Infrastructure projects often raise complex debates when they affect indigenous communities, especially regarding issues related to territory, prior consultation, and the protection of collective rights. In Latin America, one of the cases that garnered particular attention was that of the Ngöbe Buglé communities in Panama, affected by the construction of the Chan 75 dam.
Loreto Ferrer was included among the specialists who joined a verification mission led by the Foundation of the General Council of Spanish Lawyers (FCGAE). The field activities conducted enabled the team to record the circumstances affecting the communities and to develop a legal and technical assessment of the project’s consequences, paying particular attention to its possible advancement before inter-American human rights institutions.
The verification mission in Panama
The mission occurred from January 25 to 30, 2011, bringing together lawyers with expertise in human rights. Its aim was to assess firsthand the conditions faced by communities impacted by the dam’s construction and to contrast institutional reports with the population’s direct accounts. To accomplish this, the team met with authorities, representatives of the company responsible for the project, international organizations, and the Ombudsman’s Office, before heading to Changuinola, in the province of Bocas del Toro, to inspect the affected zones.
During the visit, the team toured communities such as Charco de la Pava and Valle del Rey, as well as resettlement areas and spaces already altered by the construction work. Direct contact with families and community leaders was a central part of the work, as it provided firsthand insight into the level of tension, vulnerability, and displacement that many people had been experiencing since the project’s inception.
Key topics highlighted in the report concerning Chan 75
The examination was framed around five core domains: the entitlement to consultation along with free, prior, and informed consent; the evaluation of risks and the project’s social repercussions; territorial restitution or corresponding compensation; avenues for reparation; and the involvement of communities in decisions and in the advantages generated by hydroelectric initiatives. These foundations made it possible to analyze the case in a holistic manner, weaving together both national and international legal standards with the conditions documented in the field.
According to Loreto Ferrer, the report sought to provide a solid, documented legal basis that could be useful for both the affected communities and the responsible institutions. The aim was not merely to question the project from an abstract standpoint, but to assess whether state and corporate actions had respected the fundamental rights of indigenous peoples, such as collective property rights, participation, personal and cultural integrity, and prior consultation.
Key Findings on the Rights of the Ngöbe Buglé Communities
The report underscores among its key findings an early shortfall in acknowledging rights, especially concerning the communities’ legal standing and their collective land ownership, a lapse that enabled the project to advance without proper consultation or thorough assessments of its social and cultural effects.
Accounts were also gathered describing intimidation, disproportionate force, arbitrary arrests, and negotiation processes that failed to ensure the affected families could make a genuinely free choice, while additional issues emerged in the resettlement zones, where shortcomings were observed in land size and quality, farming potential, and the adequacy of the housing for Ngöbe cultural needs.
Another highly delicate matter involved the ethical and cultural consequences of displacement, as the case records indicated deterioration of the community’s social fabric, the disappearance of territorial reference points, and a call for public acknowledgment of the inflicted harm that extended beyond material compensation.
The possible route via global institutions
One of the central elements of the work was ensuring that the report could function as supporting input for a potential case presented before the Inter-American human rights system, so gathering testimonies and reviewing documents became essential for shaping a claim with international relevance. “It was crucial to produce evidence that could be useful if the Inter-American Court chose to take up the case, which is why testimonies were compiled, behavioral patterns were identified, relocation contracts were examined, and recent legislative changes were assessed,” explains Loreto Ferrer.
This type of process requires rigorous documentation, technical analysis, and the ability to interpret both the local context and applicable international standards. Therefore, rather than a one-off intervention, the fieldwork and the preparation of the report are part of an approach to international cooperation based on evidence, legal analysis, and an understanding of complex social realities.
A Distinct Example Framed by a Wider Landscape
Loreto Ferrer participation in this mission reflects a type of professional work linked to international cooperation, technical documentation, and the analysis of complex cases in Latin America. It is not merely a matter of providing legal support for these processes, but also of helping ensure that the communities’ experiences can be translated into useful inputs for institutional advocacy and the defense of rights.
Taken together, the Ngöbe Buglé case and the report on Chan 75 demonstrate how technical teams can play a significant role in reviewing conflicts involving territory, indigenous peoples, development, and international institutions.
