EL LITIO: LA NUEVA DISPUTA COMERCIAL DINAMIZADA POR EL FALSO MERCADO VERDE

EL LITIO:

 

LA NUEVA DISPUTA COMERCIAL

DINAMIZADA POR EL FALSO MERCADO VERDE

ENERO DEL 2021

RESUMEN EJECUTIVO

DESCARGAR PDF

La “transición energética” promovida por el capitalismo es evidencia de “una nueva retórica que pondera el discurso“ que, en sí mismo, no representa un cambio de rumbo significativo de lo que actualmente ya define para el mundo su relación inseparable con el modelo extractivo minero. El ejemplo del litio en México es un caso ilustrativo.

A pesar de las declaraciones sobre la escasez de litio a nivel mundial y su esencial importancia para la llamada “transición energética”, la producción mundial de litio bajó casi un 20% en el 2019. El crecimiento de la demanda de litio ha sido lento y sólo ha llegado a satisfacer el 75% de la oferta. La desaceleración en la venta de los vehículos eléctricos, agudizada por la falta de subsidios chinos, y la reducción en el almacenamiento del litio (stockpiling) han disminuido la producción. Sin embargo, las principales fuentes de información para la industria, además de las instituciones financieras más importantes, siguen insistiendo en un inminente boom en la demanda del litio.

Esto está provocando una creciente especulación minera alrededor de la exploración de litio en las Américas por empresas mineras juniors. Estas empresas, así como en otros tipos de minería, posesionan tierras, generan expectativas irreales, además de conflicto, y provocan violencia y desplazamiento en nombre de tecnologías que supuestamente se califican de verdes o justas. México no es una excepción a esta regla.

En México existen actualmente 36 proyectos mineros de capital extranjero destinados a la extracción de litio que son controlados por 10 empresas. Estos proyectos representan 97 mil hectáreas concesionadas además de 537 mil más que están en trámite. El 84% de las concesiones asociadas con la extracción del litio están actualmente en trámite. Examinando de cerca la información disponible sobre dichos proyectos y empresas, se observa que en su mayoría son proyectos mineros sin actividad que están controlados principalmente por pequeñas empresas canadienses al borde de la quiebra, quienes dependen del proceso de especulación para generar recursos en las bolsas de valores de Canadá. Existen solamente tres empresas realmente activas para avanzar sus proyectos de extracción (Bacanora Lithium, Organimax y One World Lithium).

Sin embargo, y a pesar de la promoción especulativa de la producción de litio en México, existen presiones geopolíticas que nos obligan a considerar el posible futuro de México dentro del mercado de litio mundial. No hay duda de que el litio de México es de gran importancia para el futuro inmediato de los EEU, por lo tanto, no es casual que esto se ve reflejado en la imposición de ciertos términos en los nuevos acuerdos multilaterales firmados con este país, como es el caso del T-MEC. Las medidas impuestas para incrementar el consumo de productos de litio extraídos en Norteamérica, sumadas al hecho de que la producción mundial está actualmente concentrada en Australia, Sudamérica y Asia, ponen mayor presión sobre los yacimientos de este mineral en México y Canadá, y en especial por las empresas que desean suministrar litio para la industria automotriz regional.

El litio no representa un camino hacia la “transición energética”; por el contrario es la continuación del uso de nuevos insumos ante el eventual agotamiento de otros. Por esa misma razón, las mismas estructuras coloniales y de acumulación de capital que la industria minera reproduce se mantendrán.

INTERVENCION DE AUCAN HUILCAMAN: FORO PERMANENTE DE NACIONES UNIDAS SOBRE CUESTIONES INDÍGENAS Y EL DERECHO A LA LIBRE DETERMINACION.

INTERVENCION DE AUCAN HUILCAMAN, REUNION REGIONAL FORO PERMANENTE DE NACIONES UNIDAS SOBRE CUESTIONES INDÍGENAS Y EL DERECHO A LA LIBRE DETERMINACION.

En primer lugar agradezco al Foro Permanente de Naciones Unidas sobre Cuestiones Indígenas, por invitarme a participar de esta reunión regional sobre autodeterminación y autogobierno de los Pueblos Indígenas.

