Interviewee: Dina Meza
Interviewer: Martin Mowforth
Location: Tegucigalpa
Date: 22nd May 2017
Key Words: human rights; rights defenders; environmental defenders; journalism; media censorship; precautionary measures; freedom of expression

.

.

Martin Mowforth (MM): OK, interview with Dina Meza, in Tegucigualpa, Monday 22 May, regarding the threats to defenders of human rights, environmental rights, land rights and social rights in Honduras. Dina, if it’s OK with you, I’d like to move from the personal situation which affects you to the national and international situation in Honduras. So my first question is: can you describe your own current situation of security and insecurity in Honduras? In terms of your work and your daily life.

Dina Meza (DM): Well, I’ve been involved since 1989 in the activities associated with the defence of human rights through the exercise of journalism. And I think that we can consider the situation from after I returned from England in 2013 – as I returned, what happened and what has happened after that time.

Well, I arrived back in the country and in the first few months there was no problem. But then the threats began again, there was an attempted kidnapping. I had to move house again, and there were threats to my children and the situation was worsening.

From that time in 2013 to the present I’ve moved house three times, the vehicles of our families have been vandalised, we have to have armed guards at the entrance to the house. Then the President ordered an investigation into my personal case and the case of other human rights defenders. And yet he [the President] put in place a list of those whose private life would be investigated and who would be tracked. That was information that came to me from a source in the Casa Presidencial. And then we published it because I considered that it was very dangerous to be on that black list, and logically the tracking began almost immediately after I was told that this information existed. Then we had constant …. well, our vehicle tyres were damaged; at various times I couldn’t communicate by telephone. It left me completely isolated and also there was, and there still is, a lot of intervention on the phone.

I’m currently accompanied by Peace Brigades International. After going to England, they have accompanied me since May 2014. Compared with how it was before going to England, the threats now are more subtle. But they are always there. In a country with such impunity we have this type of thing on normal days, and more so when you’re involved in ultra-dangerous activities such as journalism and the defence of human rights.

The threats have kept coming constantly. Peace Brigades International has done an analysis and has produced communications on these threats. Also we’ve had to refer to the international authorities. Last year I went to Madrid and Barcelona. We were in a forum regarding the issue of women rights defenders and the things they were confronted with.

Already this year, less than a month ago, I was threatened in a bus. I was travelling in a bus because of a shortage of cash, and a man sat beside me and said to me that he was heavily armed and that at the back of the bus were more armed men who had been ordered to kill me, but that I should remain calm. So I said, “why do they want to kill me? What’s the problem?” Then he said. “No, the order is there, we can’t ignore it.” The man made as if he had received a telephone call, saying that he was wrong, that he had been wrong, and that I didn’t have blue eyes. But he never saw my eyes. Then he was threatening me the whole route, and I was becoming convinced, because after his supposed call, which was a lie, he told me he had to take a photograph. I said to him: “You can’t take a photo of me because it doesn’t make sense for you to take a photo of me.” We were talking like this over the whole route. In reality, God gave me a lot of strength to remain calm, and finally I said to him, “Look, I have to get off here,” and I got off at a stop. Then I shook his hand and wished him many blessings and that God would bless him on that day, and I got off the bus. The problem is that when I got off, I said to myself that it was all over. But I went and took refuge in a pharmacy, and when I left it, I saw four men standing on a corner. Then I said to myself that yes, this was certainly [a threat]. [Nervous laugh.] Then a vehicle was stationed opposite the pharmacy with flashing lights and darkened windows – like the police vehicles. And so I called Peace Brigades International for them to come and rescue me from the pharmacy and that they should get there by taxi so that I can get out of the situation I was in.

So that was less than a month ago. That situation put me outside the protection mechanism that we have in the country. So three weeks have passed since I resorted to the mechanism. They offered me a panic button, they offered me an escort, police and military; they offered me all the military possibilities, except investigation. And also a risk assessment to find the origins of the threats. So far, after three weeks, I haven’t had any contact with the protection mechanism. The panic button, for use just in emergencies, they haven’t given me; they haven’t done a risk assessment. And here we are hoping that the State of Honduras will take action.

The same thing happened with the previous threats. I was making denunciations to the Public Ministry, and they never made any investigation, and they lost my case notes. They disappeared mysteriously and they’ve never done anything.

