1

ULAM’S SUBMISSION TO THE UN COMISSION ON THE STATUS OF WOMEN PERU: Rights of Rural and Indigenous Women Endangered by Transnational Mining July 2014 I. Introduction This communication concerns the effects of transnational mining projects on rural and indigenous women’s ability to enjoy their rights. Two cases are included from Peru, one from the Piura region, the Women Defenders of the Wetlands Association (AMUPPA) and another from the Cajamarca region, Mrs Maxima Acuña de Chaupe. Both cases demonstrate the different ways in which transnational mining projects directly violate women’s human rights and actively nurture violations against women activists on the basis of their defence of the land, water and rights. ULAM is a regional network of groups and organizations led by women to benefit women who are affected socially, economically and culturally by the extractive industry in Latin America. II. Country background: Mining in Peru Over the past decade, Peru has become one of the most favourable countries for transnational mining investment1, currently the third largest global producer of copper, silver, zinc and tin, and the largest producer of tin, lead, gold and zinc within the Latin American region 2. Mining exports alone represented 62.37 percent of Peru’s overall exports in 20123. With the country’s economy heavily reliant on the industry, large transnational mining companies have become powerful players in Peruvian politics. Correlating with the high mineral exports, the amount of land under mining concession has more than tripled from 2002 to 2013 (7,452,232 hectares to 26,752,220 hectares), covering a total of 21.02 percent of Peru’s entire territory in 20134. Agricultural land and water basins are increasingly being overlapped by mining concessions5 6, affecting more and more rural and indigenous people living from Peru’s fertile land. III. Mining: Endangering Women’s Human Rights The introduction of transnational mining projects to rural and indigenous

1 Mining investment projects in Peru to reach USD 60 Billion over the next years, Apexwise, 2014 2 Mining 2013 Peru, 2013, Sandra Orihuela, Association of Corporate Counsel 3 Mining 2013 Peru, 2013, Sandra Orihuela, Association of Corporate Counsel 4 Cuarto informe cartográfico sobre concesiones mineras en el Perú, Base de Datos, Cooperaccion, Junio 2013. 5 Mining and Development in Peru with Special Reference to The Rio Blanco Project, Piura. Peru Support Group 2007 6 Geographies of Conflict, Mapping overlaps between extractive industries and agricultural land uses in Ghana and Peru, Oxfam America, 2014

2

communities in Peru has exposed women to situations where their rights may be violated7. Loss of land to contamination or to mining concessions –often without their consent- renders rural and indigenous women (traditionally agriculturists) financially reliant on men8. The contamination of water and land increases women’s workload and violates their right to live in a clean and healthy environment. Furthermore the imminent destruction of the earth violates rural and indigenous women’s ethnic and cultural rights9, as it disregards their deep-rooted beliefs and connectedness to ‘Mother Earth’10. The industry’s blind eye towards women’s concerns reinforces the communities’ traditional exclusion of women from political and decision-making arenas11. Facing the exacerbation of existing discrimination, courageous women have taken matters into their own hands and have become a leading force in the protection of the land, water and human rights12. Consequently, this has exposed women to high risks and human rights violations including; torture, kidnapping, beating, threats, defamation, arrest, criminal charges, sexual abuse and murder13 14. In addition, women activists face gendered repression and communal backlash for breaking traditional roles assigned to them15. Working with and being led by rural and indigenous women, ULAM has seen a pattern in which the introduction of transnational mining projects to a rural and/or indigenous community severely disrupts life for women and increases the likelihood of their rights being violated. IV. CASE ONE: AMUPPA

IV.a. Background information

IV.a.i. About AMUPPA AMMUPA, the Women Protectors of the Wetlands Asociation (Asociación de Mujeres Protectoras de los Paramos) is a grassroots women’s organisation formed in 2008. Members are all from the small community of Ñangali, 2250m above sea level in the cloud-forest region of Huancabamba, Piura, North Peru. The women are mostly subsistent farmers who rely on fertile land to grow crops to feed their families and to sell at local markets. AMUPPA was formed to unite women defenders of the land, water and human rights from the effects of the mining project, Rio Blanco. The group seeks to capacitate, organise and support rural women, empowering them to voice their