Quisiera recordar que, la idea del Foro Permanente, lo recomendamos en la Conferencia Mundial de Derechos Humanos, en Viena Austria en el mes de junio 1993 y seguidamente organizamos la Primera Conferencia Internacional Indígena en el territorio Mapuche. Asimismo, destacar los esfuerzos de la diplomacia internacional indígena por la Declaración de Naciones Unidas sobre los Derechos de los Pueblos indígenas y hoy a 14 años de su adopción, examinamos la manera de implementación de dicha norma internacional.

De manera preliminar quisiera poner en antecedentes al Foro Permanente de Naciones Unidas, la situación que vive el Pueblo Mapuche en este preciso momento, a raíz del “Estado Excepción Constitucional” que ha decreto el gobierno para la denomina Macrozona sur del territorio Mapuche o Wallmapuche en nuestro idioma. Cuya situación excepcional afecta el derecho a la libre determinación Mapuche.

Los Mapuche hemos desplegado diversos esfuerzos para la implementación de la libre determinación. Se instauró una Escuela para el Autogobierno Mapuche. Esta iniciativa nos permitió identificar y determinar las cuestiones previas y fundamentales para la implementación del derecho a la libre determinación y la primera de ellas, se refiere a la voluntad colectiva que debe surgir de cada persona indígena, en segundo lugar; disponer de una dotación o contingente Mapuche con mentalidad y capacidad de gobernante; en tercer lugar, se requiere de un Estatuto o Constitución Política que describa el sistema de gobierno; en cuarto lugar, un sistema de gobierno sea tradicional, sistema clásico o una combinación de ella, lo importante es que a la hora de su conformación pueda interactuar en el mundo multilateral y en quinto lugar; un sistema económico basado en la cultura del Pueblo Mapuche..

La implementación del derecho a la libre determinación en la actualidad tiene grandes dificultades institucionales en los contextos de los Estados Nacionales, por su naturaleza jurídica, política y constitucionales uniformante. Los Estados Nacionales funcionan en la antigua doctrina del negacionismo con los Pueblos Indígenas y sus derechos. En el caso con los Mapuche, la expansión del Estado en el territorio se materializó mediante el uso de la fuerza militar. De este hecho se derivó tres cuestiones que tienen relación intrínseca con la autodeterminación. El delito de genocidio que permanece en completa impunidad, la toma y confiscación del territorio Mapuche y sus recursos y el daño cultural.

La libre determinación plantea la legitimidad y la convivencia del Estado Chileno en el territorio Mapuche. Por ello, el Estado hace uso del recurso de la legalidad uniformante y el uso de la fuerza para su relación institucional con los Mapuche, por lo mismo, el ejercicio de la libre determinación, tiene complejidad por la naturaleza y legitimidad del Estado.

El negacionismo que ha prevalecido, ha dado lugar, a un procedo de colonialismo institucional, una política de domesticación cultural y una Chilenización en todas sus formas, sosteniendo que en Chile solo hay Chileno/as y que hay una sola cultura en el país. Este negacionismo, ha hecho un daño al Pueblo Mapuche y al Pueblo Chileno.

El negacionismo genera obstáculo a la hora de implementar un derecho que requiere una apertura institucional y cultural para una convivencia de paz, lo que plantea la necesidad de una cultura de los derechos humanos. Especialmente con los Pueblos Indígenas, que han sido objeto de la doctrina de la negación.

Los Mapuche como titulares del derecho a la libre determinación, hemos comenzado un Proceso Constituyente iniciando la Primera Sesión el día 30 de noviembre 2016. Los días 11 y 12 de diciembre 2018, se ha iniciado la redacción de un “Estatuto o Constitución Política del Autogobierno Mapuche”. Y con el objeto de brindarle la debida legitimidad al proceso Constituyente Mapuche, hemos realizados tres Sesiones Especiales en diversas partes del territorio. En definitiva, los Mapuche estamos implementado un proceso de autodeterminación al amparo del derecho internacional.

También quisiéramos compartir con todos ustedes que, a raíz del estallido social de octubre 2018, el Pueblo Chileno se encuentra redactando su nueva Constitución Política. Sobre este asunto se han establecido los “escaños reservados para los Pueblos indígenas”. Como es natural, los resultados y contenidos de una nueva constitución política son inciertas. Por lo mismo, hemos reforzados el Proceso Constituyente Mapuche, considerando que el derecho a la libre determinación, es un derecho “cierto”. El proceso Constituyente del Pueblo Chileno, tiene grandes desafíos, considerando que el Pueblo Mapuche somos titulares del derecho más alto que disponen los Pueblos como es el derecho a la autodeterminación, por tanto, seria impensado que la Nueva Constitución Política Chilena, viniera a restringir, limitar, diluir o domesticar los derechos adquiridos internacionalmente, en especial el derecho a la libre determinación.

