Guatemala votes on Mines: Sipacapa and Huehuetenango

Citizens in a number of Guatemalan communities have held local votes on mining. Each vote resulted in large majorities expressing opposition to plans to develop mining projects adjacent to their communities.

The Marlin Mine project and the community of Sipacapa

The Marlin Mine project proposed by Montana Exploradora, a subsidiary of Glamis Gold, was the issue in Guatemala's first resource development vote. Two municipalities, Sipacapa and San Miguel Ixtahuacán, would be affected by the mine, but most of the mine is located in San Miguel. Although there was opposition to the mine in both municipalities, only the municipal council of Sipacapa decided to hold a vote.

Sadly, the vote was preceded by the type of violence that often accompanies proposed mining projects. In December 2004, protesters began a forty-two day blockade of a convoy of mining equipment. The blockade ended when some of a group of more than 1,200 soldiers and 400 police agents began firing at the protesters. An indigenous farmer was killed, and twenty others were injured.

Two weeks later, the local bishop led three thousand marchers in an anti-mine protest, but he then had to be placed under government protection because of death threats. Later, a leader's vehicle was set afire and death threats were made against him and two other anti-mining activists. According to the company, anti-mining activists menaced their staff during this same period.

Lawsuits over a proposed vote

On January 24, 2005, the Sipacapa Municipal Council passed the first of three resolutions establishing a local vote in favor or against "the mining activity, exploration and exploitation of minerals in open pit mines." A commission was established involving the village governance structures and the Municipal Council to organize and publicize the decision. The decision was to be binding and in force in the territory of Sipacapa.

Five days before the vote, Glamis went to court to get an injunction to stop the vote from taking place. A provisional injunction was granted. The municipality appealed the decision to the Constitutional Court, but the mayor decided to withdraw his support for the vote.

At around the same time, in a parallel effort to stop the vote, the national Ministry of Energy and Mines proceeded directly to the Constitutional Court, which did not issue an injunction (the final decision of the Court is discussed below). Nonetheless, as a result of the injunction obtained by Glamis, the municipal government continued to decline to hold the vote. This prompted the Catholic Church, together with Madre Selva, a Guatemalan environmental non-governmental organization, and Ajchmol, a Mayan group, to assume responsibility for conducting the vote.

1 2 3Next Page »

Two weeks later, the local bishop led three thousand marchers in an anti-mine protest, but he then had to be placed under government protection because of death threats.