resolution of the remaining three assemblies is pending, but because of the irrefutable proofs put forth, the Unitary Agrarian Tribunal will have to rule in favor of the CECOP. If it does not, the political pressure on the justice system, which should be impartial and independent, will be evident.

3. SOCIAL IMPACT: THE TEARING OF THE SOCIAL FABRIC
In spite of repeated calls from the CECOP, the government has refused to dialogue with the opposition. Rather, it has begun a campaign to discredit and criminalize the opposition, calling them a minority and accusing them of violence (because they carry around machetes, which is the basic tool of every campesino in Mexico). What is more, the government has not thought twice about using public force against the campesinos.
The lack of desire for dialogue on the part of the government of Guerrero and the CFE, as well as the strategies they have employed which in no way seek a peaceful solution to the problems, continue to foment confrontation and encourage division in the villages. In the past year this division has led to three deaths, three serious injuries, four detentions and seven incarcerations, in addition to the multiple injuries caused by confrontations at the assemblies.
Now there are strong divisions in the families themselves. Far from attending to the problem, the government continues to fan the flames of the confrontation between opponents and supporters. Violence is latent and serious consequences are feared.

4. WHEN THE CAMPESINOS RESIST THROUGH LEGAL AND PEACEFUL MEANS...
The campesino men and women who oppose the La Parota dam have been the ones to resort to legal and institutional means to enforce their rights. In the four years of their movement they have been able to make their struggle for the defense of the land known on a national and international level. They have managed to cancel the contracts (which had already been initiated) between the CFE and private businesses for the construction of the dam. They have also managed to prevent the Mexican government from issuing the expropriation decree.
In March 2006, the CECOP presented its case before the Latin American Water Tribunal (TLA), an international agency of environmental justice which has an ethical agenda, made up of internationally recognized experts who after an in-depth study of the cases presented issue a verdict and make concrete recommendations to governments regarding these cases. The TLA resolved that: “the La Parota hydroelectric dam project should be cancelled, because it does not benefit the local population, it does not contribute to regional development and it does not protect the environment and natural resources. … The government of the state of Guerrero should guarantee conditions of security for the population, respect human rights and contribute to the social peace of the inhabitants of the affected communities.” In spite of the TLA’s great legitimacy, the Mexican government has not taken this verdict into account.
Another point in favor of CECOP, in the framework of the demand for the nullity of the four rigged assemblies, is that in September 2006 a resolution was obtained that prevents the CFE and any state or federal authority from entering the territories of these four communities to carry out any work related to the hydroelectric project until the trials have been completed.

5. ...THE GOVERNMENT RESPONDS WITH PUBLIC FORCE AND DISREGARD FOR THE LAW
The ejidal and communal assemblies arranged by the federal and state governments have been a way of imposing the hydroelectric project on the communities and not a true method of consultation. They were carried out in violation of the law and they do not constitute an adequate means of obtaining the opinion of the entire population affected. The rolls of ejidatarios[5]and comuneros[6] do not constitute true representation of the affected population, because they exclude the majority, who are new residents and land holders. Thus, for example:
• The agrarian community of Cacahuatepec, comprised of 47 annexed villages, has more than 40,000 inhabitants, but its communal rolls recognize only 7,286 people as having the agrarian status of comuneros.
• The ejido of La Palma with its three annexed villages has a population of more than 8,000 inhabitants, though its rolls only recognize 240 citizens with ejidatario status.
• The ejido of Los Huajes has a population of more than 3,000 inhabitants while its rolls only recognize 170 ejidatarios.
• The ejido of Dos Arroyos has a population of more than 5,000 inhabitants while its rolls only recognize the ejidatario status of 572 people.
In spite of the judicial resolutions prohibiting entry into the territories where the assemblies are being disputed, the state government and the CFE have continued to bring in machinery and are building the roads necessary for the construction of the dam. Thus we have a paradoxical situation where the government itself, which should be providing an example, disregards the law, while the campesinos hold fast to it. We fear that this provocative attitude might encourage the opposition to continue its struggle through physical resistance, because the laws are not being followed.

6. THE VIOLATION OF FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHTS
Authorities on all levels of government have incurred multiple human rights violations against the campesinos that would be affected. To this day the peoples’ right to land, territory and natural resources, the right to a healthy environment, the right to information and consultation in the public decision-making that directly affects the citizenry, and even the right to personal security and integrity, as well as to liberty, have all been violated by the tendentious behavior of the CFE and the government of Guerrero. On top of this, the construction of the dam would imply the violation of further rights in the social, cultural and economic spheres, such as the right to housing, nutrition, education and above all the preservation of cultural identity and practices.
As long as the federal government continues to apply this method of “development” the interests of those who have capital will be prioritized over those who have land and natural resources. This model will further accentuate differences and will produce an inequitable “development.”