7 Women, decision-making and the extractive industries, Publish what you pay 2014 8 The situation of Women Defenders of Land, Human and Economic rights in Latin America, ULAM and LAMMP, 2014 9 Los territorios, la minería y nosotras, Las mujeres nos preguntamos, Censat 2014 10 Concerns of indigenous and rural women regarding mining activity, ULAM, 2013 11 Women, decision-making and the extractive industries, Publish what you pay 2014 12 Peruvians rise up against the mines; New Internationalist, 2011 13 The situation of Women Defenders of Land, Human and Economic rights in Latin America, ULAM and LAMMP, 2014 14 Violencia Contra Defensoras de Derechos Humanos en Mesomamerica. 15 Unearthing Women’s Anti-Mining Activism in the Andes, K,Jenkins, Northumbria University, 2012

3

concerns regarding the mining project.

IV.a.ii. About the Mining Project In 2003, UK-based mining company Monterrico Metals PLC, entered the Huancabamba province with plans for an open pit copper and molybdenum mine, named Rio Blanco. The project is proposed to be amongst the twenty largest copper projects in the world holding a concession of 6473 hectares16. The magnitude and location of the project (engulfing wetlands and water sources) directly threatens the fragile cloud-forest ecosystem and as a consequence the livelihoods of local subsistence farmers. Opposition to the project by local communities has been strong. Since 2004, rejection of the project has been in the form of community protests and demonstrations. These have resulted in clashes with police, leaving many protesters injured and several dead. In 2007, the communities organised a non-binding referendum. With high turn out, 95 percent of voters rejected the project17. In the same year, 90 percent of the company was acquired by the Chinese mining company Zijin, forming Rio Blanco Copper SA. The Peruvian government gave the project its full backing even though demonstrations continued. In 2009, after buildings owned by the mine were burned down and reports were published alleging torture and kidnapping of activists in a 2005 protest, the Peruvian government temporarily suspended the project18. The reports led to a lawsuit in British courtrooms. In 2011, the company and aggrieved community members came to an out of court settlement19. Currently, Rio Blanco Copper SA has stepped up efforts in order to start the exploitation phase in 201520, establishing a company office in the town of Huancabamba.

IV.b. Alleged Violations

IV.b.i. Torture, Kidnapping and Sexual Abuse In August 2005, during a peaceful five-day march, Cleofe Neyra and Elizabeth Cunya were kidnapped alongside twenty-six protesters by Rio Blanco security forces and held captive for three days. Being the only women in the group, they faced gendered abuse, kept half naked in a small toilet with plastic black sacks over their heads, their feet’s and hands tied. Both women recall receiving rape threats and constant sexual harassment.

“We didn’t have food or water. Repeatedly they beat us with their fists and boots. All of them took pleasure in squeezing my breasts so hard that often I felt like fainting. They constantly threatened us with rape, whilst indulging in fantasies of what they were going to do to us” Cleofe Neyra.21

16 Rio Blanco: Massive copper project proposed for Cloud Forest, Oxfam America, 2009 17 Rio Blanco and the Conga Fallout, Peru Support group, 2012 18 Monterrico Metals lawsuit, Business and Human Rights Resource Centre, 2014 19 Peruvian torture claimants compensated by UK mining company, Leigh Day, 2011 20 Zijin moves to restart Rio Blanco, Peru Support Group, 2012 21 Victim Testimony Cleofe Neyra, 2012 https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=GFkdbXHSHd4

4

“The three days of detention were some of the worst of my life. When I was beaten it changed my whole world...it was as though a tornado had destroyed everything” Elizabeth Cunya.22

Though Cleofe and Elizabeth received compensation from the out of court settlement, the long-term effects of the incident have severely impacted their lives. Cleofe and Elizabeth’s reputations were tainted, with community members blaming them for the sexual abuse because they took part in the demonstration. The women were stigmatized as ‘dirty women’, resulting in friends and family members distancing themselves from them. Both Cleofe and Elizabeth were isolated and left traumatised. Nonetheless, they have continued to defend the land and water and became founding members of AMUPPA, with Cleofe being the current President and Elizabeth the Treasurer.