So that implies that the threats are not de-activated, but simply the same things will continue and get worse.

MM: Yes.

DM: That’s what happened in the case of Berta Cáceres who had made 33 denunciations. And the State never did anything. Afterwards they washed their hands of the matter, saying that she had moved and had not notified them of where she had moved to.

But that is the State that we have, a State in total impunity, and which does nothing and that offers no protection to human rights defenders.

So the situation that we have is one in which we have threats against me, or there’s tracking of my older children, or we’re being watched, or there’s telephone tapping, mainly of my elder daughter.

MM:Yes.

DM:I think that this is already a major technique, to make differentiated attacks on the human rights defenders, to attack not just us, but also our sons and daughters, so that we get into a period of destabilisation, so that we abandon our work.

I’ve had to change my security completely and to take other measures. I don’t go on the bus any longer, I’ve had to look for Support to cover at least a few months of transport by taxis and other means of transport.

MM:Yes

DM:So, such is the situation. They want to intimidate us whilst they intensify the human rights violations. This electoral year, like the previous electoral year when I spoke to you in 2013. The situation is going to be super-complicated as we are already seeing. After yesterday there is now an opposition alliance to the Juan Orlando Hernández regime.

MM:Yes.

DM:So as of now, the war is on. There’s going to be masses of attacks, not just by the media, but also physically and all kinds of things against people who are within the political opposition, journalists who aren’t following the President’s agenda, and who aren’t with his re-election. And things of that style.

So we’re in a crisis situation greater than we had in 2013, because this man wants to stay in power, he’s happy with it, and we’ve no idea how many years he wants to stay ensconced in the Casa Presidencial. So that’s the current situation.

MM:OK. As far as the black list goes, who are the creators of the list? Is it governmental?

DM:Yes, it’s governmental. According to what my source told me, it cameo ut of what they call the Crisis Room which means that it came from the President to the Crisis Room as work that remains to be done. And it’s been like that since the 1980s – right? On the back of the coup d’état, various lists emerged – there were lists of defenders, I was on a list as a journalist, I think there were students of journalism and other students at the university who were involved in social protest who had been criminalised. So, we were around ten people – no, I was accredited, given that I wasn’t able to reveal the source. So what they were doing was indirectly sending me threatening messages telling me that if I didn’t tell them the source they could make a charge against me or something like that.

So I told then, “Charge me – that’s no problem. Because we have what’s called ‘protection of the source’.” So I couldn’t say who gave me the list or anything about the source, and nor could anyone oblige me or prosecute me for that.

MM:OK. This is a bit of a diversion from the topic, but what do you think of the chances of the Alliance in November? [This refers to the newly formed Alliance of opposition parties in Honduras, and to the forthcoming elections in November.]

Both laughing.

DM:It’s pretty complicated because there’s a culture of rubbishing any alliances which form, whether they are good or bad. But it’s good that there’s an alliance against the current President. If there were transparent elections, I think that the Alliance would win.

MM:Yes?

DM:But he’s not going to have transparent elections, and what’s more the electoral system is the same – there haven’t been any modifications. Obviously it’s in the hands of the current President to change the results. As it was in 2013.

MM:Yes.

DM:So I don’t see a lot of hope from this point of view. But I think that the people with these ideas could produce a worthwhile alliance of this type.

I’m told that in the communities people are cool about the public arrival of the Alliance. And we fully understand that as it gets going there is going to be a lot of repression because they’ll use the political activism of the National Party. There are ultra-violent sectors amongst them who threaten and kill people – ultra-violent. Apart from that we have para-militarism in the country that can be used and we can say that perhaps those involved in narco-trafficking and organised crime and similar activities can also be deployed. These were the false positives used in Colombia that have also been established here in Honduras. So, I think it [the Alliance] is a good exercise for the electorate, or so it seems to me. But I don’t see much hope in terms of change.

MM:OK. Las computadoras para las elecciones ¿son por el control del Gobierno?

DM:Si. El Tribunal Supremo Electoral

MM:¿Un organismo independiente?

