Our website use cookies to improve and personalize your experience and to display advertisements(if any). Our website may also include cookies from third parties like Google Adsense, Google Analytics, Youtube. By using the website, you consent to the use of cookies. We have updated our Privacy Policy. Please click on the button to check our Privacy Policy.

Technical Analysis of Ngöbe Buglé by Loreto Ferrer Moreu

Loreto Ferrer Moreu and the technical analysis of the Ngöbe Buglé case before international bodies

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 part of the team of experts that participated in a verification mission organized by the Foundation of the General Council of Spanish Lawyers (FCGAE). The fieldwork carried out made it possible to document the situation of the communities and prepare a legal and technical report on the project’s impacts, with special attention to its potential progression before inter-American human rights bodies.

The assessment mission in Panama

The mission occurred from January 25 to 30, 2011, bringing together lawyers with expertise in human rights. Its aim was to assess firsthand the conditions faced by communities impacted by the dam’s construction and to contrast institutional reports with the population’s direct accounts. To accomplish this, the team met with authorities, representatives of the company responsible for the project, international organizations, and the Ombudsman’s Office, before heading to Changuinola, in the province of Bocas del Toro, to inspect the affected zones.

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 analysis was organized around five main areas: the right to consultation and free, prior, and informed consent; the assessment of risks and the project’s social impact; territorial restitution or compensation; reparation measures; and community participation in decisions and benefits derived from hydroelectric development. These pillars allowed the case to be addressed from a comprehensive perspective, combining the national and international legal framework with the reality observed on the ground.

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.

Key Findings on the Rights of the Ngöbe Buglé Communities

The report underscores among its key findings an early shortfall in acknowledging rights, especially concerning the communities’ legal standing and their collective land ownership, a lapse that enabled the project to advance without proper consultation or thorough assessments of its social and cultural effects.

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 potential path through international bodies

One of the central elements of the work was ensuring that the report could function as supporting input for a potential case presented before the Inter-American human rights system, so gathering testimonies and reviewing documents became essential for shaping a claim with international relevance. “It was crucial to produce evidence that could be useful if the Inter-American Court chose to take up the case, which is why testimonies were compiled, behavioral patterns were identified, relocation contracts were examined, and recent legislative changes were assessed,” explains Loreto Ferrer.

This type of process requires rigorous documentation, technical analysis, and the ability to interpret both the local context and applicable international standards. Therefore, rather than a one-off intervention, the fieldwork and the preparation of the report are part of an approach to international cooperation based on evidence, legal analysis, and an understanding of complex social realities.

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.

Viewed collectively, the Ngöbe Buglé case and the analysis of Chan 75 show that technical teams can substantially influence how disputes involving land, indigenous peoples, development projects, and international institutions are evaluated.

By Emily Roseberg

You May Also Like