Evidence of meeting #66 for Subcommittee on International Human Rights in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was know.
A recording is available from Parliament.
1:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Michael Levitt
We have time for one fairly short answer to this question.
Mr. Tabbara, to whom would you like to direct it?
1:50 p.m.
Independent investigative journalist from Honduras, As an Individual
Thank you.
Bertha Zúniga has already spoken to these difficulties. The case of the crime against Berta Cáceres is one example of international coordinated action and social pressure by the citizenry and other governments.
In fact, yesterday in the hearing, the European Union ambassador was present, as well as the ambassador from Spain, because there were questions about Honduras, which has a level of impunity of 95%. Of the total cases brought forward that reach the public ministry, 95% remain with impunity, that is, without any criminal investigation that successfully concludes and no criminal sanctions brought.
It appeared that the case of Berta Cáceres was going to be our flagship case in which we would finally achieve justice, given the planetary movement created by this environmental defender and indigenous leader. However, we see in the judicial branch the difficulty of bringing it to the second level. Like Bertha said, the trial is currently at the level of those people who were in charge of following this woman, monitoring her, and conducting the crime.
The real difficulty lies in going up one level to the private citizens who paid for, and to the government officials who participated in, the crime. Here is where we need to break that thread that the MP mentioned, that thread linking corruption and impunity, the impunity that causes new crimes that in turn engender further violence. We need to break that thread. I would hope that the case of Berta Cáceres continues as our flagship case in our quest.
1:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Michael Levitt
Thank you very much, Mr. Molina.
We will now move to MP Hardcastle.
1:50 p.m.
NDP
Cheryl Hardcastle NDP Windsor—Tecumseh, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I thank all of you for being here.
To Bertha Isabel, thank you for being here as well. I know you must be hopeful, otherwise you wouldn't be taking the risks you've taken all this time. I know that sometimes you might not feel hopeful, but you are having an impact. Your visit here is having an impact. From listening to my colleagues' questions, I think it will help us all.
Maybe our committee doesn't quite understand the thread that you're talking about being broken, Mr. Molina. Maybe we need more specific examples. I'll give you a scenario, and you can correct it or fix the scene, okay?
If I'm a Canadian mining company and I get a licence, I deal with a corrupt government of either Honduras or Guatemala. The people who live on that land need access to fresh water. Do they deal with their corrupt government, do they knock on the door of the Canadian mining company, or do they have to deal with employees of the Canadian mining company who are part of that corrupt system? Do you see what I'm saying? I need you to flesh out a little better this corruption link and relationship. That will help our committee when we look at how we can have an impact in expanding an international commission against impunity, or the work we can do at our end.
1:55 p.m.
Independent investigative journalist from Honduras, As an Individual
I would like Bertha to take this question if possible.
1:55 p.m.
Civic Council of Popular and Indigenous Organizations of Honduras
Well, I'd like to tell you that in our experience in coping with corruption, it is present throughout the process, right from the granting of the concession to this land, where, clearly, the communities are not even asked. Then there is a lack of procedures for environmental licensing. These procedures do not meet the requirement of verifying the environmental impact. Rather, they simply become red tape. That's all. They are simply a stamp on a piece of paper. Then there is also the requirement of free, prior, and informed consent, at least for indigenous communities. What happens there is.... Well, sometimes it is not done, but when it is done, it is already fixed ahead of time, if you know what I mean. They simply go to the mayor or to some local authorities, but they do it via bribery. For example, they offer an amount of money to the local authorities. As I said, they gather some signatures under the table, without really telling the community what it is that they're signing on to or without explaining the magnitude of the project.
Oftentimes the communities didn't even know the projects were coming, and once these projects are under way, if there's any resistance or any reaction, then we see strong military repression.
That's the pattern we see overall. We see this time and again, in all extractive projects, such as hydroelectric projects. Hydroelectric dams are the most relevant problem, at least in our area, but we see it all around.
1:55 p.m.
Independent investigative journalist from Honduras, As an Individual
Say an investor wants to make money. An investor wants to do it with the least amount of difficulty possible, in whatever country they want to invest in. In Honduras, unfortunately, investors already know that they need to earmark 30% of the overhead of any business for what we would call “getting things done”, 30% that they will have to pay a local “corruption operator” to pay secretaries, judges, prosecutors, journalists, and public officials.
Whom would I speak with if I were an investor, a Canadian investor, and I wanted to follow an ethical code of behaviour in doing business? Well, it would be desirable to speak to the leaders of the community where the investor is going to do the project, with those organizations that represent the community. Then I would ask the National Anti-Corruption Council, which, in my opinion, in the past five years has been led adequately, and which has sufficient knowledge of how the public and private sectors are operating vis-à-vis business in Honduras. Before putting my money down, I would ask the international commission against corruption, the OAS commission, which has opened 126 lines of investigation into public and private corruption in our country, if I wanted to follow a corporate social responsibility code and an ethics code. If I wanted to opt for direct corruption, then I would simply devote 30% of my direct costs to corruption. Regrettably, that is what's done most often.
For example, the company that caused the death of the mother of Bertha Isabel, who is with us by video conference, received an environmental permit issued by the vice-minister for natural resources, who did not follow the procedures for environmental licensing, and who, in fact, is now subject to a criminal proceeding because of it. I'm not sure if this person went to jail or not. For the past year I've been outside of Honduras, so I don't know if he went to jail or not, but he mishandled the environmental permit to that company, which was responsible for the death of Berta Cáceres. How much did he receive? Well, that's the question that we don't have an answer for, but it was something for sure. He did receive something from the company, I'm certain, in order to approve an environmental licence under the circumstances in which he did—that is, without consulting the community that is by the river, without foreseeing the impact the reservoir would have in San Antonio de Chuchepeque, the closest town. He did not follow the required procedures. As Felipe said, after the coup, a number of laws were reformed, including the general environmental law, in order to facilitate—really, it was not to facilitate—these non-transparent procedures in granting environmental concessions.
2 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Michael Levitt
Thank you very much.
We've come to the end, as it's after 2 o'clock, but I just want to take this opportunity to thank each of our four witnesses for providing your testimony here today.
I know that being human rights defenders in your countries often comes at great personal risk. We've heard your stories, and again, we obviously know your background, Bertha.
We just want to take the opportunity to thank you for being here and, of course, to thank Amnesty International Canada for Alex and the other members being here. Thank you for facilitating and bringing these stories to us.
Of course, we will be looking at this issue more in the fall, and we will no doubt be reflecting back on your testimony, or reaching back out to you again. Thank you very much to all of you.
With that, we now adjourn.
