A local missionary is a key backer of the route, which would traverse the remote, unspoiled Peruvian Amazon. Greens and rights groups disagree.
The Peruvian congress is set to debate putting a road
through a remote, protected part of the Amazon that is home to some of the last
fully isolated indigenous tribes anywhere in the world.
The highly controversial freeway would cut through an
indigenous reserve and a national park in the jungle departments of Ucayali and
Madre de Dios, on Peru’s southern border with Brazil. It would link the towns
of Puerto Esperanza and Inapari.
Environmental and indigenous groups fiercely oppose the
road, fearing it will pave the way for illegal loggers, poachers and land
squatters to devastate both the rainforest and the native communities who live
there.
“It is not illegal to do this in Peru, but it completely
contradicts the laws protecting uncontacted tribes, as well as environmental
laws,” Rebecca Spooner, of Survival International, a British group that
supports tribal peoples around the world, told GlobalPost.
“Officially declaring the road 'a national necessity' is
basically exploiting a legal loophole to override the normal protections in
place in national parks and reserves, which state that roads should not be
built.”
The draft bill appears to have a real chance of becoming
law. It has been signed by 30 of the 130 members of Peru’s single-chamber
congress. They include Rolando Reategui, the spokesman of the right-wing
opposition Fujimorista grouping, the second largest with 37 seats.
It was drafted in April but has flown under the radar of
national and international media until now, a relatively common occurrence in
Peru thanks to congress’ lack of transparency.
“This shows, once again, the lack of respect towards the culture,
rights and stated wishes of the native population of the Peruvian Amazon,”
Roger Muro, lawyer of local indigenous federation FECONAPU, told GlobalPost.
The local population is more than 90 percent indigenous
and overwhelmingly opposes the road, he added.
But the text of the bill argues that the poverty of local
indigenous and settler communities can only be addressed if they are integrated
with the rest of Peru by a road link. Currently, the region can only be reached
by light aircraft or boat.
The text claims the region of 5,000 people (excluding the
isolated tribes) suffers infant mortality at a rate of 32 percent and
illiteracy of 34 percent. The bill criticizes green groups for not
acknowledging that “in this world there exist national parks such as
Yellowstone … which are crossed by super highways that allow millions of
visitors.”
It also argues that a road is needed to “consolidate” the
border zone with Brazil. The text claims that many local families prefer to
cross the frontier to give birth to their children on Brazilian soil. That
would allow them better access to certain benefits a Brazilian nationality can
offer, including schools and hospitals.
The main driving force behind the proposed road is a
Spanish missionary, Father Miguel Piovesan, who has been working in the region
for more than a decade.
He declined a phone interview with GlobalPost but, by
email, asked: “Is the possible impact of a land connection less than the impact
and suffering that the current state of isolation causes?”
Many local indigenous communities reject that argument,
as well as the notion that integration with the rest of Peru is even desirable.
“No one can oblige us to draw closer [to the rest of
Peru],” Alfredo del Aguila, from the Purus indigenous reserve, told La
Republica newspaper recently. In addition to that reserve, the road would also
bisect the Alto Purus National Park, the largest in Peru.
More from GlobalPost: Warmer seas are blamed for Peru's
bird carnage
If congress approves the bill authorizing the road, it
would also appear to violate Peru’s new Law of Prior Consultation, which
stipulates that indigenous communities must be consulted before infrastructure
projects are built on their land. That measure was signed into law by President
Ollanta Humala last year in the highly symbolic location of Bagua, a town in
the northern Peruvian Amazon.
In 2009, more than 30 police officers and indigenous
protesters are thought to have died during clashes in Bagua. The protesters
opposed measures proposed by Humala’s predecessor, Alan Garcia, that they
argued would have further opened indigenous land to loggers and oil companies.
Survival International director Stephen Corry described
the proposed road as “suspicious,” and implied it would only benefit loggers
and others unsustainably ransacking the rainforest for economic gain.
“This ‘we know what’s best for you’ attitude is not only
patronizing, it’s deadly, as the last 500 years of colonialism and
‘development’ of indigenous lands has shown,” he said in a statement.
The proposed road is not the first time Peruvian authorities
have attempted to skirt protections for reserves and parks in the Amazon in the
name of economic development.
In 2007, the Garcia government floated the idea of
lopping off 516,000 acres of the massive Bahuaja Sonene National Park to allow
gas drilling in the area. The government was quickly forced to back down after
a major international outcry.
The fact that Peru was in the process of negotiating a
trade treaty with the United States, with members of the US Congress already
concerned about the country’s lack of environmental safeguards, is thought to
have played a determining role.