In: Home > DOSSIER > Chile's democratic deficit in relations with Indigenous Peoples
Languages: ENG | DEU | ESP | ITA
By Anita Perricone
Bolzano/Bozen, September 2011
Contents
Abstract
This article reviews the current situation of indigenous peoples
in Chile, two years after the entry into force of ILO Convention
No 169. Through six hypotheses, an attempt to explain the
existence of a democratic deficit in the relationship between the
Chilean State and indigenous peoples is made. Such a deficit was
recently diagnosed by the international monitoring system, but is
rooted in the transition to a poorly plural democracy. The clash
between the developments made on indigenous rights in
international law and the instruments created to apply such
standards in national law is analyzed, as well as the application
of international standards by national Courts. Finally, the
public opinion's perception of the state of advancement of
indigenous rights in Chile is commented, while speculations on
future developments are made in conclusion.
Mapuche activists protest during a
Process in front of Tribunal of Victoria, Chile. Photo: Massimo
Falqui Massidda.
Chile is, generally, considered "a good student, in the messy
classroom that is Latin America" ( 1 ). It
shifted from the longest dictatorship in Latin-America
(1973-1989) to a stable democracy, while maintaining a
fast-growing economy along more than two decades, which allowed
governments to effectively fight poverty. Moreover, Chile has
signed many free trade agreements and has recently entered the
OECD group of developed countries (December 2009), being the
first South-American country to do so. While even the atrocities
committed under Pinochet's dictatorship have finally been
recognized, there's still one problematic national reality that
obscures the goals reached by democratic governments: it is the
State's relationship to indigenous peoples, which remains an
extremely delicate and still unresolved issue.
Chile's performance in the implementation of international
treaties on indigenous rights has been seriously insufficient.
This is demonstrated by the recent call for a new country report,
to be submitted by the government to the International Labor
Office within September 2011. Implementation procedures of the
different international obligations derived from international
documents on indigenous rights (especially from ILO Convention
169 and the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples)
at national level were not applied in good faith. What are the
reasons of the country's difficulties in applying indigenous
rights? Is it just a lack of political will, or are these
difficulties due to a more general problem that is affecting
Chile's democracy?
Chile still seems "immature" to be able to duly and fully apply
indigenous rights. Its young democracy may be passing through a
difficult phase, similar to adolescence and characterized by
acute rebel tendencies. The next few paragraphs contain six
hypotheses, which will help reconstructing the range of possible
reasons that contributed to Chile's failure to comply with the
obligations taken under international law. Through these
hypotheses I will attempt to describe the "pluralism deficit"
that, notwithstanding the good reputation of the Chilean
democratic system, is to be observed in the country's
relationship with indigenous peoples.
The problem of the implementation of international human
rights goes to the very nature of international law, a consensual
arrangement based on reciprocity, which realization requires
cooperation from politicians. "The report system is the prevalent
system for overseeing the realization of human rights in
Contracting States. For many, this is cited as a reason why human
rights, indeed even international law, lack teeth. However, the
benefit of the system lies in publicity: many States are
reluctant to be identified as an example of bad practice on the
international arena." ( 2 )
According to Article 22 of the ILO Constitution, a State party to
an ILO Convention shall submit reports to the International Labor
Office on the implementation of the provisions of that
Convention. An initial report shall be submitted after one year
from ratification, and then present periodical reports (every
five years), unless the Committee requests the submission of
additional reports in certain situations. The Committee of
Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations
(CEACR), the main supervisory body of the organization, analyzes
the reports submitted by States. Every year, the Committee issues
an Annual Report with observations on the application of ILO
Conventions by State-Parties.
No proper sanctions are foreseen for States' failure to comply
with international human rights treaties as is ILO Convention
169. The Annual Report, together with representations by workers'
and employers' organizations to the International Labor Office
and State complaints of non-observance (Articles 24 and 26 of the
ILO Constitution, respectively), are the only "soft sanctions"
applicable to States that do not apply the Convention's
provisions. However, as the Chilean case demonstrates, the power
of publicity and of that set of values on which the international
system is based (centered on good faith), resides in the creation
of a system of "checks and balances" through which the
supervisory bodies of international organizations check the
States' compliance, and publish the results of their supervisory
action.
The fact that Chile has been called to repeat its exam before the
Committee of Experts in 2011 is a clear message that its
application of ILO Convention 169 has been insufficient, and
clearly unmasks the lack of political will to comply with
international standards on indigenous peoples' rights and, as I
suggest, a deeper problem of the young Chilean democracy.