DM:Well, the Supreme Electoral Tribunal was supposedly restructured – previously it was known as the National Tribunal of Elections, and then it became the Supreme Electoral Tribunal. The objective [of this change] was that it would be an independent organisation; and that the magistrates who were nominated to it would not belong to any political party, only that they would be honourable people and that they would be honest. The problem is that all those who are there actually respond to political parties, or simply that they’ve changed the name of their party affiliation which no longer functions. So it’s very normal that when you’re counting votes and the other people are winning, it’s not him who’s in control – the light goes and various situations occur. It happened to me in 2000, in 1998 Presidential elections and I was covering them. They were moving all the team before the end of the count. It was drawn to my attention and I began to document it. I was working in a media corporation, and I got all the information with photos and everything, and when I wrote my piece the editors called me in – the boss and his chief editor. They sat me down and told me, “your piece isn’t going to go through.”

“Why not?” I said to them.

“Because what you’ve written is false.”

So I said to them, “I’ve got photos which support me, and here I can show you.”

But they said to me, “Look, your note is not going to go through because the Director has said that it’s not going through.”

So, they have these ways of controlling what happens. Until there’s a restructuring, a radical change of the political electoral system in the country, there aren’t going to be transparent elections.

MM:Yes. A structural change?

DM:Yes, clearly.

MM:OK.¿And can the situation be helped by international observation?

DM:Yes, assistance, it seems to me that it’s vital. I posed this in 2015, in London, when we met with Peace Brigades International (PBI) and a group of other organisations to set up an urgent and multi-disciplinary human rights observation mission, right? To defend us we need lawyers, defenders, journalists to come to the country. It seems to me that it’s vital, and in this electoral context it’s super-important. Well, in 2013 it helped a lot, despite the fact that yes there was fraud, but it neutralised situations of threats and risks against defenders, largely those outside of Tegucigalpa and who had no support, like the more direct support that we had in the cities. I think it’s vital that we take up that issue again.

MM:OK. Y tú tienes medidas de precaución de la Comisión Inter-Americana de Derechos Humanos? ¿O no?

DM:Well, I must confess to you that publicly I always say that I have these measures. But currently they’re not operational and the Inter-American Commission doesn’t activate them. So, for the moment I don’t have them. But publicly I always say I have them in order to neutralise whatever situation may arise.

MM:OK. But in reality they don’t serve the purpose of precaution.

DM:The truth of the matter is that yes, sure, the Inter-American Commission has granted the measures, but the state of Honduras doesn’t implement them and doesn’t comply.

Back in 2007, I had a police escort because I was in another organisation where they killed a lawyer who was on my team. So I used to go around with two armed police agents, and it was an unpleasant situation. It stigmatised me personally, in my barrio the neighbours would see me as a delinquent because the police arrived and began shouting my name and everything with a megaphone. So it stigmatised me in the neighbourhood. And yet they never investigated the threats. So, although it’s right that the precautionary measures are worth it, but I think there must be some follow-up. As regards what the Inter-American Court is doing with its sentencing, I think the Inter-American Commission must make the time to check those countries which are not complying with the measures.

MM:And can you say something about the situation of freedom of expression and freedom of information in Honduras? And perhaps the situation of the owners of the communications media? Specifically I’m thinking and wondering about the possibility of publishing all your articles – are they edited, cancelled or prohibited? 

DM:There are different situations as far as freedom of expression and information goes.

As regards freedom of expression there are various levels. One: is the crimes against journalists and communication workers. Around 66 have been murdered since the coup. There have been only four sentences of supposed material authors. But there have been no investigations that link journalistic work the crimes that occur against them; neither has there been any prosecution of the intellectual authors.

Secondly, also there are direct threats and indirect threats sending messages by telephone, saying you’d better keep quiet, shut your mouth, that what happened to such and such a journalist will happen to you, and they mention a particular assassinated journalist.

Also, there are incursions into the communications media, with unknown men, armed, turning up and issuing threats.

Also, programmes are censored, and there are programme closures – by order of the government. They call the media and threaten them that they’ll close down the media, or they’ll close down a particular programme. There have been various programme close-downs.

Another is that there are threats to publish information. There are lawsuits for defamation and slander. Two journalists are already under sentence for this. One, Julio Ernesto Alvarado, has one year and four months of prison and the suspension of the right to exercise journalism for the same period. And we’re supporting him as an organisation, because after I came back from England, a group of people and I created the Association for Democracy and Human Rights. You’ll find it at pasosdeanimagrande.com which is a journal that we’re running and also we’re providing legal accompaniment for people with scarce resources who are the object of libel and defamation lawsuits.

