INTER-AMERICAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS
CASE OF THE KICHWA INDIGENOUS PEOPLE OF SARAYAKU v. ECUADOR
Table of contents
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
INTRODUCTION OF THE CASE AND PURPOSE OF THE DISPUTE ………………
PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COURT …………………………………………………….
COMPETENCE ……………………………………………………………………………………
ACKOWLEDGEMENT OF INTERNATIONAL RESPONSIBILITY …………………..
PRELIMINARY OBJECTION …………………………………………………………………
EVIDENCE ………………………………………………………………………………………..
A.
B.
C.
VII
DOCUMENTARY, TESTIMONIAL AND EXPERT EVIDENCE ………………….…………………………………………
ADMISSION OF THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE …………………………………………………………………………
ADMISSION OF THE STATMENTS OF THE PRESUMED VICTIMS AND THE TESTIMONIAL AND
EXPERT EVIDENCE ……………………………….……………………………………………………………………………………
ASSESSMENT OF THE FILE ON PROVISIONAL MEASURES ………………….……………………………………
ASSESSMENT OF THE VISIT TO THE SARAYAKU TERRITORY ………………….…………………………………
D.
E.
4
5
9
9
11
12
12
13
14
15
16
FACTS .........................................................................................................
THE KICHWA INDIGENOUS PEOPLE OF SARAYAKU ……………………………………………………………
OIL EXPLORATION IN ECUADOR ……………………………………………………………………………………
AWARD OF TERRITORIES TO THE KICHWA PEOPLE OF SARAYAKU AND THE COMMUNITIES
OF THE BOBONAZA RIVER IN MAY 1992 ………………………………………………………………………
D.
PARTNERSHIP CONTRACT WITH THE CGC FOR THE EXPLORATION OF HYDROCARBONS AND
EXPLOITATION OF CRUDE OIL IN BLOCK 23 OF THE AMAZONIAN REGION …………………………
E.
FACTS PRIOR TO THE SEISMIC SURVEYS AND INCURSION INTO THE SARAYAKU
TERRITORY …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
F.
APPLICATION FOR AMPARO ……………………………………………………………………………………………
G.
FACTS RELATED TO THE SEISMIC SURVEYS OR OIL EXPLORATION ACTIVITIES OF THE
CGC AS OF DECEMBER 2002 ……………………………………………………….……………………………….
H.
ALLEGED ACTS OF VIOLENCE AND THREATS AGAINST THE SARAYAKU PEOPLE ………………………
I.
FACTS FOLLOWING THE SUSPENSION OF ACTIVITIES OF THE CGC ………………………………………
VIII MERITS ...…………………………………………………………………………….
VIII.1 RIGHT TO CONSULTATION AND TO INDIGENOUS COMMUNAL PROPERTY ……
16
16
17
A. ARGUMENTS OF THE PARTIES ………………………………………………………………………………………………………....
A.1 Right to property, in relation to the obligation to respect rights,
freedom of thought and expression and political rights …………………………………
A.2 Right to freedom of movement and residence ………………………………………………..
A.3 Economic, social and cultural rights ……………………………………………………………….
A.4 Domestic legal effects to ………………………………..…………………………………………………
A.5 Obligation to respect rights …………………………………………………………………………….
B. THE OBLIGATION TO GUARANTEE THE RIGHT TO CONSULTATION IN RELATION TO THE RIGHTS
32
TO COMMUNAL PROPERTY AND CULTURAL IDENTITY OF THE SARAYAKU PEOPLE ………………………
36
A.
B.
C.
B.1
B.2
B.3
B.4
The right to indigenous communal property ……………………………………………………
The special relationship between the Sarayaku people and their territory ……
Protective measures to guarantee the right to communal property ………………
The State’s obligation to guarantee the right to consultation of the Sarayaku
People ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
B.5 Application of the right to consultation of the Sarayaku people in this case …
a) Consultation must take place in advance ………………………………………………………
b) Good faith and the goal of reaching an agreement …………………………………………
c) Adequate and accessible consultation …………………………………………………………
d) Environmental impact assessment ……………………………………………………………
e) The consultation must be informed …………………………………………………………..
2
18
19
21
24
24
28
30
31
31
32
34
35
36
36
36
37
39
40
50
51
53
57
59
60