16 72. On November 18, 1934, Law 18 on Indigenous Reserves was adopted, by which the State of Panama declared the Upper Bayano region to be an indigenous reserve (“reserva indígena”). That law provided as follows: ARTICLE 1: The barren lands in the following places in the Provinces of Bocas del Toro and Panamá are hereby declared indigenous reserves: … Indigenous Region of Alto Bayano: The barren lands inhabited by the indigenous tribes of Maje, Pintupo, Piria, and Cañazas, in keeping with the official map drawn up in October 1932 by Official Surveyor Mr. Blas Humberto D’Anello, whose map bears the order number B 6-442, in the Archive of the Secretariat of the Public institution. ARTICLE 2: The lands addressed in the previous articles shall be possessed in common by the indigenous tribes who inhabit them and may not be sold or leased. ARTICLE 3: The Executive Branch is obligated to declare non-adjudicable an area in each of the Provinces of the Republic where there are Indian tribes and shall set them aside as indigenous 66 reserves for them to work on them free of charge sic . 73. The IACHR observes that as the text of the law indicates, the characterization of Upper Bayano as an “indigenous reserve” was based on the measurement work done in 1932 by surveyor Blas Humberto D’Anello, to whom the description of the expedition makes reference. According to information produced by the parties and other sources of public knowledge, the area of the Indigenous Reserve of the 67 Upper Bayano was from 87,000 to 87,321 hectares. 74. In addition, the IACHR finds that by Article 2 of that law, the Panamanian State granted the indigenous peoples who lived in the reserve the right to common possession of the lands, which could not be alienated or leased. 75. On February 14, 1952, the National Assembly of Panama passed Law 18, “by which 68 Article 94 of the National Constitution is developed and other measures are issued.” By this law the State ordered the creation of four comarcas, including the “Comarca of Bayano and Darién.” In addition, territories by which each comarca would be constituted were established. That law specifically provided as follows: …continuation reservation. The boundaries were marked out according to natural markers, such as rivers, tributaries of the Bayano, hills, or particular trees. A map was made out of the region based on the survey and finally, in 1935, a path was cleared to mark the reserve boundary. The collective Kuna community contributed labor, money and material to the delimitation of the work and they contributed labor to clear the trail. Additionally, according to a written history of the events preserved by the Kuna in their archives, the Kuna communities spent over $15,000 for the work.” Annex 3. Alaka Wali, “Kilowatts and Crisis: Hydroelectric Power and Social Dislocation in Eastern Panama”, 26 Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado 1989. p. 31. Annex 51 to the petitioners’ initial petition of May 11, 2000. 66 Law 18, of November 18, 1934. Annex 7 of petitioners’ initial petition of May 11, 2000; and Annex 1 to the communication from the State of June 29, 2001. Available at: http://www.asamblea.gob.pa/APPS/LEGISPAN/PDF_NORMAS/1930/1934/1934_092_0285.PDF. 67 Annex 11. Final assessment document of the Mesa de Concertación of the Bayano Zone of July 2, 1999. Annex 31 to petitioners’ initial petition of May 11, 2000. pp. 20-21; Annex 13. Report and Recommendation of the Inter-governmental Commission. Annex 21 of the communication from the State of June 29, 2001. In addition, academic documents make reference to an expansion of nearly 87,000 hectares. Reina Torres de Araúz. “Cunas (Tules).” In: Panamá indígena. Panama City: Panama Canal Authority. 1999. p. 174; Annex 1. Esther Urieta Donos, thesis “Ipeti-Choco: Una comunidad Indígena de Panamá afectada por una Presa Hidroeléctrica”. Universidad Veracruzana, School of Anthropology, 1994. p. 32. Annex C to the petitioners’ brief of additional observations on the merits, received by the IACHR December 18, 2009; State’s Brief of May 14, 2012, received by the IACHR on the same day; and Annex 2. Informe Final de la Comisión Nacional de Límites Político-Administrativo sobre la Demarcación Física de la Comarca Kuna de Madungandí de 2000. Annex 3 to the petitioner’s brief of July 13, 2012, received by the IACHR the same day. 68 Annex 11. Final assessment document of the Mesa de Concertación of the Bayano Zone of July 2, 1999. Annex 31 to petitioners’ initial petition of May 11, 2000. p. 21. p. 20; and Report and Recommendation of the Inter-governmental Commission. Annex 21 to the State’s communication of June 29, 2001.