The paradox of the Chilean democratic transition consists in
the engagement with democratic institutions (since 1990) while
maintaining an insufficient degree of pluralism, as well as
ineffective channels for participation of certain social
sectors.
While, during the dictatorship, the Mapuche were an oppressed
social group among others, the democratic transition seemed to
imply the opening of a new era in relations between indigenous
peoples and the State. The Agreement of Nueva Imperial (1989), in
which the left-wing candidate to the Presidency and future
President Patricio Aylwin promised to amend the Chilean
Constitution for adding a recognition of indigenous peoples'
rights, to ratify ILO Convention 169, to create a Special
Commission for the elaboration of an Indigenous Law and to create
a special body for indigenous peoples' representation within the
State (the future National Corporation for Indigenous
Development, CONADI), created many hopes and expectations.
However, the Agreement revealed to be more functional to
electoral propaganda than to the substantial improvement of
indigenous peoples' situation.
Although the creation of the Indigenous Law No 19.253 (1993),
whose provisions were supposedly inspired by the adoption of ILO
Convention 169, was initially regarded as a great success for the
renewal of relations between the State and indigenous peoples,
its application revealed the Law's weaknesses, starting to
generate frustration since its early years. Especially the
insufficient effectiveness of the provisions on political and
participation rights, and of those concerning land and control
over natural resources, generated indigenous peoples'
dissatisfaction and frustration with the Law. Such sentiments,
increased by the State's insistence in marginalizing its native
peoples, lead to the breakout of a new kind of social protest
related to indigenous claims. ( 3 )
The Chilean democratic transition created a weak democracy,
characterized by a lack of pluralism. Democracy should not just
imply elections, but also an adequate level of pluralism in
order, at least, to allow indigenous peoples' aspirations to
intervene and participate in the democratic decision-making
process. Instead, Chile is nowadays characterized by a class of
political elites, cut off from citizenry in practice, which
renders the whole political life an empty process.
In other words, representation of indigenous peoples did not find
a place within the process of transition to democracy initiated
by Chile in 1989. Given the fact that real pluralism is still an
underdeveloped aspect of the Chilean political life, it could be
affirmed that, due to democratic immaturity, rather than just
political unwillingness, the country's democracy is not capable
of applying indigenous rights appropriately.
The last decades have seen the making of a series of efforts,
at the international level, towards the reestablishment of
indigenous peoples' dignity and equality with respect to the rest
of society. These efforts started mainly within two different
forums: the United Nations Organization (UNO) and the
International Labor Organization (ILO). Within the former, there
was a shift from individual to collective rights, which was
mediated by the insertion of the right to self-determination in
Article 1 common to the International Covenants of 1966, the one
on political and civil rights and the other on economic, social
and cultural rights. UN bodies and forums initially lacked
participative instances open to indigenous peoples'
representatives. This changed with the establishment of the
Working Group on Indigenous Peoples (WGIP), which became the
largest UN forum ever, at least before the creation of the
Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues in 2000. Within the ILO, a
shift from an integrative approach (clearly reflected in
Convention No 107) to a more participative approach (reflected in
ILO Convention No 169) was pushed through. While indigenous
"populations" are the subject of the former Convention,
indigenous "peoples" are the protagonists in the latter. The
insertion of this term was crucial, since it recalls the exercise
of the right of self-determination. ( 4 )
These changes in focus, however, could not be easily transposed
to the national level in the Chilean case. Here, indigenous
peoples' participation within a pluralistic democracy is still
far from becoming reality. The long path towards the ratification
of ILO Convention 169, which was marked by various attempts to
challenge the instrument's constitutionality (two controls of
constitutionality by the Constitutional Court and one
interpretative declaration), is just one sign of the reluctance
with which the Chilean institutionalism adopted, after twenty
years of debate, the most advanced binging instrument on
indigenous peoples' rights. The reticence in amending the
constitutional text in favor of the insertion of the recognition
of indigenous peoples and their rights is another important
message about the "Chilean way" to deal with the indigenous
peoples living within its borders.
The violation of numerous individual rights at national level,
moreover, adds to this reticence to recognize collective rights,
epitomized by the refusal of the term "peoples" both in the
Indigenous Law of 1993 ( 5 ) and in the
recognition of rights enshrined by the latest draft of the still
pending constitutional reform (2009). Among the most evident
violations of individual human rights there is that of equality
before the law, especially in the case of the Mapuche leaders
prosecuted under the Anti-Terrorist Law No 18.314 of 1984.