7. CONCERN OF PRESTIGIOUS INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
The resolution of the Latin American Water Tribunal means it is possible to analyze the criteria developed by the World Commission on Dams (WCD, a body sponsored, paradoxically, by the World Bank, a financial institution that has traditionally promoted this type of mega investment project). The WCD’s final report, published in November 2000, establishes that: “In any event, the true economic profitability of large dam projects remains elusive, as the environmental and social costs of large dams were poorly accounted for in economic terms. More to the point, the failure to account adequately for these impacts and to fulfill commitments that were made have led to the impoverishment and suffering of millions, giving rise to growing opposition to dams by affected communities worldwide.”
The WCD recognizes that “the generalized impacts of large dams have inflamed conflicts related to the location and impacts of large dams, both existing and proposed, making large dams one of the most controversial matters in sustainable development today.” It continues, “when there are better alternatives, those should be preferred over large dams. Thus the debate over dams calls into question the perspectives with which societies develop and manage water resources, in the wider context of alternatives to development.”
On the benefits of dams, the WCD also established that “in too many cases an unacceptable and often unnecessary price has been paid to secure those benefits, especially in social and environmental terms, by people displaced, by communities downstream, by taxpayers and by the natural environment. Lack of equity in the distribution of benefits has called into question the value of many dams in meeting water and energy development needs when compared with the alternatives.”

The Mexican state has broken international laws set out by the World Commission on Dams by not considering the high social and environmental costs that the project will generate. In this sense they have not looked into other possibilities for electricity production which might produce less harmful consequences for the population, the environment and natural resources.
The Mexican government did not respond publicly to the calls made by three United Nations Special Reporters. Rodolfo Stavenhagen, Special Reporter on the Situation of Human Rights and Fundamental Liberties of Indigenous Peoples, denounced in his most recent Annual Report the “abuses and violations of the indigenous campesinos in the state of Guerrero who oppose the construction of the La Parota dam in their territory, a project which the state insists on carrying out without the informed consent of the population.” Stavenhagen visited the territories affected by the dam project in August 2006 and could directly perceive the impact the project would have on the population and the environment. “A tribunal has instructed the government to desist from continuing construction of infrastructure in the region until the conflict has been resolved through negotiation, but the authorities have ignored this and continue to build roads as part of the dam project, to which many comuneros are opposed,” the report indicates. Similarly, Stavenhagen, together with the reporters for the Right to Nutrition and Housing, sent several missives to the Mexican government expressing their multiple and well-founded concerns with respect to the project and its imposition on the campesinos.
In May 2006, the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights also manifested its concern about the lack of consultation of the indigenous communities, as well as the environmental deterioration that the project implies, and above all about the displacement of 25,000 people, violating their communal rights to land as well as their economic, social and cultural rights.
At the beginning of March, a representative of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights in Mexico, Amerigo Incalcaterra, visited the territory of La Parota to meet with the affected population in the communities of Garrapatas and Tasajeras and was able to clearly perceive the lack of information and open consultation regarding this project.
Given the concern that the UN has shown with respect to the La Parota hydroelectric project, the state and federal government should reconsider their actions and attend to the call to stop violating the human rights of the campesinos through the imposition of the project. The fact that the highest body of nations in the world observes that in the process of constructing the dam “abuses and violations” have been committed against the campesinos shows that the authorities are the ones who have strayed from the law and that the communities have resorted to only legal mechanisms to demand the enforcement of their rights and prevent them from being violated by the implementation of the project.
Therefore, today more than ever it is imperative that both the president of Mexico, Felipe Calderón Hinojosa, and the governor of Guerrero, Zeferino Torreblanca Galindo, take into consideration the pronouncements of the United Nations on this case, because the message that they have put forward up to this point is that of a government that does not respect the law, forcing the opposition to defend their land through physical means.

[1]Campesino: a person who lives in a rural area and works the land
[2]Ejido: a form of politically-established land ownership, dating from the land reform period after the Mexican Revolution
[3]Collective land-owning systems inherited from the period of the Mexican Revolution which guarantee that land remains in the hands of the campesinos
[4]Hectare: an area of land measuring 10,000 square meters, or about 2.5 acres
[5]Ejidatario: a person with the right to use politically-established communal lands
[6]Comunero: a person with the right to use traditionally-established communal lands