Imagine, one morning people come to your home claiming to be from the government. They call a community meeting with no advance notice. They talk about a project that will benefit your family. They ask you to register your attendance by writing your name and signing a form to confirm that you were there and heard what they said. It doesn’t matter if it wasn’t in your language; the important thing is that your signature is there to validate that the event took place. They take photos and record the meeting.
Then comes the silence.
You’ve forgotten about the event when suddenly you find out that your nation’s territory in the rainforest, your home, has been given away through a state concession. Soon, an oil company will be there. And they claim that you gave them your consent.
The experience above has been described numerous times in testimony from seven Indigenous nations in the Ecuadorian Amazon. Each community’s testimony is strikingly similar, painting the picture of a systematic strategy by the Ecuadorian government to pave the way for lucrative extractive projects, like oil and mining, within ancestral territories without proper consultation and the consent of those who inhabit them: the Indigenous communities of Ecuador’s southeastern Amazon. This is a violation of their rights.
Our team has traced this specific strategy back to 2011, when the government modified an oil registry—an official registry of potential oil reserves for investors to exploit—without prior consultation. It demarcated 21 new oil blocks in the southeastern Amazon, home to seven Indigenous nationalities.
Indigenous leaders immediately started to fight back. In June 2012, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights issued a ruling in favor of the Kichwa Indigenous People of Sarayaku, also in the Pastaza region of Ecuador. The ruling established that the Ecuadorian State had violated their rights by authorizing oil exploration activities in their territory without conducting a free, prior, and informed consultation. It also concluded that these actions by the State infringed on the Kichwas’ rights to collective property and cultural identity, and their right to life and personal integrity.
The ruling was celebrated as a step forward for Indigenous rights. It gave those fighting against the southeastern oil blocks tools to halt the next planned round of exploitation and to protect their right to Free Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC), a fundamental right recognized by Convention 169 of the International Labor Organization (ILO), the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and the Ecuadorian Constitution.
Then, one month after the international ruling, in July 2012, the government issued Executive Decree 1247.
The decree represented a major step back in the Indigenous fight for their right to protect their territory. It arbitrarily established norms for prior consultation in the hydrocarbon sector, which encompasses oil extraction. It also bypassed a constitutionally mandated procedure to obtain consent from the people before establishing such norms. Most glaringly, given the timing, it failed to meet the standards for prior consultation that had just been established in the Inter-American court case of Sarayaku. Plus, it was issued after the decision to tender the oil blocks had already been made in Quito, without the consent of the true owners of the territory.
In other words, Decree 1247 was a blatant flex of power and an attempt to turn the prior consultation process into a mere publicity stunt. Its effects continue to be felt.
Implementing a Dangerous Decree
In August 2012, the “prior consultation” process laid out in Decree 1247 was set in motion. In reality, the process consisted of the one-time administration of express consultations that lasted just two months. By November 2012, the government had already announced a bidding process, under the name “XI Oil Round” or “Southeast Oil Round,” for 13 of the 21 oil blocks demarcated the previous year, without the legitimate consent of the affected Indigenous nations.
Over the next six years, the government allocated various oil blocks, but they were unable to start any exploration or extraction processes within them because of Indigenous resistance. In 2018, then-president Lenin Moreno announced the reopening of the Oil Round to generate new interest from investors.
Moreno’s announcement motivated the Waorani communities of Pastaza, along with their traditional authorities (Pikenani) and OWAP (Waorani Organization of Pastaza), to file a lawsuit against the State in 2019. They accused the State of acting in bad faith, with deceit, and in violation of the Indigenous nations’ right to free, prior, and informed consultation regarding future oil operations in Block 22, which would affect their ancestral territories.
In the 2019 Waorani of Pastaza case (case 1296-19JP), the court ruled in favor of the Indigenous plaintiffs, determining that they had not been consulted in 2012. The Court held that the Ecuadorian government would thereafter be prohibited from carrying out any hydrocarbon bidding, exploration, or exploitation activities in the half a million acres that make up Block 22.