Prosecution of these individuals under this regulation
constitutes a blatant violation of the right to equality before
the law, especially since it is applied in a discriminatory way
against the Mapuche, and since this law should have been
modified, or better abrogated, a long time ago.
Clearly, there is a tension between the effort made by
international organizations for reestablishing the position of
the excluded and the national state of things that,
notwithstanding the passing of two decades since the end of the
dictatorship, has not established an adequate level of pluralism.
The contrast between (international) theory and (national)
practice is particularly evident in the case of the rights of
consultation and participation. The standards established by
international law seem to be too grandiose for being applied in
reality, at least in Chile. Here, Decree No 124 of the Ministry
of Planning transposed the duty to consult into the national
system, resulting in a serious distortion of the scope of this
fundamental duty. ( 6 )
On the one hand, we may think that, as long as individual rights
(such as equality before the law and non-discrimination) are not
granted at national level, it is too early even to attempt the
application of collective guarantees (like land and participation
rights) to relations between the Chilean State and the indigenous
peoples inhabiting its territory. However, bearing in mind that
human rights are universal, indivisible and interconnected, the
correct thinking should be that overcoming individual rights'
violations is as important as applying the newest collective
rights formulations (such as the right to collective land
ownership, established by the Inter-American Court in the Awas
Tingni case, 2001). This is even more important in the case of
indigenous peoples, since the right to collective land ownership
bridges the realization of a full range of other fundamental
rights for these peoples (the right to dignity, cultural
survival, economic, social and cultural rights etc.).
The prescriptions of international law, when entering the
Chilean legal order, also clash with the "deregulation" that
characterizes Chile's neo-liberal economic model, forcefully
implanted in the country during Pinochet's military government.
Indigenous peoples' rights represent an obstacle to the expansion
of this model, which is based upon the exploitation of the
natural resources present, in abundant quantities, on indigenous
territories in Northern and Southern Chile. Mining is pushing for
expanding in the next decades, against the will and in violation
of the indigenous rights of the Aymara people (indigenous
inhabitants of Northern Chile), while forestry enterprises,
fishery and hydroelectric plants have proliferated in the last
few decades in the South of the country, in violation of the
rights to land and control over natural resources of the Mapuche
people.
Social conflict has been rendered particularly acute by the
presence of a small group of very rich and influential business
families, which control the exploitation of Chile's natural
resources: the Falabella and the Luksic groups control enormous
sums of capital in mining, while the Matte and Angelini families
are deeply involved in the forest and cellulose industries and,
to a certain degree, in the energy sector. These families form an
economic elite, which is very influential in the State's
political realm. Economic power has allowed them to exert their
influence on political parties, as well as to influence the
decision-making process.
In a range of cases, however, international law has had a
considerable impact on national jurisprudence, especially in
those cases judged by Chilean regional Courts of Appeal. ILO
Convention 169 has been successfully applied in particular by the
Courts of Appeal of Southern Chile (sitting in the cities of
Concepciòn, Temuco, Valdivia and Puerto Montt), which are
more sensitive to the indigenous question, since the rural
Mapuche population (more than half - around 60% - of the total
population migrated to the capital city of Santiago de Chile) is
mainly concentrated in that provinces. Some cases judged by these
Courts have been great successes for indigenous peoples,
especially with respect to the State's duty to consult them, as
established by international standards, in cases related to
indigenous rights to natural resources, territorial rights and
investment projects developed on Mapuche land. Only in three
cases did the Courts of Appeal judge against the interests of
indigenous peoples.
In front of the Supreme Court, however, the situation has been
less favorable to indigenous peoples than at the lower judicial
level. It could be affirmed that the Supreme Court, which is
supposed to be the independent judicial body per excellence, has
shown a serious problem of "jurisprudential schizophrenia".
( 7 ) The "Palguin" case (June 2010), in which
the Court reverted the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Temuco
(January 2010), although the latter judgment was perfectly in
accordance with international standards on indigenous rights, is
the most striking case. The "Celco" case, another key judgment on
the right to be consulted, was closed in December 2010 by a
decision of the Supreme Court to confirm the judgment issued by
the Court of Appeal of Valdivia (June 2010), already not
favorable to indigenous peoples. It is possible to argue that
these judgments of the Supreme Court have had, and will possibly
have, an effect on the latest (the case of the Cayucupil
hydroelectric plant and the case of the Airport of Temuco of
January 2011) and future judgments of the Courts of Appeal. Such
an incoherent approach of the Supreme Court does certainly not
constitute a guideline, nor an encouraging conduct for the work
of the lower Courts.