So with PEN International we managed to raise the case of Julio Ernesto Alvarado with the Inter-American Human Rights Commission and we are pursuing the case. We managed to get the sentence suspended and the Inter-American Commission would study the admissibility of the case or not, and it’s still at that point.

So we’ll see what the Inter-American Commission says – we’ve been presenting the case since 2015 and we still haven’t had a reply – it’s a really delayed process.

But last year in August, another journalist, Ariel Davicente, covering the south of the country, was convicted. He denounced some irregularities of a police chief who was committing abuses of authority, and that he was involved in illegal activities. The police chief contested it, and so he was sentenced by a court to three years in prison, with suspension of the practice of journalism for the same three years, and having to pay all the costs of the judgement. Moreover, the police chief is going to open a civil case so that he can get, supposedly, compensation for the moral damages which he has been caused. Currently the case is under study by the Supreme Court of Justice which has to make a pronouncement through the Sentencing Court. So if the Court confirms this resolution, our colleague is going to go to prison, will be suspended from journalism and will have to pay all that money. So that’s a bit of Julio Ernesto Alvarado’s case – we’re supporting him and also presenting his case to the Inter-American Commission for Human Rights.

MM:But did you say that the journalist is out of the country?

DM:No. This journalist is in the south of the country.

MM:OK.

DM:He’s continuing to practice his journalism. He’s one of the critical journalists of the southern zone. And both of the two who are critics have defamation and libel cases against them. Their cases represent one form of closure.

The other form of closing down is with the information sources. They don’t let anybody – I, for instance, can’t get to the Casa Presidencial, nor to the National Congress, because all they have to do is read my name and there’s no way I can be there. So they require your accreditations, they ask for loads of things, and that’s just to verify your identity. But they close down the sources too.

And another thing is that the carrot-and-stick are used with government publicity. At the moment all the funds destined for publicity are focussed on the Casa Presidencial. Initially that was being managed by the President’s brother, but now it’s managed by another person. But for sure the focus of publicity is associated with control of the journalists. We can say that a journalist who doesn’t stick to the government’s agenda, simply isn’t given a contract or a permit.

So, those are the ways of controlling the press.

And on the other hand …..

MM:[Inaudible)

DM:Yes, and also laws have been made to limit the access to information. We have a very good law, the law of access to public information. But it’s blocked by the official secrets law. They created this law to encrypt information for 25 years – 5, 10, 15, 25 years, at the discretion of the government officials. Or maybe somebody can tell you that this information could affect national security and therefore cannot be made public. So this law also restricts our work, as well as that of the rest of society too.

So those are the ways in which our work is restricted. Moreover, there are many campaigns to stigmatize us. The President tells journalists that we are not on his agenda, that we are inflammatory, that we get in the way of development and that we foment campaigns against the government each time we go to events like the periodic universal examination of the United Nations Human Rights Council – when we go to speak on what is happening, and also when we go to the Inter-American Commission. And all these campaigns of stigmatisation, what they aim to do is generate hatred against us.

And they’ve also created some reforms which limit the freedom of expression. Among these are reforms to the Penal Code. In article 3.35 where it talks of what can be taken as an apology for terrorism, and apology for hatred, and that journalists are responsible for that and that we can be taken to court for it.

Likewise, those who make use of social protest are also criminalised. And they included another clause for the financiers. In other words, what they want is to let no one support the civil society that is doing Human Rights defense with funds so that we can carry out the work. That way generates terror in the financiers so that they no longer finance us – in Nicaraguan style with, with Daniel Ortega who some years ago [closed?] an organisation taking its documents – well, it was a disaster. And that’s exactly what is being applied here.

And well, they also talk of the crime of usurpation [illegal expropriation] which now carries a greater penalty than previously, similar to defamation and libel the penalties for which have also risen.

And with that the students of the National University make use of the right to protest; and the crime of usurpation didn’t hit them last year in 2015 – it didn’t work. So now they’ve added a little clause to the article that says: ‘take public buildings other than your house’. They put in that little bit, because we said: there can be no usurpation if they study in the university. In other words, they do not have the purpose of appropriating the university, but simply making use of freedom of expression through social protest.

So those are some of the things that are happening.

MM:Is there any evidence that social media is managing to get round these obstacles?