This year we confirmed the suspicion that the fight didn’t end with that ruling 2019, when current President Daniel Noboa announced his intention to reactivate the bidding process based on the same bogus consultations from 2012. Why would the government even take the risk of opening an auction based on debunked claims of consent? The reason is clear: Ecuador’s Constitutional Court is failing to act.
When the Waorani communities of Pastaza won their case in 2019, a ruling was made on Block 22, and it was limited to that block. The Constitutional Court took up the case in 2020, in order to establish jurisprudence that would further define the rights of all Indigenous Peoples in Ecuador. They could set a clear legal precedent and declare that the only actors who can decide what happens in ancestral territories are Indigenous Peoples and nationalities. But after five years, they have not ruled on the case. The government is now using the inaction of the Court as an opportunity.
With President Noboa’s reactivation of the bidding process, Indigenous nations now face imminent invasion by oil companies and are demanding that the Constitutional Court finally address the case on their docket with the hope that this will further enshrine FPIC in Ecuador’s constitution. The nations are calling for a hearing in their territory that guarantees intercultural dialogue and in which the voices of all seven nations will be heard. They have all had their rights violated through deceptive “consultations” that disrespected their organizational structures.
No such hearing is guaranteed, but even without it, these Indigenous nations are ensuring that their voices are heard by the judges. This year, all seven Indigenous nations submitted amicus curiae briefs to the Constitutional Court for consideration in the adjudication of the 2019 Waorani Resistance case (1296-19JP).
The briefs speak volumes.
Amazon Frontlines recently analyzed the testimonies. We found a clear pattern of deceit, manipulation, and violation of fundamental rights.
A Pattern is Further Exposed
Amicus curiae briefs (solidarity briefs) for the Waorani of Pastaza case (case 1296-19JP) were submitted by:
- The Achuar Nation of Ecuador (NAE)
- The Sapara Nation of Ecuador (NASE)
- The Shiwiar Nation of Ecuador (NASHIE)
- The Federation of the Shuar Nation of Pastaza (FENASH-P)
- The Kichwa Indigenous People of Sarayaku
- The Kichwa Nation of Pastaza (Pakkiru)
- The Andwa Nation of Ecuador (NAPE)
These briefs reveal a common pattern in the alleged prior consultations carried out to legitimize the 2012 Southeastern Oil Round. The Ecuadorian government systematically applied tactics of deception and manipulation including:
- Biased Publicity. This tactic was used to present oil exploitation to communities as a fait accompli that cannot be rejected, reducing the consultation process to a mere administrative formality.
The most glaring example: A map was published and disseminated, showing oil blocks already drawn over entire territories of Indigenous nations, prior to their “consultations.”
- Public Hearings Held Outside the Affected Territories. These hearings prevented the effective participation of Indigenous communities, who can only leave their territories by river, on foot, or by air, which entails high economic costs. The hearings were held in parishes or cantonal capitals located far from the communities.
In the case of the Sapara, Ecuador’s Secretary of Hydrocarbons (SHE) installed one “office of consultation”, where communities had to go to receive information about the oil project. That office was in the community of Masaramu, which is 1/2 hour from the communities of Ripanu, Jandiaycu, Tsitsanu, and 1.5 hours from Nima Muricha, navigating along the Conambo river. The community’s participation was dependent on the availability of canoes and fuel needed for the trip.
- Negotiations with Illegitimate Representatives. Negotiations to enter the territories and agree on investments in the communities were held without the highest authorities or with illegitimate representatives seeking to claim representative power for the convenience of the State. State actors ignored traditional Indigenous organizational structures and did not negotiate with legitimate representatives.
In the case of the Shiwiar nation, investment agreements were signed by representatives, but none were in the name of NASHIE, the official representative of the Shiwiar communities.
- False Promises of Economic Incentives. These promises were used to generate internal divisions within Indigenous nations.
The government signed agreements with representatives, including illegitimate ones, promising millions of dollars in future social benefits (through projects controlled by the State) for communities.
- Falsification of Consultation Reports. Official reports were presented, indicating that the consultation was conducted adequately, despite evidence that the communities were not consulted in any meaningful way.
In SHE’s official report to Ecuador’s National Assembly regarding the oil blocks in Achuar territory, it claims to have conducted consultations in line with Ecuador’s own laws and regulations as well as international agreements regarding Indigenous rights.