The Chilean legal and political system is not (yet) an
encouraging environment for the recognition and realization of
indigenous rights. Indigenous rights standards elaborated at the
international level have encountered numerous obstacles
throughout the three branches of government. This meant real
difficulties for those rights in penetrating the Chilean
institutions and in benefiting the indigenous peoples inhabiting
this country.
There is first an overarching and symbolic problem: the missing
constitutional recognition of indigenous peoples and their rights
in the Constitutional text, since the Agreement of Nueva Imperial
(1989). At this point of the story, however, many indigenous
representatives and organizations argue that they prefer the lack
of constitutional recognition, rather than the adoption of a
draft that was not consulted with indigenous peoples and which
only contains a partial, distorted recognition of indigenous
rights. A recognition of this kind would certainly constitute a
locking-up of indigenous peoples' rights, an obstacle to the
struggle of future generations for the genuine recognition of
their indigenous rights. Given the difficulty to reach a
consensus and to adopt a satisfactory amendment for all parts,
the debate on the constitutional reform has lately been put
aside, even if the government returns on it occasionally (just to
show that it is still concerned with indigenous issues).
Further analyzing the legislative level, it may be affirmed that
the main instruments adopted in order to apply international law
provisions, both the Indigenous Law No 19.253 (1993) and Decree
No 124 on the regulation of the duty to consult (2009), have
constituted a distortion of the rights established by ILO
Convention 169.
At level of the executive power, the most evident limitation of
the Chilean institutionalism is certainly the unwillingness, more
than the incapacity, demonstrated in applying the duty to consult
with indigenous peoples. This unwillingness is clearly visible in
the curtailment of the scope of this duty in Decree No 124, which
regulates consultation within the national legal order,
especially with relation to administrative measures. The Decree
excludes from that duty the main public organs which deal with
indigenous issues (Municipalities and public enterprises, among
others); it also excludes investment projects, which are among
the initiatives that cause the fiercest opposition among the
inhabitants of indigenous territories. Consultation in these
cases is considered "optional", while the duty is discharged onto
sectoral regulations, such as the system of environmental impact
evaluation (Sistema de Evaluaciòn de Impacto Ambiental,
SEIA).
Other limitations encountered at the executive level are linked
to the weak and improper protection regime in the field of land
rights by the Fund for Indigenous Lands and Waters (Fundo de
Tierras y Aguas Indìgenas, FTAI), among others.
At the judicial level, serious obstacles have been encountered in
the protection of the rights of indigenous individuals,
especially the right to equality before the law and
non-discrimination. The application of the Anti-terrorist law has
been the most evident problem in the different treatment given to
the Mapuche before national courts. The application of this law
to Mapuche leaders accused of minor crimes, such as arson, has
opened the way to a process of criminalization of the Mapuche
people, exacerbating the discriminatory treatment given to them
on base of ethnic reasons. Such treatment includes the
application of preventive prison, double prosecution of the
accused both by civil and military tribunals, as well as their
conviction with more serious penalties than under the current
penal code.
An important sector of the Chilean society is profoundly
confused vis-a-vis the conflict between the State and the
Mapuche. It is arguable that this reaction, a sort of alienation,
is linked to the problematic, kind of traumatic relationship of
the Chileans to their identity and historical origin. In general,
there is a much better knowledge of the Mapuche cause for
indigenous rights, and of the real conditions in which this
people lives, in the South of the country, especially in the
VIII, IX and X Regions, where the majority of indigenous rural
population is concentrated. The fact that the non-indigenous
population of Southern Chile has a better understanding of the
Mapuche question is reflected in the support given by Courts of
Appeal of the cities located in that part of the country
(Concepciòn, Temuco, Validivia and Puerto Montt).
