63 219. Participation in the benefits of the project. The second component of this third requirement is the establishment of benefit-sharing mechanisms in favor of the communities or peoples affected by the extraction of natural resources or the implementation of development or investment plans 228 or projects. 220. Prior environmental and social impact assessments. Finally, the third safeguard included within the third requirement is the conduction of a “prior environmental and social impact assessment”, 229 carried out by “independent and technically capable entities, with the State’s supervision” . The ultimate purpose of environmental and social impact assessments is “to preserve, protect and guarantee the special relationship” of indigenous peoples with their territories, and guaranteeing their subsistence as 230 peoples. For the Inter-American Court, Article 21 of the American Convention, in connection with Article …continuación abril de 1997]. Therefore, the IACHR has made recommendations to States such as the following: “as the right to participate in decision-making and the right to effective judicial recourse each require adequate access to information, the Commission recommends that the State take measures to improve systems to disseminate information about the issues which affect them, and to enhance the transparency of and opportunities for public input into processes affecting the inhabitants of development sectors.” [CIDH, Informe sobre la situación de los derechos humanos en Ecuador. Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.96, Doc. 10 rev.1, 24 de abril de 1997]. For the Inter-American Court, “this duty requires the State to both accept and disseminate information, and entails constant communication between the parties” [Corte IDH. Caso del Pueblo Saramaka. Vs. Surinam. Excepciones Preliminares, Fondo, Reparaciones y Costas. Sentencia de 28 de noviembre de 2007. Serie C No. 172, párr. 133]. Informed consultation also requires States to ensure that the procedures ”establish the benefits that the affected indigenous peoples are to receive, and compensation for any environmental damages, in a manner consistent with their own development priorities.” [CIDH, Acceso a la Justicia e Inclusión Social: El camino hacia el fortalecimiento de la Democracia en Bolivia. Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II, Doc. 34, 28 de junio de 2007, párr. 248]. 227 As a general rule, states must “ensure, through clear consultation procedures, that their free and informed prior consent is obtained in order to carry out said projects” [CIDH, Informe de Seguimiento – Acceso a la Justicia e Inclusión Social: El camino hacia el fortalecimiento de la Democracia en Bolivia. Doc. OEA/Ser/L/V/II.135, Doc. 40, 7 de agosto de 2009, párr. 165], and the achievement of consent must be the primary objective of every consultation process. States’ primary obligation is to secure, in accordance with Convention 169, that “all projects to build infrastructure or exploit natural resources in the indigenous area or that affect their habitat or culture is processed and decided on with the participation of and in consultation with the peoples interested, with a view to obtaining their consent and possible participation in the benefits.” [CIDH, Segundo Informe sobre la situación de los derechos humanos en el Perú. Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.106, Doc. 59 rev., 2 de junio de 2000, Capítulo X, párr. 39 – Recomendación 5] In the inter-American Court’s words, “consultations must be in good faith (…) and with the objective of reaching an agreement” [Corte IDH. Caso del Pueblo Saramaka. Vs. Surinam. Excepciones Preliminares, Fondo, Reparaciones y Costas. Sentencia de 28 de noviembre de 2007. Serie C No. 172, párr. 133]. 228 Indeed, indigenous and tribal peoples have the right to participate in the benefits derived from projects for the exploration and exploitation of natural resources or from development or investment plans or projects in their territories [CIDH, Democracia y Derechos Humanos en Venezuela, 2009. Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II, Doc. 54, 30 de diciembre de 2009, párr. 1137, Recomendación 6. Ver también: CIDH, Acceso a la Justicia e Inclusión Social: El camino hacia el fortalecimiento de la Democracia en Bolivia. Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II, Doc. 34, 28 de junio de 2007, párr. 297, Recomendación 6]. In the Court’s terms, “the second safeguard the State must ensure when considering development or investment plans within [indigenous or tribal] territory is that of reasonably sharing the benefits of the project with the [respective] people” [Corte IDH. Caso del Pueblo Saramaka. Vs. Surinam. Excepciones Preliminares, Fondo, Reparaciones y Costas. Sentencia de 28 de noviembre de 2007. Serie C No. 172, párr. 138]; consequently, “the State must guarantee that the [members of the affected indigenous or tribal communities] will receive a reasonable benefit from any such plan within their territory” [Saramaka, párr. 129.]. Indigenous and tribal peoples also have the right to participate in the determination of the benefits of projects for natural resource exploration and exploitation, or of investment or development plans, in accordance with their own priorities for development, and States are in the international obligation of guaranteeing their participation in said determination of the benefits to be produced by the proposed projects. [CIDH, Democracia y Derechos Humanos en Venezuela, 2009. Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II, Doc. 54, 30 de diciembre de 2009, párr. 1137, Recomendación 5. Ver también: CIDH, Acceso a la Justicia e Inclusión Social: El camino hacia el fortalecimiento de la Democracia en Bolivia. Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II, Doc. 34, 28 de junio de 2007, párr. 297, Recomendación 5] Therefore, states must ensure that prior consultation procedures “establish the benefits that the affected indigenous peoples are to receive, and compensation for any environmental damages, in a manner consistent with their own development priorities.” [CIDH, Acceso a la Justicia e Inclusión Social: El camino hacia el fortalecimiento de la Democracia en Bolivia. Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II, Doc. 34, 28 de junio de 2007, párr. 248] 229 230 Corte IDH, Caso Pueblo Saramaka, supra nota 42, párr 129. Ibidem. In general terms, “ESIAs serve to assess the possible damage or impact a proposed development or investment project may have on the property in question and on the community.” [Corte IDH. Caso del Pueblo Saramaka Vs. Surinam. Interpretación de la Sentencia de Excepciones Preliminares, Fondo, Reparaciones y Costas. Sentencia de 12 de agosto de 2008 Serie C No. 185, párr. 40] States must guarantee that the sustainability of investment or development plans or projects and natural resource exploration and exlpoitation projects in indigenous and tribal peoples’ territories is “measured in advance, using effective mechanisms of participation for the persons and groups affected, regardless of whether the State has recognized their Continúa…