Infrastructure projects frequently spark intricate discussions when they impact indigenous peoples, particularly on matters involving land, prior consultation, and safeguarding collective rights. Across Latin America, a case that drew notable attention involved the Ngöbe Buglé communities in Panama, who were affected by the development 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.
The main themes of the report on 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.
Principal Insights into the Rights of the Ngöbe Buglé Communities
Among the most relevant conclusions, the report highlights an initial failure to recognize rights, particularly regarding the legal status of the communities and the collective ownership of their lands. This gap allowed the project to proceed without adequate consultation processes or sufficient studies on its social and cultural impact.
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 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 key aspects of the work was that the report could serve as input for a potential case brought before the Inter-American human rights system. In that sense, the collection of testimonies and the review of documents were key to building a case with international standing. “It was important to generate useful evidence in case the Inter-American Court decided to open the case. That is why we collected testimonies, identified patterns of conduct, reviewed the relocation contracts, and analyzed recent legislative reforms,” explains Loreto Ferrer.
This kind of process demands meticulous record‑keeping, thorough technical evaluation, and the capacity to interpret both local conditions and the relevant international norms; as a result, the fieldwork and the drafting of the report are not treated as isolated tasks but as components of an evidence‑driven, legally grounded approach to international cooperation that takes into account complex social dynamics.
A Specific Case Within a Broader Context
Loreto Ferrer takes part in this mission through professional work rooted in international cooperation, technical reporting, and the examination of intricate cases across Latin America. This role goes beyond offering legal assistance for these procedures, involving efforts to ensure that community experiences are transformed into meaningful contributions for institutional advocacy and rights protection.
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.