IV.b.ii. Harassment, Intimidation and Death Threats Since the 2005 incident, members of AMUPPA have experienced many incidents of harassment, intimidation, assault and death threats23. Perpetrators include community members (male and female), police officers, local journalists and employees of the mine. The women have identified that existing gender discrimination within the community serves as a basis for the attacks, though it is the constant defamation and discrimination promoted by radio shows and community leaders (linked to the mine)24 that incites, provokes and nurtures violations against them. The most effective accusation that is currently being used to discredit AMUPPA, is that all of its members received large payouts from the out of court settlement in 2011. This allegation has been regularly announced by Duber Maureola, owner of Radio Centinela, a widely listened to radio station25 that allegedly receives large funding from the mine in order to obtain public support for the project26. As a result, community members have accused the women of being ‘thieves’ and ‘robbers’. Men who received money in the settlement have not been subjected to these accusations. The women live in constant fear, scared to leave their homes27. UALM has been working alongside AMUPPA to document the on-going aggressions. As many of the women are illiterate, documentation has been difficult. Below is a list of some incidents against the women since 2005.

22 Peruvian torture claimants compensated by UK mining company, Leigh Day, 2011 23 A civil complaint was filed against Monterrico Metals in the UK Court system following the abuses of 2005. As key witness for the prosecutor, Cleofe states that throughout the proceeding she received death threats warning her to keep her mouth shut.http://www.statecrime.org/testimonyproject/peru#chapter6 24 AMUPPA members allege that the radio show presenters and community members receive financial support from the mine 25 Una Mina los Divide, La Republica, 2007 26 AMUPPA members allege that the radio and community members receive financial support from the mine 27 Mujer del Mes, Mayo, Cleofe Neyra, ULAM, 2014

5

1. 10th of August 2005, Silvia Jimenez Neyra, Rosa Carrión Córdova and Julia Alberca Acha were insulted and physically beaten by police officers for publically demanding that their rights and territory be respected.

2. 20th September 2005, when travelling to a Court hearing in Huancabamba to

give statements regarding the kidnapping, mining staff working in the Rio Blanco Project attacked Elizabeth Cunya alongside her lawyer, Quique Rodrigues.

3. 18th January 2006, Cleofe Neyra received a death threat as she returned to

Ñangali from Huancabamba.

4. 20th February 2006, mine workers on the road to Ñangali from Huancabamba surrounded the car that Irma Calle was travelling in. They issued death threats towards her.

5. 15th April 2006, when returning from a community meeting, a motorcycle

followed Elizabeth Cunya. Upon arriving to her home, the motorcycle stayed outside for five minutes.

6. 18th July 2006, two men approached Nelly Gaona when she was feeding her

animals. They threatened to rape her if she continued with her opposition to the mine.

7. 12th November 2006, Elizabeth Cunya received a phone call from an unknown

man. He stated that he knew where her son was and warned her that it would be better for her to work with the mining company if she didn’t want something to happen to her son. He said that they knew everything and could hear everything everywhere.

8. February 2007, Elizabeth Cunya made a denunciation at the police station

regarding the constant threats and intimidation she was receiving, however these were not investigated.

9. September 2007, Julia Ibañez and Nivia Pusma were insulted in the street

“Disgusting old ladies”.

10. September 2008, Elizabeth Cunya was assaulted and received a death threat.

11. April 2009, Silvia Neyra and Rosa Sarango Peña were intimidated in the street, “stupid disgusting old ladies, what do you know about rights, go and cook and sweep your houses”.

12. January 2010, a note was left under Elizabeth Cunya’s door stating “Fucking

bitch, we are going to rape you and cut you into pieces”.

13. In November 2010, Aurelia Romero, from the village of Cajas Canchaque in the Huancabamba province, was shot in her groin and leg by police during a raid of her house. She was left permanently disabled. Officers told her that she was a terrorist for opposing private investment, an enemy of the country, and

6

that she did not deserve to live.28

14. In April 2011, employees of the mine attacked Nivia Pusma and Rosa Murillo and accused them of being terrorists whilst they visited a school in Ñangali.

15. In October 2011, a fifteen-year-old girl was beaten by several boys who left

her with severe physical and psychological injuries. The parents of the boys were mine supporters who instigated the attacked.

16. In June 2012, Ms Josephine Aponte was beaten and chased by mine supporters

who threatened to kill her if she continued opposing the mine.

17. In September 2012, mine supporters insulted and threw stones at Cleofe Neyra and Nivia Pusma whilst they were walking on the street on their way to a community meeting.

18. December 2012, Julia Ibañez was accused of terrorism for denouncing that the

mine occupied her land.

19. In February 2013, Elizabeth Cunya was beaten by mine workers as she arrived to pick her son up from his school.

20. In May 2013, the AMUPPA's office was broken into and a message saying “women go home, don't go on with this” was left painted on the wall29.

