İkinci dava:
Brezilya’da Madeira Nehri üzerinde mega baraj projeleri
BRAZIL– Construction of Megadams on the Madeira River
in the Amazonian state of Rondônia.
Case: Construction of Megadams on the Madeira River
in the Amazonian state of Rondônia, Republica Federativa do
Brasil and its possible impact on the communities of Karitiana,
Karipuna, Oro Bom, Cassupá, Salamai
and Uru-eu-Wau-Wau;
and isolated indigenous groups such as Katawixi and Mucuin
1)
General Aspects
Madeira River Hydrological Basin: 1,244.500 km2, constitutes
one of the Amazon River sub-basins and has tibutary rivers in
Brazilian, Peruvian and Bolivian territories. Upriver, there are the
Mamoré River (Bolivia) and Guaporé River (Brasil); and downriver,
the Amazon River, of which the Madeira River is a tributary, as
mentioned before.
2) Water problems denounced in the area
The Brazilian government intends to build two large dams for
hydroelectrical generation (Santo Antônio and Jirau) estimated at
271,3 km² and 258 km² respectively, in the Madeira River
transnational basin shared by Peru, Brazil and Bolivia. These
countries are members of the Intitiative for the Integration of a
South American Region Infrastructure (IIRSA), established in 2000.
These dams are part of the Acceleration Growth Plan (PAC),
considered of very high importance by the federal government of
Brazil.
General Characteristics of the projects described
Santo Antônio
Installed Potential: 3150 MW; it will be located 7 kilometres from
Porto Velho’s capital.
Height of the dam: 55 metres.
Total area of resulting reservoir: 271,3 km2.
Jirau
Installed Potetiall: 3300 MW, se construirá a 120 kilómetros de la
represa de Santo Antônio.
Height of the dam 35,5 metros.
Total area of resulting reservoir: 258 km2.
According to what is projected, both dams would together supply 8% of
Brazil’s energy demand. The capacity of these two dams almost
represents half of the energy generated by the dam of Itaipú. The
resolutions ANA No. 555 (for the Jirau project) and ANA No. 556 (for the
Santo Antônio project) grant rights-of-use of hydrological resources for
these dam projects.
The Madeira Consortium Energy S/A was identified as the one that
obtained the bidding for the Santo Antônio project, and it is formed by the
following companies: Oderbrecht Investimentos in Limited Infrastructure
(17, 6%), Constructora Norberto Orderbecht S.A. (1%); Andrade
Gutiérrez Participações S.A. (12.4%); CEMIG Geração e Transmissão S.A.
(10%), Furnas Centrais Elétricas S.A. (39%) and Fundo de Investimentos
e Participações Amazônia Energia (FIP, constituted by the banks BANIF
and Santander) (10%).
With respect to the Jirau project, the Consorcio Energía Sustentable do
Brasil (CESB), constituted by: Suez Energy South America Participações
Ltda. (50.1%); Camargo Strap Investimentos em Infra-Estrutura S/A
(9,9%); Eletrosul Centrais Elétricas S/A (20%); and Companhia Hidro
Elétrica do São Francisco (CHESF) (20%). It is estimated that both
hydroelectric projects must begin operation in 2012.
The Bolivian government, a country that shares the Madeira River basin,
appealed the project at the beginning of the preliminary informationgathering stage, given the proximity of the Jirau and Santo Antônio
projects to the Bolivian border (84 and 190 kilometers respectively).
Estimated cost of works: 9.672.720 and 9.300.076 million Brazilian
reales.
Denounced activity: Violations to the right of public participation in the
process of granting environmental license, by the indications of serious
environmental, national and cross-boundary damages; and by the threat
to physical and territorial integrity of indigenous towns and of isolated
indigenous groups.
Estimated cost of work: 9.672.720 and 9.300.076 million Brazilian
reales.
Demanding stakeholder: Associacao de Defesa Etnoambiental Kanindé
In opposition to: Federal Government of Brazil, through:
Advocacia Geral da Uniao (AGU)
Iniciativa para la Integración de la Infraestructura
Regional Sudamericana (IIRSA)
The Associacao de Defesa Etnoambiental Kanindé points out the
following social and environmental irregularities:

Public hearings providing information about the projects with the
local communities were unsatisfactory, especially, in regards to the social
issues involved.

