If you'll allow me, I'd like to answer in Spanish.
First of all, I'd like to express my gratitude for the question that was asked by the MP.
We also share the same concern in that free trade agreements should be a tool for the development of the country, while maintaining the environment and the cultural identity and rights of our indigenous communities.
Obviously, the events that occurred in Peru, in keeping with what I pointed out in the background information, were not a result of a situation that exists only now. This goes back a long time. When the government established legislative decree 1070, it did so with a view to providing a legal framework for ownership of lands in indigenous communities vis-à-vis the need to develop the natural resources that exist in the country.
I would like you to bear in mind that Peru is a country of 1,280,000 square kilometres, of which 60% is in the Amazon. This 60% is populated by 10% of the population of 28 million inhabitants. Of this 10%, only a minority are native; the rest are not native people. Decree 1070 reserved ownership of up to 12 million hectares for the communities and another 15 million hectares as natural reserves.
What has occurred is a lack of communication or a lack of understanding between the natives and the authorities who negotiated the adoption of this decree. Unfortunately, this poor communication led to the events that occurred on June 5, and all Peruvians have lamented that this has occurred. And we have learned from this situation, so much so that the government first of all has suspended the standard that gave rise to this, and now Congress is repealing it in order to start again with an expansion of indigenous communities and the dialogue with them in order to identify the controversial points, find a solution to them, and come up with an act that will cover the expectations of those living in the Peruvian Amazon and their rights of ownership.