21. In July 2013, Cleofe Neyra was insulted and received death threats by a

mineworker as she walked through the street.

22. In August 2013, unknown men followed Elizabeth Cunya on a motorbike, and shortly after she received pictures of herself in her home – confirming that she was under surveillance30.

23. In October 2013, journalist Duber Maureola alongside his wife and two sons

physically attacked Cleofe Neyra in the main square of Huancabamba. The Police ignored Cleofe’s denunciation. Cleofe suffered substantial injuries but doctors refused to give her a medical certificate as she alleges that they receive financial support from the mine.

24. January 2014, Police officials and workers of the mine physically assaulted

Reyna Peña during a demonstration.

25. January 2014, whilst travelling to Piura to attend a workshop, Cleofe Neyra and Ismena Pusma received death threats as a result of their opposition to the mine.

26. On the 10th February 2014, two masked men entered the home of Ms Nivia

Pusma and threatened to kill her. 28 http://www.frontlinedefenders.org/files/fld_report_peru_final.pdf 29 Environmental Rights Defenders at Risk in Peru, Frontline Defenders, 2014 30 Environmental Rights Defenders at Risk in Peru, Frontline Defenders, 2014

7

27. 22 February 2014, Rosa Ibañnez was insulted and ridiculed as she entered her

home, for being part of AMUPPA.

28. During the month of March 2014, AMUPPA’s members received public death threats, insults and defamation by the radio station Centinela.

29. On the 6th April 2014, a motorbike followed Elizabeth Cunya as she returned

to her home in Piura; she then received threatening text messages.

30. On the 18th April 2014, the radio Centinela insulted and defamed members of AMUPPA because the women had made a public denunciation regarding the mining project.

31. On the 2nd June 2014, Cleofe Neyra was insulted in the street, and warned

“Shameless robber, return the money or we will beat you and kill you”31.

32. On the 5th of June, at 7am Maria Jimenez was assaulted by two women who threatened her “you good for nothing, you negotiated with the mine, and received the money behind our backs, return the money if you don’t want anything to happen to you and your family”.

33. On the 8th June 2014, two unknown persons assaulted Aide Garcia and Josefa

Aponte in the main plaza of Huancabamba. They were threatened “traitors, disgusting old ladies, murderess, return the money you have received from the mine or you will see what happens”.

34. On the 27th June 2014, radio presenter Duber Maureola, verbally attacked

members of AMUPPA and threatened to take the law into his own hands if they didn’t return the money.

V. CASE TWO: Maxima Acuña de Chaupe

V.a. Background Information

V.a.i About Maxima Acuña de Chaupe Maxima lives in Tragadero Grande, a small community high in the hills of the Sorochuco district, in the department of Cajamarca, Northern Peru. Her family home is one of the few remaining houses opposite the Blue Lake. She has lived there for the past twenty-four years and has owned the land since 1994. Before 2011, Maxima reports that she survived by weaving, sewing garments, and selling the produce grown on her land at the market.

V.a.ii About the Mining Project Minas Conga is a gold and copper mining project32 from the��� Yanacochca Mining

31 This is in relation to the money that some members of AMUPPA received following the out of Court settlement in 2011. 32 An expansion of the Yanacocha gold mine, the largest gold mine in South America.

8

Company, majority owned by US-based Newmont Mining Corporation and backed by the Peruvian ‘Compañia de Minas Buenaventura’ and the World Bank33. With an investment of 4.800 million USD the project is projected to be Peru’s largest ever-mining investment34 exploiting 3069 hectares of land and displacing four mountain top lakes. In November 2011, communities in the Cajamarca region forced the suspension of Minas Congas for two years following regional demonstrations and strikes.35 Community members oppose the project, especially the destruction of the lakes, with the largest concern being their access to sufficient, safe and affordable water for farming, livestock and human consumption36. Moreover, they argue that their right to give a free, prior and informed consent had not been respected, and that they have the right to determine their own regional development.37 Large-scale opposition continued throughout the suspension period, reaching a crisis point in July 2012 when five protesters were shot dead by government security forces in the 34th and 35th day of regional strikes. A state of emergency was implemented as a result, suspending civil liberties and imposing martial law in four provinces of Cajamarca.38 On December 2013, Peruvian government officials announced that the Minas Conga Project would likely reopen for operation in 2014.39

V.b. Alleged Violations Part of the prospective Minas Congas concession covers Maxima’s land. In 2011 she refused to sell it to Yanacocha for the project and as a result, she alleges that a campaign of intimidation, violence and harassment ensued.