Environmental impact studies of both projects neglectful as far as
the indirect impact to little known and isolated indigenous villages, such
as Karitiana, Karipuna, Gold Bom, Cassupá, Salamai, Uru-USA-Wau-Wau;
Katawixi and Mucuin were concerned.

Non-clarified points and unheeded social plans.

Exhaustion of possibilities for dialogue and social participation in
the process of decision-making regarding social and environmental
impacts.

Protests of civil groupings against bidding laws, and police
repression.

Questionings on the part of the Bolivian state, that indicates how
dams would invade (and flood) its territory, alter the hydrological regime
and threaten inhabited localities with flooding.

Incursion on indigenous populations, some of them isolated and
little known, as a result of the migration of workers searching to be
employed.

Violation of Art. 2º, item III of the FUNAI regulation that
establishes: to guarantee to the indigenous people and groups that are
isolated, the right to remain the way they are, maintaining the integrity of
their territory.
Possible social and environmental risks and damages associated
with the described irregularities

Threat of flooding communities located in the zone of dams, as
much in Brazilian as in Bolivian territory.

Damages to isolated indigenous villages in the states of Rondônia
and Amazonas, their culture, freedom and protection of their physical
limits.

Collateral consequences in aquatic biodiversity, fishing (i.e.
catfishes), sources of sustenance and nutrients for the river-edge
populations, health and tourism.

Alteration in the hydrological cycle of the Madeira River near the
dams.

Potential for an international conflict, in which the Bolivian State
has indicated its disposition to obtain international justice on this subject,
given the possibility of inter-state and international cross-boundary
damages, as much in its neighboring Amazon state as in Bolivia.

Deterioration of the economic conditions of approximately 2,400
fishermen from the state of Rondônia, as a result of the alteration of biotic
communities in the river. Fishing here contributes 5 to 6 million tons of
fish daily to the city of Porto Velho.

Loss of agricultural production for the populations based
downriver from the dams, due to the loss of annual deposition of fertile
mud sediments on flooded plains.

Significant flooding of great extensions of the Amazonian forest
given the dimensions of the dams, with loss of biodiversity and
infringement of species in danger of extinction (i.e. jaguar, Panther onca).

Flooding of indigenous lands, and of historical and archaeological
patrimony.

Loss of traditional means of subsistence.
Documented evidence presented by the Associacao de Defesa
Etnoambiental Kanindé
Institutional actions

Work-plan: Arranged activities for the regions where references
of isolated indigenous peoples exist that will be affected by the Santo
Antônio dam. Fundação Nacional do Índio; Diretoria de Assistência
Coordenação Geral dos Índios Isolados. Ministério da Justiça.
Management of denouncers

Open letter to civil society institutions about the judging for the
denunciation of violations of constitutional indigenous rights by the
Madeira River energy power complex project before an instance of
environmental justice.
Maps

Maps of hydrographic river basins, with Amazon trans-boundary
tributary rivers.
Legal frame

Chapter VIII, artícle 231 of the Federal Constitution of the Federal
republic of Brazil.

Law Nº 8.183/1991.

Portarias No. 260, 268, 269, 272, 274, 281, 290, 292 y 294/PRES
given by FUNAI (20/04/2000).
On September 11, 2008 the Latin American Water Tribunal jury attended
this case in the public hearing “hydrological justice in the lands and
territories of indigenous towns,” that took place in Antigua, Guatemala.
The released verdict censors the Brazilian government for ignoring
indigenous rights when not applying the OIT’s Agreement 169, and due to
the intention to construct works having great social and environmental
impact, which will have a useful life of less than 50 years (see verdict).