Finalmente, quisiera reiterar y comunicar formalmente al Foro Permanente sobre Cuestiones Indígenas y por su intermedio comunicar a todos los organismos multilaterales que los Mapuche estamos implementando el derecho a la libre determinación para la conformación de un autogobierno.

Quisiera recomendar al Foro Permanente, siga conociendo las experiencias internacionales y haga seguimiento de dicho proceso orgánico de libre determinación.

Las organizaciones Mapuche me han pedido que trasmita una invitación al Foro Permanente al territorio Mapuche para los próximos meses y que pudiéramos realizar una “sesión especial” para entender y trabajar con mayor información sobre las limitantes, complejidades y la implementación del derecho a la libre determinación.

 

Muchas gracias.

 

Aucan Huilcaman

Licenciado en Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales

Encargado de Las Relaciones Internacionales

Consejo de Todas Las Tierras.

 

Wallmapuche, 19 de octubre de 2021

Continental Commission Abya Yala: October 12, 2021 Position Statement on the Doctrine of Discovery and the UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

Continental Commission Abya Yala

Centro Cultural Techantit - Maya Vision

TONATIERRA

Dismantling the Doctrine of Discovery

 

Recommendation: Strengthening the Mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the Rights of the Indigenous Peoples of the United Nations

 

We call for the reinforcement of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples:

 

In consequence and implementation of the pertinent recommendations formulated by the UN

Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues inwe call for the integration of a

formal evaluation and a methodology of the processes of repudiation and dismantling of the

racist relic of the by the government states of the Americas by the Special Doctrine of Discovery Rapporteur on each and every one of her official visits to countries whose claims of jurisdiction as successor states to the Doctrine on our continent of Abya Yala [Americas] are normalized by the Doctrine of the Discovery of Christendom, the Papal Bulls of Pope Alexander VI Inter Caetera (1493) and the concept of “Original Property of the State” in the Americas.

 

This is also a context for the urgent call to the international community and all human rights

defenders to denounce the legaloid systems of oppression normalized by the so-called national

"immigration" legislation policies and practices of the successor states to the Doctrine of the

Discovery in the Americas, and their respective international borders.

 

We denounce once again and demand international responsibility and proper prosecution, and not simply "redress" or "reconciliation," even as we did in 1987 before the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, for the systemic collusion between the states of North America [NAFTA 1994-USMCA 2018] in violation of the right of self-determination of our Original Nations of Indigenous Peoples, equal to all other peoples. In this regard, we give special attention to the proposed construction of a "wall" along the line of the border established by the United States and Mexico by the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo (1848), in violation of right of Free, Prior and Informed Consent as Original Nations of the Indigenous Peoples of Anahuac.

 

In the same regard, in defense of the right of Free, Prior, and Informed Consent as Indigenous

Peoples we denounce the violation of our Collective Rights as Original Nations of Indigenous

Peoples of Mother Earth in the processes of consultation and subsequent proclamation in December 2018 in Morocco of the UN GLOBAL COMPACT FOR SAFE, ORDERLY AND REGULAR MIGRATION.

 

Continental Commission Abya Yala

NAHUACALLI Embassy of Indigenous Peoples

 

TONATIERRA

www.tonatierra.org

 

Foro Permanente de Cuestiones Indígenas de las Naciones Unidas

18 periodo de sesiones New York, NY

24 de abril 2019

Intervención ante la Relatora Especial Sobre los Derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas de las Naciones Unidas

Tupac Enrique Acosta, TONATIERRA

 

Recomendación: Fortalecimiento del Mandato de la Relatora Especial Sobre los Derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas de las Naciones Unidas

 

Exigimos que se refuerce el mandato de la Relatora Especial sobre los derechos de los pueblos

indígenas:

 

En consecuencia y en cumplimiento de las recomendaciones pertinentes formuladas por el Foro

Permanente de Cuestiones Indígenas en sesiones anteriores, pedimos la integración de una

evaluación formal y una metodología de los procesos de repudio y desmantelamiento de la

reliquia racista de la Doctrina del Descubrimiento por los estados gubernamentales de nuestro

continente Abya Yala [las Américas] por la Relatora Especial en todas y cada una de sus visitas

oficiales a los países cuyos reclamos de jurisdicción como estados sucesores de la Doctrina

todavía están normalizados por la Doctrina del descubrimiento de la cristiandad, las Bulas

Papales del Papa Alejandro VI Inter Caetera (1493) y el concepto de "Propiedad Originaria de la Nación" por los estados americanos.