V.b.i. Forced Eviction and Physical Abuse In May 2011, engineers from the Yanacocha mine accompanied by private security guards and officials from the Division of Special Operations of the Peruvian National Police (DINOES) entered Maxima’s property, tearing down fences, and dismantling her home. 40 When she attempted to report the incident to the police the following day, they refused to see her. On the 9th August 2011, mining officials accompanied by over a hundred DINOES personnel entered Maxima’s property. They destroyed her home for a second time, and confiscated many of her possessions, including beds, clothes, cooking utensils and food supplies. 41

33 It is owned 51.35 per cent by US Newmont Mining Corporation, 43.65 per cent by Peru’s Minas Buenaventura, and 5 per cent by the World Bank 34 Minas Conga mining project, Bank Track, 2014 35 Newmont's Conga Project In Peru Faces Uncertain Fate, Forbes, 2013 36 Peru’s Conga Mine conflict: Cajamarca wont capitulate, Upside Down World, 2014 37 Minas Conga mining project, Bank Track, 2014 38 Minas Conga mining project, Bank Track, 2014 39 Peru's Conga Mine could reopen this year, Peru this week, 2014 40 La mujer del agua, crónica de una visita a la familia Chaupe, La Republica, 2013 41 ‘Life yes, gold no!’, New Internationalist, 2012

9

On the 10th August 2011, Yanacocha engineers returned to Maxima’s land accompanied by large machinery and a contingent of DINOES personnel. Ysidora, Maxima’s eighteen-year-old daughter, recounted that the engineers began to provoke the family. Maxima alleged that mine officials kept telling her that she had sold her land and now it was the property of Yanacocha. They accused her of squatting on the land illegally. Maxima reports that as the machinery entered further, Ysidora jumped in front of it, blocking its path. Several policemen grabbed her and dragged her away. They then started to beat her. Maxima went to her daughter’s aid, but the police turned on her and started punching and hitting her to the ground. Both women were beaten unconscious. Maxima’s husband, Jaime attempted to help his wife and daughter but had a gun pointed at his head. Maxima also reported that the Police hit her son, Daniel, in the chest, leaving him with long-lasting effects on his breathing and lungs. After regaining consciousness, Ysidora recorded her mother on the ground still unconscious, police standing in a line by the road and trucks with Yanacocha engineers further down the road.42 V.b.ii. Harassment, Intimidation and Death Threats Over the past few years, members of the DINOES, police agents working for Yanacocha and mine workers, have subjected Maxima and her family to constant intimidation and harassment. More recently, Maxima denounces a strong defamation campaign launched by workers of the mine, who claim that she is preventing the mine from employing people. This has increased harassment, intimidation and threats from community members. On May 22nd 2012, the Yanacocha land supervisor, Guillermo Silva entered Maxima’s land with ten security guards. Guillermo Silva told Maxima that this was not her land. Maxima went to report the incident to the police, but the Police Commissioner refused to see her, stating that he was too busy.43 She waited for five hours for a police officer to finally see her and record the incident. She denounced Guillermo Silva for trespassing and physical assault. On 30th January 2013, Maxima reported seeing DINOES circling her land looking for the Ronderos, community members that Maxima had allowed to stay on her land for added protection44. Sixty DINOES entered her property and attempted to evict her and her family without any official documentation. They demanded to know where the Ronderos had gone, and when Maxima explained that they had left at 6am to attend a conference in Celendin the DINOES proceeded to destroy the Ronderos’ campsite. They also killed several of Maxima’s animals, including her dog. Whilst detaining her husband and son, Maxima was beaten. The family was physically detained for two hours, and once released they feared to leave their home as the DINOES were still circling their land.45 On the 12th January 2014, Maxima was farming vegetables within her land when

42 Testimonio de Máxima Acuña contra la Minera Yanacocha https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USk4XOByu48&feature=endscreen 43 Solo con coraje, La lucha contra la empresa más grande del mundo, El Cajarquino, Edicion 4, 2013 44 On the 21st October 2012 Maxima permitted over one hundred Ronderos from Celendin to set up a makeshift camp on her land. The Ronderos, campesinos who provide community protection in Peru, feared for Maxima and her family’s safety and their possible eviction. 45 Cajamarca: Familia Chaupe-Acuña denuncia agresión policial y atentado contra su propiedad, Aguamina, 2013

