purpose of [such studies] is not [merely] to have an objective measurement of the possible impact on land and persons, but also […] to ensure that the members of the peoples […] are aware of possible risks, including environmental and health risks,” so that they can weigh up whether to accept the proposed development or investment plan, “voluntarily and with full knowledge.”248 The permitted level of impact cannot negate the very survival of the members of the indigenous and tribal peoples.249 215. In addition, the Court has established that environmental impact assessments must respect the traditions and culture of the indigenous peoples and that one of the purposes of requiring such assessments is to ensure the right of the indigenous people to be informed of all proposed projects on their territory. 250 Therefore, the State’s obligation to supervise such assessments interrelates with its duty to ensure the effective participation of the indigenous people.251 In this regard, the Court reiterates that in this specific case, the safeguard concerning effective participation in the environmental impact assessment becomes important prior to the start-up of exploitation operations, because that is when the specific area of the whole concession in which the extraction operations will be executed is determined. 216. In this case, the Court has verified that: (a) the social and environmental impact assessment was not made before the startup of the extraction activities in 1997; (b) domestic law did not require such an assessment (supra para. 213); (c) the first assessment was made in 2005, eight years after the startup of exploitation, and the Kaliña and Lokono peoples did not participate in it before it was accepted, and (d) the assessment was carried out by a private entity, subcontracted by the mining company, and there is no evidence that it was subject to subsequent supervision or monitoring by State agencies. Consequently, the environmental impact assessment was not prepared in keeping with the provisions of the Court’s case law, or with the relevant international standards.252 217. The Court takes note that the Wane Kreek Nature Reserve was established in order to protect and conserve nine unique ecosystems (supra para. 81) in part of the territory claimed as traditional by the Kaliña and Lokono peoples. However, the Court observes that, to the contrary, the extraction of bauxite in Wane Kreek 1 and 2 resulted in serious damage to the environment and to the natural resources necessary for the survival and development of the Kaliña and 248 Cf. Case of the Saramaka People, supra, para. 133, and Case of the Saramaka People v. Suriname. Interpretation of the judgment on Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of August 12, 2008. Series C No. 185, paras. 40 and 41, and Case of the Kichwa Indigenous People of Sarayaku, supra, para. 205. 249 Cf. Case of the Saramaka People. Interpretation of the judgment, supra, para. 42. 250 Cf. Case of the Saramaka People. Interpretation of the Judgment, supra, para. 41, and Case of the Kichwa Indigenous People of Sarayaku, supra, para. 206. Cf. Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, supra, Principle 10 indicates that: “[e]nvironmental issues are best handled with participation of all concerned citizens, at the relevant level. At the national level, each individual shall have appropriate access to information concerning the environment that is held by public authorities, including information on hazardous materials and activities in their communities, and the opportunity to participate in decision-making processes. States shall facilitate and encourage public awareness and participation by making information widely available. Effective access to judicial and administrative proceedings, including redress and remedy, shall be provided.” 251 Cf. Case of the Saramaka People. Interpretation of the Judgment, supra, para. 41, and Case of the Kichwa Indigenous People of Sarayaku, supra, para. 206, and Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, supra, Principle 22 indicates that: “[i]ndigenous people and their communities and other local communities have a vital role in environmental management and development because of their knowledge and traditional practices. States should recognize and duly support their identity, culture and interests and enable their effective participation in the achievement of sustainable development.” 252 Cf. Expert opinion of Stuart Kirsh of January 27, 2015 (merits file, folio 357). The expert witness indicated that, in a personal communication of February 10, 2009, the Vice President for Sustainable Development of BHP Billiton advised him that the domestic laws of Suriname did not require environmental and social impact studies, and this is why they were not conducted until 2005. 57