Together, these systematic violations of the right to Free, Prior, and Informed Consultation detailed in the amicus curiae briefs show that the Ecuadorian State has implemented a strategy to impose extractive activities on Indigenous territories—and Indigenous nations will not stand for it. They demand:
- Recognition and respect for the self-determination of Indigenous Peoples and nations
- The nullification of fraudulent consultation processes and the review of concessions that have been granted
- Comprehensive reparation measures for affected communities
- Respect for the right to Free, Prior, and Informed Consent, which requires honoring the decisions of Indigenous Peoples regarding their territories
- Decision-making by the Constitutional Court, which includes listening to the nations in their territories and from their worldview
The current announcements about reactivating the Southeastern Oil Round have mobilized the Indigenous nations at risk. They are reaffirming their position of rejecting the Ecuadorian National Government’s plans. Aware of the government’s strategy of deceit, they are sending a message, loud and clear, to those who, up until now, have chosen not to hear them:
We have already said, “No.” No, you cannot enter our territories. No, you will not enter our homes.
Amazon Frontlines is supporting the Waorani people of Pastaza in their case before the Constitutional Court and stands with Indigenous nations in their fight against the Southeastern Oil Auction.
Below, we share access to the amicus curiae briefs in full, as well as representative cases of the Indigenous nations fighting to stop oil drilling before it starts in the South-Central Amazon of Ecuador.
Amicus briefs (in Spanish): Achuar Nation of Ecuador, Sapara Nation of Ecuador, Shiwiar Nation of Ecuador, Kichwa Indigenous People of Sarayaku, Kichwa Nation of Pastaza, Federation of the Shuar Nation of Pastaza and Confederation of Indigenous Nations of the Ecuadorian Amazon.
Representative Cases Detailed in the Amicus Briefs
Achuar Nation of Ecuador (NAE): In 2012, Ecuador’s Secretary of Hydrocarbons (SHE) reported that no consultation processes had been carried out because the communities resisted and did not allow them. From 2011 to 2015, several Achuar assembly resolutions were issued rejecting consultations and extractivism. However, in 2015, Decree 1247 was applied in blocks 74 and 75 within the Achuar nation’s territories, violating the right to consent.
Sapara Nation of Ecuador (NASE): The Sapara territory is recognized by UNESCO as Oral and Intangible Heritage of Humanity. The social fabric of this nation was ruptured when organizations that did not have legitimate authority were created, and the government signed investment agreements with them. The consultation in blocks 79 and 83 was deceitful, with meetings held in communities outside the affected area, and the main communities of the Sapara Nation were excluded from participation.
Shiwiar Nation of Ecuador (NASHIE): The government imposed consultation in blocks 80 and 81, which cover the entire Shiwiar territory. The supposed consultation involved only two of the fourteen existing communities, excluding the participation of the majority of the population and violating the Shiwiar Nation’s right to self-determination. Despite not having carried out any meaningful consultation process in block 86, the Ministry of Energy currently indicates that the block’s population has been consulted.
Kichwa Indigenous People of Sarayaku: The Sarayaku case was emblematic in the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR). In 2012, the IACtHR established the standard of consent and denounced Ecuador’s violations of the right to consultation. However, the Ecuadorian State continued to impose new oil blocks on Kichwa territories without honoring the Kichwas’ right to self-determination.
Kichwa Nation of Pastaza (Pakkiru): An oil bidding plan was disseminated in some communities without the knowledge of the Kichwa people of Pastaza as a whole, thus negating the Kichwas’ longstanding process of reclaiming their territory as Kawsaky Sacha (Living Forest). Currently, extractive activities are being carried out in other blocks through deception and the co-optation of leaders.
Andwa Nation of Ecuador (NAPE): In blocks 80 and 81, while deceitful consultation processes were carried out with the Andwa Nation’s legitimate organizing bodies, parallel, illegitimate organizations were created; then the State signed investment agreements with these parallel organizations, though they did not have legitimate authority. This action caused a profound rupture in the social fabric of the community, the negative effects of which persist to this day.