10

DINOES approached her and told her that she should leave the area, as Yanacocha Mining Company owns the land. The following day DINOES and a Fiscal carried out an inspection of the area, and began to record Maxima going about her day-to-day activities.46 On the 26th January 2014 Maxima was threatened by her neighbour and known mine supporter Berta Alvareda, who warned Maxima “not to speak to people about mining” as well as accusing her of mistreating her animals. Maxima reports that Berta’s husband, the president of Tragadero Grande, has been telling other community members that she will soon be evicted. These incidents came after a nearby family were forcedly evicted from their land on the 18th January 2014.47 At 10:30am on the 30th January 2014, Maxima received a phone call from a private number telling her “leave your property or you will be killed”. One hour later she was farming with her daughter when two DINOES entered her land and told her to stop working the land as it is not theirs. Two further DINOES were standing on her land and a further four remained in pick up trucks parked in front of her home. At 12pm on the same day, one-armed DINOES and one police officer entered Maxima’s home and told everyone to leave immediately and to stop cultivating the land. When Maxima rang the local radio station to denounce the actions, the officer left48. Maxima has informed ULAM that since January 2014, DINOES and workers of the mine frequently record her as she goes about her daily activities. Additionally she reports being denied a place in the local bus that transports people from her community to Cajamarca, as community members and the bus owner don’t want any problems getting across the checkpoints set up by police on behalf of the mine. She is left to walk for hours. This constant surveillance and restriction of movement has made Maxima feel very tense and is preventing her from living an ordinary life. She is extremely isolated and scared to leave her land for fear that DINOES and mine workers will destroy her home and crops - everything she has. V.b.iii. Lack of access to justice In 2012, Yanacocha mining company filed legal proceedings against Maxima and her family, accusing them of ‘illegal occupation’. 49 On 29th October 2012 the case was brought before the Judge of Celendin who found the family guilty and sentenced them to a three years suspended prison sentence. In addition they were ordered to pay 200 soles in compensation to Yanacocha.50 Grufides, a local NGO, who represented Maxima, appealed the verdict and on the 2nd August 2013 the Superior Court of Justice of Cajamarca ruled that the sentence against Maxima and her family was null and void. The judgement ruled that the previous judgement not

46 Recorded by Red Ulam who is working closely with Maxima and recording all human rights abuses against her. 47 Recorded by Red Ulam who is working closely with Maxima and recording all human rights abuses against her. 48 Recorded by Red Ulam who is working closely with Maxima and recording all human rights abuses against her. 49 Yanacocha: “Haremos valer nuestros derechos” El Cajamarquino, Marzo 2013 50 Solo con coraje, La lucha contra la empresa más grande del mundo, El Cajarquino, Edicion 4, 2013

11

only contained errors of law and fact but it had ignored the consideration of fundamental evidence that was favourable to the family.51 A new trial is currently underway, however the family still face discrimination. Maxima reports that the state’s Public Prosecutor has on various occasions tried to confuse the family and that evidence submitted in a previous case by the Public Prosecutor is now being used by Yanacocha’s lawyers. Questioning the impartiality of the state’s legal representatives.52 Furthermore, gender discrimination has made it hard for Maxima to access the legal system. On previous occasions, she has been refused attendance at the Cajamarca police station when she attempted to make denunciations against mining staff and DINOES. On one occasion (22nd of May 2012) she was made to wait for over five hours before she was attended. Maxima states that the Police are extremely aggressive to her and as a result she is often scared to report incidents of abuses and harassment by mining staff and DINOES. On the 5th May 2014, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights granted protection measures to forty-six community leaders including Maxima and her family.53 These protection measures are still waiting implementation. In face of the on-going harassment and intimidation, Maxima’s lawyer, Dr Mirtha Vazquez, has requested on several occasions protection measures to the Cajamarca Governor, however her communications have been rejected.

