Open Letter on the adoption of the International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM) Indigenous Peoples and Mining Position Statement

19 August 2024


Ivan Arriagada

Chair

International Council on Mining and Metals


Rohitesh Dhawan

CEO

International Council on Mining and Metals



Open Letter on the adoption of the International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM) Indigenous Peoples and Mining Position Statement

The Indigenous Peoples Rights International (IPRI) and the undersigned organizations express our profound concern regarding ICMM’s recently adopted Indigenous Peoples and Mining Position Statement (MPS). While there are improvements in the final MPS from the draft, it remains fundamentally inconsistent with what it rhetorically states several times as clear commitments to respect the rights of Indigenous Peoples.

IPRI and other Indigenous organizations  engaged with ICMM in good faith, providing written comments, inputs, and participating in both face-to-face and virtual meetings relating to the MPS. During these discussions, IPRI, alongside other Indigenous organizations and leaders, clearly emphasized that the MPS must fully respect the rights of Indigenous Peoples, regardless of state recognition. A key aspect of this respect is the implementation of free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC), ensuring that Indigenous communities have the unequivocal right to say no to mining projects that affect their lands and resources, as well as cultural heritage which shall be respected by states and companies.

Despite these clear and firm demands from Indigenous representatives, the final MPS allows for a process where the decision of Indigenous communities to withhold consent can be overridden by the company or authorized by the state. This is deeply concerning, as it permits mining activities to proceed in violation of Indigenous Peoples' rights to our  lands, resources, to our cultural heritage  and self-determination. The MPS, therefore, appears to redefine FPIC not as a true consent process but as a mechanism to pressure Indigenous communities into agreement, knowing that the project may continue regardless of their opposition. The MPS thereby serves as a tool for mining companies to assert their power to undermine the rights of Indigenous Peoples when they do not give their consent, instead of what they  claim  as respecting Indigenous Peoples rights.

IPRI acknowledges that the MPS partially addressed various issues, including improvements in relation to defining the free, prior and informed consent process. This includes the recognition that “Indigenous Peoples have the right to withdraw their agreement if there is non-compliance with the established terms or a change in the extent of the impacts on their rights.”[1] Moreover, Commitment 4 appropriately notes that “[i]n accordance with the principles of FPIC, agreement should be achieved through informed and meaningful engagement and good faith negotiation, through means … that facilitate freely giving or withholding agreement.” Which should include “demonstration of consent to anticipated impacts, mitigation measures developed through the due diligence process, and a redress mechanism for potential infringements of the agreement or of Indigenous Peoples’ rights.”

Nevertheless, Commitment 4 is rendered useless by Commitment 5, when Indigenous Peoples withhold their consent. “Recognising that there may be circumstances in which agreement is not obtained, this Position Statement sets out the process that ICMM members will take in this instance. ICMM members will develop a policy or approach outlining the steps they have taken to fulfill these commitments where agreement is not obtained.”

As further elaborated in the explanatory notes, these include the development of “a policy or approach that outlines appropriate steps to take and how they will manage impacts in those circumstances in which Indigenous Peoples do not provide their agreement to anticipated impacts to their land or other rights.” Alternatives for ICMM members include “mediation,” “pursuing processes that have been designed by States for these situations” or even “escalating issues to the highest relevant corporate-level decision-makers… for a decision on how the activity should progress.” They can also proceed in situations in which “States might determine that a project should be authorized without consent." Ultimately, granting permission for a company to proceed with a project without the agreement of affected Indigenous Peoples and a superficial commitment to “fully evaluate [the risks] according to the established policies and procedures.”

This treatment of FPIC is unjust and incompatible with the rights of Indigenous Peoples as affirmed in international human rights standards. The ICMM and its members, through this position statement, have clearly decided  to continue  the  gross rights violations and injustices that have historically plagued Indigenous Peoples' interactions with the mining industry. The MPS, as it stands, reduces the ICMM’s purported commitment to respect Indigenous rights to mere rhetoric, as it allows for the selective disregard of those rights when they conflict with corporate or state interests. Indigenous Peoples’ rights are inherent, interdependent, and must be respected in their entirety—no entity, whether state or corporate, has the authority to choose which of these rights they will honor or disregard.

We thereby reiterate our demand that mining companies must properly implement the FPIC process and fully respect the collective decision of affected communities including a no consent decision. We shall continue to engage with ICMM and its members in demanding their full respect of Indigenous Peoples rights especially in the context of mining for critical transition minerals in which more than 60% is within and nearby Indigenous Peoples.

Signed by:


Individuals:

  1. Alexander Arbachakov, Russia
  2. Anne-Marie Tupuola, NZ/USA
  3. Barbara Shaw, Canada
  4. Catherine Murupaenga-Ikenn, Aotearoa, New Zealand
  5. Concepción Suarez, México
  6. Cristhian González Gómez, Costa Rica
  7. Cristina Coc, Belize
  8. David Solis-Aguilar, Costa Rica
  9. Enrique Vela, Ecuador
  10. Florence Daguitan, Philippines
  11. Isabel Palavecino Gatica, Chile
  12. Jimmy Ginting, Indonesia
  13. Maria Farfán, Argentina
  14. Maria Mercedes Carusso, Argentina
  15. Maureen Loste, Philippines
  16. Michelin Sallata, Indonesia
  17. Mija Ednam Baer, Sweden
  18. MONSERRAT BORJA, México
  19. Nicolas Gadea, Argentina
  20. Norman Jiwan, Indonesia
  21. Pablo Sibar, Costa Rica
  22. Rajani Maharjan, Nepal
  23. Victoria Pereira, Uruguay