 

Este es un contexto también para el llamado urgente a la comunidad internacional ya todos los

defensores de los Derechos Humanos para denunciar los sistemas legaloides de opresión

normalizados por la llamada legislaciones nacionales de "inmigración", políticas y prácticas de

los estados sucesores a la Doctrina del Descubrimiento en las Américas, y sus respectivas

fronteras internacionales. Denunciamos una vez más y pedimos la responsabilidad internacional y el procesamiento adecuado, y no simplemente la "reparación" o la "reconciliación", incluso como lo hemos hecho en 1987 ante la Comisión de Derechos Humanos de las Naciones Unidas, por la colusión sistémica entre los estados de América del Norte [NAFTA-USMCA] en violación del derecho de libre determinación de nuestras Naciones Originarias de Pueblos Indígenas, igual a todos los demás pueblos. En este sentido, prestamos especial atención a la construcción propuesta de un "muro" en la línea de la frontera establecida por los Estados Unidos y México por el Tratado de Guadalupe Hidalgo (1848), en violación del derecho del Consentimiento Libre, Previo e Informado como Naciones Originales de los Pueblos Indígenas de Anáhuac.

 

En el mismo sentido, en defensa del derecho de Consentimiento Libre, Previo e Informado de

Pueblos Indígenas, denunciamos la violación de nuestros derechos colectivos como Naciones

Originales de los Pueblos Indígenas de la Madre Tierra en los procesos de consulta y la proclamación en diciembre 2018 por las Naciones Unidas en Marruecos del Pacto Mundial para establecer una Migración Segura, Ordenada y Regular.

 

Comisión Continental Abya Yala

NAHUACALLI

Embajada de Pueblos Originales

TONATIERRA

Charmaine White Face: Empty Words and Colonialism, or Treaty Rights and Self Determination?

“Is President Biden’s Proclamation only Empty Words?”

 

By Charmaine White Face

On Friday, Oct. 8, 2021, United States President Joe Biden issued a first-ever Proclamation for Indigenous Peoples’ Day. The first two sentences state:

 

“Since time immemorial, American Indians, Alaska Natives, and Native Hawaiians have built vibrant and diverse cultures – safeguarding land, language, spirit, knowledge, and tradition across the generations. On Indigenous Peoples’ Day, our Nation celebrates the invaluable contributions and resilience of Indigenous peoples, recognizes their inherent sovereignty, and commits to honoring the Federal Government’s trust and treaty obligations to Tribal Nations.”

Right off the bat, that second sentence is an insult to our Nations. We never did call ourselves “tribes”. That is a moniker put on us by the United States in the first place. It was an easy way to NOT recognize us as the NATIONS we are.

It was also easier to force us to live under THEIR form of government, a Tribal Council form of government. By saying “Tribal Nations” then President Biden leaves himself and his administration wide open to only dealing with the Tribal Council governments which were established without the people’s consent by the United States through the Wheeler – Howard Act of 1934, also called the Indian Reorganization Act (IRA).

 

In spite of their efforts to totally eradicate us, we are still here. After reading some of the reports of the Dakota Territory Commission, they planned on our being totally gone in twenty (20) years after the 1868 Treaty was signed.

No wonder Dakota Territory became two states in 1889, just 21 years after the Treaty was signed. The United States chose NOT to enforce Article II which stated the geographic Treaty territory which was supposed to be for our “undisturbed and absolute use and occupation”.

Article II means that the entirety of western South Dakota is still the Great Sioux Reservation and anyone who we do not permit to be here is illegally trespassing. Rapid City, anyone? All the counties in western South Dakota from the East bank of the Missouri River to the summit of the Big Horn Mountains? There are areas in Wyoming, Montana, North Dakota, and even Nebraska that are still 1868 Treaty Territory.

