I think it's important to note that Peru has adopted a whole host of rules that enable participation, whether they're referenda, recalls, citizen initiatives, or others; yet most of the consultations are non-binding, so they don't require governments to comply with those sorts of initiatives, whereas these agreements are binding, and they give powerful, muscular provisions that support investor rights.
I think the critical thing is--and I think this has been picked up in this discussion--that it's not simply the provisions themselves but how they are actually enforced. What we're seeing in the case of the Garcia government is that they are using the implementation of legislation process as a way of trying to achieve changes that in fact restrict the ability of people to participate in these kinds of decisions in ways that are probably not even required by the agreement itself.