Infrastructure projects often raise complex debates when they affect indigenous communities, especially regarding issues related to territory, prior consultation, and the protection of collective rights. In Latin America, one of the cases that garnered particular attention was that of the Ngöbe Buglé communities in Panama, affected by the construction 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 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 explored communities like Charco de la Pava and Valle del Rey, along with resettlement zones and areas already transformed by the construction work. Direct engagement with families and community leaders remained a key element of the effort, offering immediate insight into the tension, vulnerability, and displacement many people had faced since the project began.
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 was designed to lay out a well-documented legal foundation intended to assist both the impacted communities and the institutions involved. Its purpose went beyond raising theoretical objections to the project; it sought to determine whether the actions of state authorities and corporations had upheld the essential rights of indigenous peoples, including collective land ownership, participation, cultural and personal integrity, and the requirement of prior consultation.
Key Findings on 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 particularly sensitive issue was the moral and cultural impact of displacement. The case documentation revealed damage to the community fabric, a loss of territorial references, and a demand for public recognition of the harm caused, beyond material reparations.
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 participation in this mission reflects a type of professional work linked to international cooperation, technical documentation, and the analysis of complex cases in Latin America. It is not merely a matter of providing legal support for these processes, but also of helping ensure that the communities’ experiences can be translated into useful inputs for institutional advocacy and the defense of rights.
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.