Will the United States truly enforce their Treaty obligations and find ways to move their citizens who are illegally trespassing in our Treaty Territory? Will the United States truly honor the Treaty by enforcing it?

 

This is where words and actions are two different things. President Biden can say he will honor the Treaties all he wants, but without enforcement of the Treaties, then the word ‘honor’ is empty. There is a way already established which President Biden could use to enforce the Treaties and that is through the United Nations Decolonization Committee.

Yes, it will take time, years even, but the UN Decolonization process has worked with many other Indigenous nations throughout the world. That was because other colonizing nations saw what their colonizing had done to Indigenous Nations and wanted to correct their errors. What the United States has done to us, Indigenous nations, with their residential schools, killing or imprisoning our grandparents for speaking of the Treaty or teaching the culture, and forbidding our spiritual practices are deliberate attempts at genocide.

 

The UN is entering their Fourth Decade of Decolonization. A Resolution was recently passed at the UN Human Rights Council which states in part:

 

“...1. Stresses the utmost importance to eradicate colonialism in any form or manifestation and address the negative impact of legacies of colonialism on the enjoyment of human rights:...”

 

That is us. Our human rights have been negatively impacted by the United States since 150 years ago when they conspired to go against their own words in the 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty. (Read the Dakota Territory Commission reports before 1868.) Our human and treaty rights are impacted today when we are not allowed to live freely in our own Treaty Territory. The path is wide open for President Biden to do the right thing: to petition the United Nations to list the Great Sioux Nation and all other Indigenous Nations in the United States to the List for the UN Decolonization Committee. Without such action, then his Proclamation is empty and the word and honor of the United States are still soiled.

 

We can all help President Biden have the courage to do the right thing. Send him a letter saying thank you for doing this Proclamation but his word to “honor” the Treaty needs to include “enforcement”. Then ask him to urge the United Nations General Assembly to include the Great Sioux Nation and all other Indigenous nations in the Northern Hemisphere on the Decolonization List in support of the 4th Decade of Decolonization. Finally, pray for him and his family as this is a strong step that many businesses who only want our land and resources will oppose.

 

 

Paha Sapa (Black Hills)

Charmaine White Face whose Tituwan name is Zumila Wobaga, age 74, is a great-grandmother, scientist, writer and Spokesperson for the 1894 Sioux Nation Treaty Council. She can be reached at cwhiteface@gmail.com

************

SoundCloud

October 12, 2021 - Interview with Charmaine Face, spokesperson of the 1894 Sioux Nation Treaty Council in conversation regarding the simultaneous proclamation of Indigenous Peoples Day and Columbus Day on October 12 by President Biden.

Festival of Existence: Yaqui Traditional Authorities Demand Canceling the Aqueduct Independencia

Traditional Authorities of the Yaqui Tribe,

Pueblo of Vicam insist on the Canceling the aqueduct “Independencia” as part of the AMLO ‘justice plan’

 

October 10, 2021

 

With exhibitions, music, dance, paintings, cinema and talks, the Yaqui tribe expressed their rejection of the operation of the Independencia aqueduct

 

The Yaqui people point out that the Independencia aqueduct was built without consulting the Indigenous Peoples

 

Vícam Pueblo: “We exist”.

The Independencia Aqueduct operates illegally and causes irreversible damage to the Yaqui Nation, according to traditional authorities of the Yaqui Tribe during the Festival of Existence held in the town of Estación Vícam, [Sonora, Mexico].  Among the supporters of the traditional authorities who participated in the Festival of Existence included the organization Indigenous Peoples Rights International (IPRI).

 

The traditional authorities also demanded that the Mexican federal government include the cancellation of the Independence aqueduct in the “Justice Plan for the Yaqui Tribe” being promoted under the administration of current Mexican president Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (AMLO).

 

With exhibitions, music, dance, paintings, cinema and conversations, the Yaqui tribe expressed their rejection of the operation of the Independencia Aqueduct, which was built without informing or consulting the Indigenous Peoples, and which has caused damage to ancestral Yaqui sites in the territory, causing obstructions to Yaqui ceremonial ritual practices and desecrations in the worldview of the Yoeme (Yaqui).

The Yaqui Sewa Tomteme school hosted the meeting in Vicam, with in-person invited guests and other individuals connected through digital platforms such as the engineer Cuauhtémoc Cárdenas Solorzano, as a special guest.