Organizations:

  1. Accountability Counsel, United States
  2. Ambeua Helewo Ruru Foundation, ID
  3. APALAC COALITION, Pays Bas
  4. ARTICLE 19, United Kingdom
  5. Asamblea Nacional Indígena Plural por la Autonomía (ANIPA-México, México
  6. Asia Indigenous Peoples Network on Extractive Industries and Energy (AIPNEE), Philippines
  7. Asociacion del Centro de Desarrollo Integral de la Mujer Aymara "Amuyt'a" CDIMA, Bolivia
  8. Asociación Fuerza de Mujeres Wayuu, Colombia
  9. Asociación ProPurus, Peru
  10. Ação dos Jovens Indigenas, Brazil
  11. Batani Foundation, Russia/USA
  12. Borok Indigenous Tiprasa peoples' Development Centre, NE India
  13. Center for support of indigenous peoples of the North, Russia
  14. Centro de estudios independientes Color tierra, Colombia
  15. Cirdinadora nacional de mujeres indígenas de panama, Panama
  16. Community Empowerment and Social Justice Network (CEMSOJ), Nepal
  17. CONFEDERACION DE PUEBLOS AUTOCTONOS DE HONDURAS CONPAH, Honduras
  18. Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities of the Ecuadorian Amazon, Ecuador
  19. Continental Network of Indigenous Women of the Americas, ECMIA., Perú
  20. Continental Network of Indigenous Women of the Americas, United States
  21. COORDINADOR DEL AREA DE LOS PUEBLOS ORIGINARIOS RED ONGs AMERICA LATINA, El Salvador
  22. Coordinadora Andina de Organizaciones Indígenas - CAOI, Perú
  23. Coordinadora Socioambiental Biobío, Chile
  24. Cordillera Peoples Alliance, Philippines
  25. Cordinadora Andina de Organizaciones Indígenas CAOI, Colombia
  26. Cuenca de Salinas Grandes y Laguna de Guayatayoc, Argentina
  27. Divest Invest Protect, USA
  28. Diálogo y Movimiento, A. C., Mexico
  29. Environmental Defender Law Center, Brasil
  30. Federación de Comunidades Nativas de Ucayali y Afluentes-FECONAU, Perú
  31. Federación Indígena Empresarial y Comunidades Locales de México. A.C., México
  32. Forest Peoples Programme, United Kingdom
  33. Foro Indígena Abya Yala FIAY, El Salvador
  34. Foro para el Desarrollo Sustentable AC, México
  35. Foro Social de la Deuda Externa y Desarrollo de Honduras, Honduras
  36. Friends of the Earth Sierra Leone, Sierra Leone
  37. Fundación Camino del Agua, Ecuador
  38. Future Group, Australia
  39. Gobierno Ancestral Plirinacional de las naciones indígenas Originarias. Maya Akateka, Maya Chuj, Maya Q'anjob'al, Maya Popti', Territorio Maya Q'anjob'alano/Guatemala.
  40. Greater Whange Residents Trust, Zimbabwe
  41. Grupo Intercultural Almaciga, España
  42. Inagkodi/Kabugao Youth, Philippines
  43. Inisiasi Masyaraka Adat (IMA), Indonesia
  44. INNABUYOG-Alliance of Indigenous Women's Organization in the Cordillera Region,Philippines, Philippines
  45. Instituto para el Futuro Común Amerindio IFCA, Honduras
  46. International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs (IWGIA), Danmark
  47. Lawyers’ Association for Human Rights of Nepalese Indigenous Peoples (LAHURNIP), Nepal
  48. Linguismo, USA
  49. London Mining Network, United Kingdom
  50. Mandera county human rights network, Kenya
  51. Mayma. Humanidad Emprendedora, Argentina
  52. Nature Talk Africa, Uganda
  53. Nepalbhasa Poetry Foundation, Nepal
  54. Not1More, UK
  55. Organización de Mujeres indígenas Mano de Tigre (Dbön Orcuo, Costa Rica
  56. Peace Advocate Youth Organization, Philippines
  57. Proyecto sobre Organización, Desarrollo, Educación e Investigación (PODER), Mexico
  58. Right Energy Partnership with Indigenous Peoples (REP), Philippines
  59. San Youth Network, Botswana
  60. Sierra Leone Land Alliance, Sierra Leone
  61. Sisters of Mercy of the Americas Justice Team, International
  62. The Khoeporation, Republic of South Africa
  63. TIPD-Turkana Indigenous People Action for Development, Kenya
  64. Zomi Human Rights Foundation, India

*with 17 undisclosed Individuals and 13 undisclosed Organizations

[1] ICMM Indigenous Peoples Mining Position Statement. (See Recognition Statements stating that ICMM members recognize that “Free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) is a human rights norm derived from various foundational rights vested in Indigenous Peoples, and it operates as a process that safeguards Indigenous Peoples’ substantive rights, including their rights to lands, resources and cultural heritage. Through due diligence processes that are guided by the principles of FPIC, Indigenous Peoples can meaningfully participate in decision-making and freely agree, or not agree, to anticipated impacts on their rights and to the terms under which those impacts will be managed. Maintaining agreement is an ongoing mutual responsibility. Indigenous Peoples have the right to withdraw their agreement if there is non-compliance with the established terms or a change in the extent of the impacts on their rights.”)

Related Articles