174. In this case, based on the exploitation plan for Block 23, the oil concession involved seismic work over a significant area of the Sarayaku territory that would substantially affect it, given the inherent and probable impacts of an oil project in the jungle.230 The total area that would be affected by the project on the Sarayaku territory included primary forest, sacred sites, areas for hunting, fishing and food gathering, medicinal plants and trees, and places used for cultural rites. Consequently, if this is added to the impact that previous oil exploitation projects in Ecuador have had on the lives of other indigenous peoples231 and of inhabitants of the region,232 it is understandable that the Sarayaku People should reasonably feel that the implementation of a project of this magnitude would severely impact their territory and way of life. 175. Indeed, it should be noted that the Sarayaku People always opposed the company’s entry into its territory by taking various measures on and outside the community, by decision of their own authorities (supra paras. 74, 80, 85, 87, 94 and 97). In this regard, during the public hearing, Patricia Gualinga stated that, in Sarayaku, the plan was opposed because they “had seen all the problems that oil exploitation had caused in other areas; they had seen everything that happened in Block 10 and all the divisions it was causing [...] and, apart from that, they knew that part of their subsistence depended on defending their living space and territory.”233 Thus, during the first incursions of the CGC in November 2002, the Sarayaku People decided in an Assembly to declare a “state of emergency,” and set up the so-called “Peace and Life Camps” (supra para. 100). define themselves as nationalities and Afro-Ecuadorians is: (a) to obtain, in advance, the views, comments, opinions and proposals of the indigenous peoples, who define themselves as nationalities and Afro-Ecuadorians, who live in the area of direct influence of the block open to bidding, with regard to the possible positive and/or negative socio-environmental impacts that the plans and programs resulting from the oil bidding processes and the signature of the respective exploration and exploitation contracts could have on their territories; (b) to receive opinions on the general socio-environmental strategies and measures for prevention, mitigation, control, compensation and rehabilitation of the negative socio-environmental impacts, as well as on efforts to promote positive socio-environmental impacts, which must be taken into account by the agency responsible for the bidding process, the award and signature of contracts and the activities for monitoring their execution, and (c) to obtain opinions on the mechanisms for the participation of indigenous peoples, who define themselves as nationalities and Afro-Ecuadorians, who live in the area of direct influence of the block open to bidding, through their representative organizations, during the implementation of the socio-environmental measures of prevention, mitigation, compensation, control and rehabilitation related to the negative socio-environmental impacts and to promote positive socioenvironmental impacts on their territories due to the hydrocarbon activities resulting from the bidding processes and the award and signature of exploration and exploitation contracts.” Lastly, article 10 stipulates that: “[t]he purpose of prior consultation of indigenous peoples, who define themselves as nationalities and Afro-Ecuadorians, is to obtain, in advance, the views, comments, opinions and proposals of the indigenous and Afro-Ecuadorian communities in the area of direct influence of the project, regarding the possible positive and/or negative socio-environmental impacts of the oil exploration and exploitation activities, and to determine the socio-environmental measures of prevention, mitigation, compensation, control and rehabilitation in relation to the negative socio-environmental impacts and to promote positive social and environmental impacts that, if technically and financially viable and legally appropriate, shall be incorporated into the Environmental Impact Assessment and the Environmental Management Plan, including the Community Relations Plan (evidence file, tome 8, folio 4130 and ff.). 230 In his expert report, William Powers described the impacts inherent in an oil project in the jungle, which include the arrival of workers in the zone, the opening up of numerous trails involving the clearing of vegetation, impact on water courses, soil erosion, and indirect effects owing to opening up the area to an external population; explosives to create seismic waves; construction of heliports and temporary campsites; drilling of hundreds of production wells; flow lines between wells and production stations, and a gas and/or oil pipeline to transfer production (evidence file, tome 19, folios 10090 to 100103). 231 Cf. Expert opinion provided by affidavit by Alberto José Acosta Espinoza, economist, of June 30, 2011 (evidence file, tome 19, folios. 10073 to 10077) 232 In this regard, the Inter-American Commission had indicated that, in 1997, oil exploitation in eastern Ecuador was directly violating the right to life of many of the inhabitants of the region, pointing out that these activities had exposed them to toxic by-products in the water they used to drink and to wash themselves, in the air they breathed, and in the soil in which they grew their food. The Commission determined that this posed a considerable risk to human life and health because they were exposed to increased risks of contracting serious illnesses (Inter-American Commission, Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Ecuador. OAS/Ser.L/V/II.96 Doc. 10 rev. 1(1997), Ch. VIII. “The human rights situation of the inhabitants of the interior of Ecuador affected by development activities”). Expert witness Alberto Acosta referred to the effects that the oil boom had had on the Ecuadorian Amazon, indicating that “[i]t is indisputable that, since the second half of the 1960s, oil activities have caused massive damage to the biodiversity and well-being of the population of the Amazon region. The indigenous communities and the settlers have suffered innumerable violations of their most basic rights in the name of the mythical well-being of the population as a whole” (evidence file, tome 19, folios 10073 and 10074). 233 Testimony rendered by Patricia Gualinga before the Court during the public hearing on July 6, 2011. Also Affidavit prepared by Gloria Berta Gualinga Vargas on June 27, 2011 (evidence file, tome 19, folio 10037). 49