During his presentation in the Festival of Existence, which was promoted by live stream across the internet, Cuauhtémoc Cárdenas Solorzano exhorted respect for the presidential decrees established between the federal government and the Yaqui Tribe in 1937 and 1940 by his father, then President Lazaro Cardenas, and to cancel the operation of the Independencia aqueduct. He also called for justice and accountability for the murders of indigenous leaders in Sonora over last six months.

“It is essential that the provisions of the 1940 decree be respected in order to fully restitute the Yaqui territorial rights, but above all so that the Yaquis can manage and dispose of the water rights which they legitimately possess, specifically 50 percent of the volumes of water from the Rio Yaqui stored in the Angostura dam. I believe the cancellation of the so-called Independencia aqueduct is essential, as I said a few days ago before current Mexican president AMLO, not only because the Aquaducto Independencia project was constructed in violation of established legal provisions, but also because these violations of law have been allowed impunity with the complicity of government authorities,” said Cárdenas Solorzano.

Mario Luna Romero, spokesman for the Yaqui tribe, pointed out as unforgivable that neither the National Institute for Indigenous Peoples (INPI), nor the Federal Government included in the recently announced Justice Plan for the Yaqui Tribe, the cancellation of the Independencia aqueduct, after the Yaqui have dedicated enormous efforts in their struggle to defend the Rio Yaqui over recent years.  He gave as evidence to this struggle the many resolutions and judicial orders affirming the demands by the Yaqui including from the Supreme Court of Justice for the Nation and the United Nations that have been ignored by the federal government.

“Within the Yaqui tribe, decisions are made by consensus, in the plaza of the Traditional Guard where everyone participates, and this absence of a culturally appropriate decision-making is what has prevented the Yaqui Justice Plan from progressing and having better results.  That is why it has had serious omissions such as the fight for the defense of the Yaqui River, which has been excluded from the plan due to pressure from economic interests and the abuse of power that does not contribute to the unity of the Yaqui tribe”, stated Mario Luna, who was a political prisoner during the administration of Guillermo Padrés for opposing the Aquaducto Independencia.

###

YouTube:

October 8, 2021
Message to the Pueblo Yaqui

Cecil Lewis, Sr.

Akimel O'otham

(Pima)

 

Aucan Huilcman: Mexico and Chile - Presidential Requests for Pardon "Without Effect"

MEXICAN PRESIDENT ANDRES LOPEZ'S REQUEST FOR FORGIVENESS AND EXPRESIDENT MICHELLE BACHELET'S REQUEST FOR FORGIVENESS IN CHILE: VERY SIMILAR AND WITHOUT EFFECT.

 

Aucán Huilcamán

Expert in International Law

 

 

The recent request for pardon expressed by the President of Mexico, Andrés Manuel López Obrador AMLO, before the Yaqui Tribe in Sonora is very similar to the same request for forgiveness of former President Michelle Bachelet in Chile.  Both events, although being very relevant in terms of the human rights of Indigenous Peoples, yet in the manner that these official acts have been publicly presented neither of the requests bring bear any effectiveness from which a true forgiveness may be derived. Such authentic petitions for pardon by the heads of state in the Americas to the Indigenous Peoples would include directives towards restoring justice, reparations and a just and equitable compensation for the historical trauma caused in all its forms.

 

The issue of merit, the earning of pardon and then forgiveness - remains undefined and is not addressed.  This refers to the fact that AMLO has now dared to ask for pardon in his visit to the Yaqui People, which of course has now caused a reaction at various levels, among them in the government of Spain and even the King of Spain.  However, all of these reactions are unavoidably related to the context of the current situation that Indigenous Peoples are living in Mexico, Peru, Argentina, Guatemala, and Chile and across the continent where other countries continue to deny the institutional responsibility for their policies and genocidal practices towards the Original Nations of Indigenous Peoples over the past 500 years.

 

In the act of requesting forgiveness from the Indigenous Peoples by both leaders, Michelle Bachelet in 2017 and now the president of Mexico, shows that there are pending issues with Indigenous Peoples in the hemisphere, both in the context of issues that originate with the Hispanic colonial relations and subsequently with the formation of the National States, whether in Argentina, Chile, Peru, Mexico, and others. The pending issues are related to the "International Crime of Genocide" which remains in complete impunity until today.