Why is the most part of the Chilean society so alienated before
the conflict involving the Mapuche, the State and enterprises
exploiting natural resources? There are many social and cultural
reasons that influence this tendency. First of all, it should not
be forgotten that Chile came out of the longest and most cruel
dictatorship in Latin America, which exacerbated the nationalist
discourse. Secondly, the media has played a particularly
important role in influencing public opinion on the issue: media
reports of violent indigenous attacks on land property and other
goods (wood, houses and cabins), "have alienated the
non-indigenous Chilean population", confusing their minds on the
plight of the Mapuche and other indigenous cultures, "creating a
cultural gap that may soon be too wide to breach." ( 8 ) In particular, the media has inculcated the idea
of the "Mapuche conflict", forgetting that every conflict always
involves more than just one part.
Cleavages of a social, economic and cultural character still
profoundly divide the Chilean society. In divided and
heterogeneous societies like Chile, nationalism plays an
important role; here, the nationalist discourse was (and still
is) used by politicians to create unity out of diversity,
thorough uniformity. Clearly, the result of such an attempt is a
mere illusion. Until the Chilean State does not stop looking at
diversity as a problem, instead as an immense resource for a
country, conflicts with the Mapuche people will not come to an
end.
The members of the most politically active sector of the Mapuche
society do not resign to consider themselves Chileans. Many of
them did never feel Chileans, and won't feel as such until they
are adequately taken into consideration in decision-making
processes, treated as citizens that have the same rights and
dignity of the rest before the Courts, and their collective
rights as members of an indigenous people are duly recognized and
granted respect.
For a number of reasons, international instruments ratified by
Chile did not produce the hoped results. It may be argued that
the country's governments are still unwilling to allow the
preservation and protection of diversities, and that its masses
do not support the cause for indigenous rights, in favor of
numerically significant sectors of their own society, in a
sufficiently massive way yet.
Notwithstanding the "immaturity" of the Chilean democracy, some
movements in favor of the rights of the Mapuche flourished
lately, especially among the younger generations. Young people,
indigenous as well as non-indigenous, are increasingly concerned
with the Mapuche struggle for indigenous rights. This happened
because the Mapuche youth had increased access to higher
education, and because indigenous as well as non-indigenous youth
is increasingly influenced by international tendencies, while
contacts with civil society movements abroad have become more
frequent.
Currently, the situation shows the existence of a "double
standard". On the one hand, the government showed its will to
ensure indigenous rights to the peoples living within its border,
clearly by ratifying ILO Convention No 169 (2008) and by voting
in favor of the UN Declaration on Indigenous Rights (2007). On
the other, instead of transposing international instruments in
good faith, it changed the rules of the game: the content of
those instruments was made void, while the State kept insisting
on the perpetration of assimilation, discrimination, exclusion
and inequality.
The blossoming of massive movements, all along 2011, suggests
that important changes are coming over. Protests against the
Hidroaysén project and in favor of the preservation of
Patagonia from the construction of five mega-dams for
hydroelectric exploitation, and innumerable demonstrations
against profit in education and in favor of the free and public
education may be anticipating an "awakening" of the Chilean
democracy. Such awakening is certainly susceptible to influence
indigenous peoples' situation positively.
(1) Jorge Contesse S., "The rebel democracy: a look into the
relationship between the Mapuche and the Chilean State", 26
Chicano-Latino L. Rev 2006: 131.
(2) Rhona K.M. Smith, "Textbook on international human rights",
4th edition. Oxford University Press (2010): 150.
(3) Jorge Contesse S., Op.cit.: 135.
(4) This concept refers to the right of the peoples to freely
choose their form of government and governors, as well as the
priorities of their economic, social and cultural development.
For a deeper insight see Anaya, James, "Self-determination. A
Foundational Principle", en "Indigenous Peoples in International
Law", Oxford University Press (1996).
(5) Article 1 of the Indigenous Law does not contain the term
"indigenous peoples"; it rather uses the expressions "human
groups" and "ethnic groups".
(6) Articles 6 and 7 of ILO Convention 169 contain the right to
be consulted and the right to political participation,
respectively.
(7) Alexandra Tomaselli, "Reformas Legales y derechos indigenas
en Chile. Què tal estamos con el Convenio 169 OIT?". Paper
presented at the XIV Meeting of Spanish Latin-americanists,
Santiago de Compostela 15-18 September 2010, kindly provided by
the author (atomaselli@eurac.edu).
(8) Alexandra Tomaselli, "The Mapuche Resolve", published on
Academia 47 (2008): 14. Available online at:
http://webfolder.eurac.edu/EURAC/Publications/Academia/ACADEMIA-online/ACADEMIA-47/Academia-47.pdf
BOOKS
- Anaya, James, "Self-determination. Foundational Principle", en
"Indigenous Peoples in International Law", Oxford University
Press, Oxford, 1996.