51 First victory for the Chaupe Family! , Congaconflict.wordpress, 2013 52 Mineria y fiscalia intercmbian pruebas y las presentan como propias, Vilma Rodriquez, Youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V648Sdd21cM&feature=youtu.be 53 Comision Interamericana de Derechos Humanos Resolucion, No 452-11 9/2014, 5th May 2014 http://www.derechoysociedad.org/IIDS/Rondas_Campesinas/CIDH/CIDH_Medida-Cautelar-Rondas-Campesinas_Conga_7-de-mayo-de-2014.pdf

12

VI. Recommendations ULAM recommends that the UN working group:

• Identify rural and indigenous women as the most vulnerable within societies affected by the extractive industry.

• Acknowledge that the extractive industry needs to have a gendered approach

at all levels of policy.

• Identify that a platform for women is needed to allow their participation in consultations. Their voices continue to be overlooked and ignored even though mining has a catastrophic impact on their lives.

• Identify that the extractive industry endangers women’s ability to enjoy their

rights and offer suitable guidelines to the extractive industry and governments so that women’s rights are upheld.

• Set recommendations for full transparency of all monetary transactions

between mining companies and all parties.

• Investigate the oppression and violence that rural and indigenous women human rights defenders face when opposing the extractive industry.

• Work on strategies to ensure that mining companies are held accountable for

their effects on communities, and particularly on women.

ULAM is happy to assist the UN working group if further information is needed. Signed

Melissa Wong Daniel Rowe Regional Representative Regional Representative Melissa@redulam.org Dan@redulam.org Organisations and emblematic women that are members of the network

• Asociación de Mujeres Protectoras de los Paramos (Perú) • Centro de Mujeres Indígenas Aymaras Candelaria (Bolivia) • Frente de Mujeres Defensoras de la Pachamama (Ecuador) • Asociación de Mujeres en Defensa de la Vida (Peru) • Frente de Mujeres Guardianas de la Amazonía (Ecuador) • Fundación Mujeres del Agua (Venezuela) • Homo et Natura (Venezuela) • Organización Intibucana de Mujeres Las Hormigas (Honduras) • Margarita Perez Anchiraico (Peru) • Zenaida Romero Romero (Venezuela) • Yolanda O’queli (Guatemala)

13

Additional Resources Below is a list of films, photographs and articles that provide evidence for the cases.

CASE ONE: AMUPPA 1. Peru: Undermining Justice, Al Jazeera, 2012

A documentary about the 2005 torture and kidnapping incident. http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/peopleandpower/2012/05/20125311829466420.html

2. Peruvian torture claimants compensated by UK mining company, Leigh Day, 2011. PDF report. http://business-humanrights.org/sites/default/files/media/documents/monterrico-metals-20-july-2011.pdf

3. British mining company faces damages claim after allegations of torture in Peru, The Guardian, 2009. Video showing images of the 2005 torture and kidnapping incident and article about the legal case. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/oct/18/peru-monterrico-metals-mining-protest

4. Photograph of protesters during kidnapping in 2005. Source: LAMMP

14

CASE TWO: MAXIMA ACUNA DE CHAUPE 1. Maxima

A documentary about the attacks and abuses faced by Maxima and her family including the video recorded by Ysidora Chaupe during the 2011 eviction. CineColectivoPE, 2014 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SjZ1VQEcaY&feature=youtu.be

A snap shot taken from the documentary showing DINOES and machinery on Maxima’s land.

2. Photograph of Maxima and her injury after the 2011 forced eviction. New Internationalist, 2011

15

3. Medical certificate indicating Maxima’s physical injuries from the forced

eviction in 2011.

4. Photograph of DINOES on Maxima’s land, 2013

MINISTERIO PUBLICO INSTITUTO DE MEDICINA LEGAL

DIVISON MEDICO LEGAL DE CELENDIN

t-ecna:

Hora: 18:37

R M L A D U L T O S

CERTIFICADO MEDICO LEGAL N°: 000779 - L SOLICITADO POR: S E G U N D A FISCALIA PROVINCIAL P E N A L DE c T í ^ D I N N° DE oTi^i^^^^^:^^^ PRACTICADO A: ACUÑA A T A L A Y A MAXIMA «.^v^ _

SEXO: F E M E N I N O

EDAD: 41 Años DOCUMENTO DE IDENTIDADnento Nacional de Identidad 80053194

P O R : Lesiones

D A T A :

F E C H A : 11/08/11 H O R A ' 1 8 - 0 0 R E F I E R E A G R E S I O N FISICA POR D E S C O N O C I D O S , QUIENE S LO G O l P F A M r n M - P A , no» R E F I E R E NO ATENCION MEDICA. • ̂ ^ ' c ' ^ ^ ^ L U üULPEAN C O N P A L O S " .

