Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2013, published 103rd ILC session (2014)

Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (No. 169) - Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) (Ratification: 2002)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government concerning the period ending in September 2013. The Government declares that, in accordance with the strategic objectives laid down in the Plan for the Nation 2013–19, the Ministry of People’s Power for Indigenous Peoples has approved 88 projects and provided 257 dwellings for a total of 1,157 beneficiaries. The Government also highlights the fact that, among other initiatives, the indigenous communities have participated in the discussion process with respect to the Organic Act concerning culture. The Committee notes the observations from the Independent Trade Union Alliance (ASI) concerning the application of the Convention, which were transmitted to the Government in August 2013. The Committee observes that the Government’s report does not cover the other matters referred to in the comments made in 2009 and 2012. The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide a report containing detailed replies to the issues raised below.

Part I of the Convention. General policy. Article 1. Identification of indigenous or tribal peoples. The Committee invites the Government to indicate in its next report the number of indigenous persons who have received the identity cards provided for in the Organic Act concerning the identification of indigenous persons. Please also include up-to-date, disaggregated statistics relating to the indigenous and tribal communities of the national population covered by the Convention.

Articles 2 and 33. Coordinated and systematic action. In its report received in August 2013, the Government referred to the strategic objectives laid down in the Plan for the Nation 2013–19 for the Ministry of People’s Power for Indigenous Peoples. The Committee invites the Government to include information in its next report enabling an evaluation of the impact of the plans and programmes of the aforementioned Ministry on establishing mechanisms, in cooperation with the indigenous and tribal peoples, for coordinated and systematic action with regard to the application of the Convention.

Coordination with other bodies. The Committee invites the Government to include information in its next report on the activities relating to the Convention undertaken by the special department at the Office of the Ombudsman with competence for the indigenous peoples, the Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources, and the Standing Committee on Indigenous Peoples at the National Assembly, including materials which illustrate the activities undertaken.

Article 3. Human rights and fundamental freedoms. Massacre of members of the Yanomami indigenous people (municipality of Alto Orinoco, State of Amazonas). The ASI indicates that in August 2012 the Coordinating Committee for Indigenous Organizations of Amazonas (COIAM) reported another massacre of members of the Yanomami indigenous people by illegal miners originating from Brazil. The Committee requests the Government to include detailed information in its next report on the steps taken to investigate the events affecting the Yanomami communities.

Appropriate consultation and participation procedures. The Committee invites the Government to include up-to-date information in its next report enabling it to examine the manner in which the effective consultation and participation of the indigenous peoples concerned in measures and decisions which may affect them directly is ensured (Articles 6, 7, 15 and 16).

Part II. Land. Articles 13 and 14. The ASI indicates in the observations transmitted to the Government in August 2013 that there are delays in land demarcation, despite some activity by the National Demarcation Committee and the regional committees. The ASI refers to the COIAM pronouncement of 11 August 2012, which recognizes the efforts of the Regional Demarcation Committee of the State of Amazonas to start examining pending demarcation requests from indigenous peoples in accordance with a schedule approved by the President of the Republic. Nevertheless, COIAM has expressed concern at the way approval of technical reports is going ahead, with pressure on the indigenous peoples and communities and no effective consultation of them, and without any account taken of the proposals from various indigenous peoples to undertake demarcation themselves, resulting in an arbitrary reduction of the self-demarcated area and disputes among the indigenous peoples themselves. The Committee requests the Government once again to include detailed information in its next report on:

• (i) the manner in which indigenous representation is ensured in the demarcation procedures;
• (ii) the lands which are potentially subject to demarcation, disaggregated according to each federative entity inhabited by indigenous communities;
• (iii) the lands for which demarcation is in progress or completed by December 2013; and
• (iv) the manner in which the land disputes referred to by the ASI and COIAM in the observations of August 2013 have been resolved.

Article 15. Natural resources. The ASI refers to disputes over mining licences and the construction of mining infrastructure, citing two cases in the State of Bolívar: the eviction in 2011 of members of the Pemón indigenous people from a mine where they were operating; and mercury contamination in El Caura affecting the Yekuana and Sanema communities. The Committee requests the Government to include information in its next report on the manner in which the application of the Convention is ensured in disputes relating to the exploration and exploitation of natural resources on indigenous lands in the State of Bolívar. The Committee again invites the Government to include detailed information in its report on the manner in which the provisions of the Organic Act concerning indigenous peoples and communities have been applied throughout the country with respect to prior consultation of the indigenous communities concerned, environmental and socio-cultural impact studies, payment of compensation and receipt of benefits by the aforementioned communities.

Article 16. Relocation. Situation of the Yukpa communities. The ASI refers to various situations involving the displacement of indigenous communities, particularly the Yukpa community of Sierra de Perijá (State of Zulia), whose displacement stems from situations arising in their ancestral habitats which are obliging them to flee to the cities. The Committee invites the Government to include up-to-date information in its next report on the manner in which the application of the Convention is ensured in the case of the Yukpa communities. The Committee requests the Government to include the up-to-date information required in the report form in relation to Articles 16, 17 and 18 of the Convention.

Part III. Conditions of employment. Article 20. The Committee again requests the Government to supply practical information on the situation of workers belonging to the indigenous peoples, including statistical information relating to the sectors in which they work. Please also specify the measures taken to ensure adequate labour inspection in areas inhabited by indigenous and tribal peoples.

Part IV. Vocational training. Articles 21 and 22. In the report received in August 2013, the Government refers to a “diploma in community development” course at the Bolivarian University of Venezuela (BV), in which members of the indigenous communities of Monagas and Anzoátegui have participated. The ASI points out that in November 2011 the Indigenous University of Venezuela received official recognition. The Committee invites the Government to include up-to-date information in its next report on special training programmes and methods which have been made available to indigenous peoples with their participation.

Part VII. Contacts and cooperation across borders. The Committee invites the Government once again to include information in its next report on international agreements adopted to facilitate contact among indigenous and tribal peoples across borders, indicating whether such agreements have made it possible to shed light on, and avoid the recurrence of, situations such as those referred to in the present observation relating to the Yanomami communities.

[The Government is asked to reply in detail to the present comments in 2014.]