- Clavero, Bartolomè, "Reconocimiento Mapu-Che de Chile:
Tratado ante Constituciòn", in "Geografía
Jurídica de América Latina: Pueblos
Indígenas entre Constituciones Ladinas": www.derecho.us.es/clavero/geografia.pdf
- Smith, Rhona K.M., "Textbook on international human rights",
Oxford University Press, Oxford, 4. Ed., 2010.
- Willemsen Dìaz, Augusto, "How Indigenous Peoples' Rights
Reached the UN". In "Making the Declaration Work", published by
Claire Charters and Rodolfo Stavenhagen, 2010:
www.iwgia.org/graphics/Synkron-Library/Documents/publications/Downloadpublications/Books/Making
the Declaration Work.pdf
ARTICLES FROM ELECTRONIC PUBLICATIONS
- Contesse S., Jorge, "The rebel democracy: a look into the
relationship between the Mapuche and the Chilean State", 26
Chicano-Latino L. Rev, 2006.
- Tomaselli, Alexandra, "The Mapuche Resolve", publicado en
Academia 47 (2008): 14. Available online at:
http://webfolder.eurac.edu/EURAC/Publications/Academia/ACADEMIA-online/ACADEMIA-47/Academia-47.pdf
OTHER ELECTRONIC DOCUMENTS
- Aquevedo, Eduardo, "Chile: los 10 principales grupos
economicos". Available online at:
http://jeaqueve.wordpress.com/2010/03/28/chile-los-10-principales-grupos-econmicos-2007-2008/
- Charpentier, Denisse, "Ya es oficial: Confirman ingreso de
Chile a la OCDE", 15 dicembre 2009. Available online at:
www.biobiochile.cl/2009/12/15/ya-es-oficial-chile-ingresa-a-la-ocde.shtml
- Centro de Politicas Publicas, "Chile deberá repetir el
examen ante OIT en 2011 por Convenio 169. El imperativo del
dialogo". Available online at:
www.politicaspublicas.net/panel/c169noticias/728-chile-convenio169-chile-repite-examen-2011.html
- Centro de Politicas Publicas, "OIT CAECR. Informe 2011.
Observaciones a Chile. Aplicación del Convenio 169"
Available online at:
www.politicaspublicas.net/panel/chile-oit/726-2011-ceacr-informe-chile2011.html
- Centro de Politicas Publicas, "Trayectoria de proyectos de
reconocimiento 1990-2006". Available online at:
www.politicaspublicas.net/panel/reforma/documentos/49-trayectoria-de-proyectos-de-reconocimiento-1990-2006.html
- Centro de Politicas Publicas, "Texto comentado del Decreto 124
de "Reglamento de Consulta y Participaciòn de los Pueblos
Indìgenas en Chile". Available online at:
www.politicaspublicas.net/panel/decreto-124-comentado.html
- Centro de Politicas Publicas, "Declaraciòn. Encuentro de
Autoridades tradicionales y dirigentes de pueblos
indìgenas. Mayo 2011". Available online at:
www.politicaspublicas.net/panel/c169noticias/742-declaracion-encuentro-mayo2011.html
- Centro de Politicas Publicas, "Chile a juicio frente a la Corte
Inter-americana por política penal discriminatoria contra
Mapuches". Available online at:
www.politicaspublicas.net/panel/siddhh/casos-cidh/1515-cidh-chile-mapuche.html
- Clavero, Bartolomè, "Chile: Convenio 169 y un reglamento
para cancelar derechos". Available online at:
www.politicaspublicas.net/panel/consulta/391.html?task=view
- Padilla, César, "La expansión de la
minería y los desafíos para las organizaciones de
América Latina". Available online at: www.observatorio.cl/node/575
- Seguel, Alfredo,"El Poder Factico de las Empresas Forestales en
Chile. ¿A quien se enfrenta el Pueblo Mapuche?". Available
online at: www.mapuche.info/fakta/reportaje030129.html
See also in gfbv.it:
www.gfbv.it/3dossier/eu-min/autonomy-w.html
| www.gfbv.it/3dossier/eu-min/work-autonomy.html
| www.gfbv.it/3dossier/eu-min/autonomy.html
in www: www.mapuexpress.net | www.azkintuwe.org | www.observatorio.cl | www.mapuche.info | www.ilo.org/ilolex/cgi-lex/convde.pl?C169