LOS PERITOS QUE SUSCRIBEN CERTIFICAN AL EXAMEN MEDICO PRESENTA:

B ™ ° Z ¿ ™ ^ ^ DE 10 X 8 C M EN REGION DE C A R A P O S T E R I O R, TERCIO MEDIO D E

B ™ ° T R E C H 0 ° ' ° " DE 7 X 7 C M EN R E G I O N DE C A R A P O S T E R I O R, TERCIO MEDIO DE

^ ^ ^ l i l S ^ I S ^ l ^ ^ X 2 C M Y DE 5 X 2 C M EN REGION DE C A R A ANTERIOR, T E R C O

E Q U I M O S I S DE C O L O R V I O L A C E O DE 3 X 3 C M E N R E G I O N DE RODILLA D F R P r w A

E X C O R I A C I O N LINEAL DE 3 C M EN R E G I O N L U M B A R DEL L A D O D E R E C H S CONCLUSIONES:

P R E S E N T A H U E L L A S DE L E S I O N E S T R A U M A T I C A S R E C I E N T E S

ATENCION FACULTATIVA: 01 Uno

INCAPACIDAD MEDICO LEGAL 06 Seis día r=í̂ Q A . o ^ . , ^ ,

a'a(s) SALVO COMPLICACIONES: ( X )

- 5 ? í M E D I C O L E G A L •cUsti pAljiLOS ENRIQUEZALAÉAR CAStAÑEDA >

CMP: 4f •<:s<^..-'<' DNI: 40^86629 '¿c^"' Domicilio Legal:,¿IR. GRAU 800

„ '^ 'ÑíSTERÍo'FnBUC^ 2tta FISCALIA PROVINCIAL PENAL CORPORATIVA

DE CELENDIN !

Recb|-dopor:__ \-

Hora.- 9',-^,% \: T ' ^ V x

MINISTERIO PUBLICO INSTITUTO DE MEDICINA LEGAL

DIVISON MEDICO LEGAL DE CELENDIN

Fecha: 16/08/2011

Hora: 18:41

RML NIÑO Y A D O L E S C E N T E

CERTIFICADO MEDICO LEGAL N°: 000780 - L SOLICITADO POR: S E G U N D A FISCALIA PROVINCIAL P E N A L DE C E L E N D I N N° DE OFICIO 1220-2011

PRACTICADO A: C H A U P E A C U Ñ A JILDA SEXO: F E M E N I N O

DOCUMENTO DE IDENTIDAD:

POR: Lesiones

Sin Documento S.D. EDAD: 16 Años

DATA: F E C H A : 11/08/11 H O R A : 18:00. R E F I E R E A G R E S I O N FISICA P O R D E S C O N O C I D O S , Q U I E N E S LO A G R E D E N C O N " P A L O S " . R E F I E R E PERDIDA DE CONOCIIVIIENTO. R E F I E R E NO ATENCION MEDICA.

LOS PERITOS QUE SUSCRIBEN CERTIFICAN AL EXAMEN MEDICO PRESENTA:

EQUIMOSIS DE C O L O R V I O L A C E O DE 3 X 2 C M E N REGION PARIETA L DEL DEL LADO D E R E C H O .

CONCLUSIONES:

P R E S E N T A H U E L L A S DE L E S I O N E S T R A U M A T I C A S R E C I E N T E S .

ATENCION FACULTATIVA: 01 Uno

INCAPACIDAD MEDICO LEGAL 04 Cuatro día (s) SALVO COMPLICACIONES: ( X )

i ^¡S9!:^¡ÍT'^ f t:^RL0SEminUEJ:ALAz4R CASTAÑEDA

CMP: 49894 DNI: 4098^629

Domicilio Legal: jA. GRAU 800

; M I N I S T E R I O P U B L I C O ¡ ¿t-a H S C A L W PROVINCIAL PENAL CORPORATIVA

DE CELENniN

1 7 AGO 2011

icíbidopor: ^^X'c55=-~^ ,

r s ; _ _ ^ _ ' _ í ) _ ^ _Firma:

16

5. Photograph of bus load of DINOES outside Maxima’s home, February 2014

6. Photograph of mine workers and security staff outside Maxima’s home, 08th February 2014