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 took place from January 25 to 30, 2011, and was composed of lawyers specializing in human rights. Its objective was to verify on the ground the situation of the communities affected by the dam’s construction, as well as to compare institutional information with the direct experiences of the population. To this end, the team held meetings with authorities, representatives of the company responsible for the project, international organizations, and the Ombudsman’s Office, and then traveled to Changuinola, in the province of Bocas del Toro, to visit the affected areas.
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 was designed to lay out a well-documented legal foundation intended to assist both the impacted communities and the institutions involved. Its purpose went beyond raising theoretical objections to the project; it sought to determine whether the actions of state authorities and corporations had upheld the essential rights of indigenous peoples, including collective land ownership, participation, cultural and personal integrity, and the requirement of 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.
Testimonies were also collected regarding intimidation, excessive use of force, arbitrary detentions, and negotiation processes that did not guarantee a free decision by the affected families. Added to this were problems in the resettlement areas, where deficiencies were identified regarding the size and quality of the land, agricultural possibilities, and the suitability of the housing for Ngöbe culture.
Another particularly sensitive issue was the moral and cultural impact of displacement. The case documentation revealed damage to the community fabric, a loss of territorial references, and a demand for public recognition of the harm caused, beyond material reparations.
The potential path through international bodies
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.