With the formation of the nation states, the invasion, and dispossession, and occupation of the indigenous territories and their resources became normalized and then institutionalized, without the consent of the Indigenous Peoples, as established in Article 28 of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of the Indigenous Peoples of the World (2007).

An legitimate pardon is commonly the result of a process of clarification of certain controversial facts that motivate a head of state to ask for forgiveness, however, in the case of AMLO and Michelle Bachelet, the facts related to both pardon requests are characterized as not producing the effects of an honest and effective process for forgiveness to be actually received.  Instead, the public posturing by both presidents of state have typified of an incomplete acknowledgement of historical truth relative to the treatment of Indigenous Peoples, that is, a comprehensive clarification of the facts that would necessarily provide the basis for an authentic forgiveness is lacking.

 

Secondly, a public policy of reparations and a fair and equitable compensation must direct the manifestation of the procedures for a legitimate pardon. A pardon in terms of human rights is intrinsically related to a policy of justice and reparation for the damage caused, which does has not occurred in the petitions for forgiveness of AMLO and Michelle Bachelet.

 

In the case of former president of Chile, Bachelet, it was a request for pardon orchestrated for purposes of international posturing, allowing her to constitute a precedent in her favor for the achievement of the post of High Commissioner for Human Rights at the United Nations, by giving the impression of a person committed to human rights of the Indigenous Peoples. In short, the request for pardon was an eloquent use of political theater, despite the seriousness of the criminal acts that have been committed against the Mapuche people and which remain in complete impunity.

 

In the case of Chile, the situation of injustice that Indigenous Peoples and especially the Mapuche have experienced, has not only been used by former President Bachelet, but, now recently, by the political parties of one side or the other.  These political schemes have resorted to usurping the legitimate Mapuche cause of self-determination to clothe themselves and deploy a strategy to coopt the indigenous political movement in order to maintain power, as has happened in the Constitutional Convention of the Chilean People this year.

 

The injustices related to the Indigenous Peoples is also similar to the Peoples of Africa who were subjected to the system of human slavery in the past. Despite the lapse of time, the issues related to human slavery had an open demonstration at the World Conference Against Racism and Xenophobia and other Related Situations in Durban, South Africa 2001.

In Durban, the governments and the Peoples of Africa raised the issue to the governments of the world that human slavery constituted a "Crime Against Humanity". This principle was preliminarily accepted by the States of the world, which included the States of Europe that were primarily responsible for the slave trade from Africa. However, among the political actors who invoked the need to codify slavery as an international crime, there were those who also created a dilemma by calling for the development of "a long process of dialogue in the multilateral international system to codify "slavery" as a "Crime Against Humanity". Meanwhile the public processes for the requested pardons for the historical crimes of colonization continued and evidently then prevailed, so that the act and procedures of public petition for pardon overtook the process of codification of the crimes for which the pardon was needed in the first place.

The value of a request for forgiveness and pardon is that it constitutes a gradual overcoming of denialism and that has become unsustainable over time. The centuries-long policy of denial of Human Rights has not only hurt Indigenous Peoples, but also all Peoples of the continent and the world.

Some organizations of the Indigenous Peoples, as a result of the participation of the Catholic Church in the process of European colonization of the continent Abya Yala/Wallmapuche, have raised the responsibility of the Vatican as a state to address the need to go beyond asking for a simple pardon, but rather, assume the full institutional responsibility of complicity in the context of international law. This institutional responsibility as a member state in the UN system, emerges from the the context of the "doctrine of Discovery of Christendom", from which the current situation of indigenous peoples is derived.

It is not the case that the relevant efforts of a public policy with the Indigenous Peoples in Mexico and Chile go unrecognized, but this is another matter that is not related to a policy of fair, impartial and equitable reparations in matters of human rights regarding events of the past that continue as issues of colonialism in the present.

The request for forgiveness of Michelle Bachelet and the request for pardon of AMLO, augurs new times, that is, these petitions for pardon represents a preliminary stage of the responsibility of the Latin American States, which now depends to a large extent on the articulation among the Indigenous Peoples to bring the of enforcement to the next stage.  This would entail the comprehensive clarification of the factual record, demanding reparations and compensation in a fair and equitable manner for the damage caused by centuries of colonization and establish the institutional measures for a firm and lasting coexistence in the continent under the rule of law and the principle of self-determination.

 

Wallmapuche, Temuco, Chile October 06, 2021