DM:Yes, of course because the communications media are controlled by the government.

They have their accords, they have an agreement so that the publishers who have debts for electricity or water can swap them for the right to publish.

So they have a law for that too.

MM:Yes, but I’m thinking of the possibility that the protests, those protesting, can use social media to get round these obstacles put there by the government.

DM:Yes, clearly. There are already cases of people who have used Facebook who have been had proceedings started against them. There’s a young person who posted a Facebook message repeating information from one of the media that said that a bank was going to close because of money laundering. Well he was caught, the police turned up and arrested him for having written that on Facebook.

Another journalist in the central zone of the country commented on his Facebook page that a bridge was very expensive and that it was the most expensive bridge he had ever seen. The mayoress took him to court but we managed to nullify the lawsuit because the mayoress was using public money to defend herself as her lawyer in this case was the municipality lawyer when it was in fact a private case.

So they’re making small or great steps as regards criminalizing the use of social networks. And they’re calling them cyber crimes. Here the social networks aren’t very active.

MM:Yes.

DM:It may be immediately that there is some repression, an attack, or whatever may be against a human right, there it is. So, although for sure the corporate media are closing down your spaces, even so, through the social networks, everybody knows about it.

MM:OK.

DM:What you were asking about the concentration of media ownership, this continues. The State of Honduras committed itself to democratise the radio communications spectrum, but it hasn’t done it.

In 2012, or 2013, it distributed the frequencies, but the majority of these frequencies they gave to political activists of the two traditional parties, to activists of the current party in government. And they closed the spaces of social organisations to which they denied frequencies citing a load of obstacles which they created. So they didn’t allocate frequencies and the few that they did give out were to some indigenous groups and some communities that were under real stress. They presented administrative hurdles, red tape associated with the National Telecommunications Commission, they implemented power cuts, they ruined the equipment, there were calls to CONATEL to explain why, for example, it was blocking other frequencies and doing things like that.

So there are indirect means of censorship which they are using, apart from the other more direct threats.

MM:Yes. One final question please. Do you have any suggestions for people, activists, of the supposedly first world – in England? For example, how can we help you more than in the past; in the future, can we help in any better ways? Are there various measures that we can take, various things that we can do?

DM:Good, in the European Union we met with a delegate from Europe and asked him why they continue giving money that is used for repression. He said, “no, no, no, we won’t deal with that because it’s already decided that the money will be given to the government – and ta ta ta.”

I think that if you close down that valve, the valve that is the money requested for the protection of human rights, if you close that opening because of non-compliance, then that is a big step.

MM:Yes.

DM:Because it must be monitored, it must have field investigation to see what’s happening – and not just to receive government reports, but they must also talk with the victims, they must verify the indicators to ensure their certainty.

On the other hand, I think that it’s important that the directives of the European Union put these into effect. In Honduras we have had an Ambassador who has made good use of the directives. In my case, which I’ve raised, it’s worked well – although others have complained.

But I think that complying with the EU directives must be more profound – at the level of those countries which give funds for education, for human rights – that must be controlled. Because the opposite is its use for the purchase of more instruments of repression, like rockets, like vehicles for firing tear gas, more personnel for surveillance. And all these elements intensify the militarism which is what we experience in this situation.

On the other hand, I think it’s really important start proceedings against or to make investigations into the actions of the Public Ministry. In the case of Berta Cáceres, they’re not letting anyone see the case notes, they aren’t giving access to these notes to the family nor to the lawyers, and so we don’t know how the situation is going. As for journalists, I’ve asked for information and what they say is that the Public Ministry law doesn’t allow the imparting of that information. When we ask we’re just given general information which isn’t going to affect any case.

So they hide under this cloak, to keep cases locked away, doing nothing about them. Why? At times they say they don’t have the fuel, or they don’t have a vehicle, so they can’t move. But there are cases which don’t need that, all they need is the political will to take action, that’s all.

I think that the Judicial Power is functioning in the same way as the Supreme Court of Justice, in that it acts at the speed of light to criminalise defenders, but shelves the cases which are presented by defenders for the investigation of the perpetrators.

So I think that the powers of the state – the Legislature, which approves damaging laws – no? – gives concessions for natural resources such as the rivers – that brings more violence. It pays no respect to the informed consultations with the populations. It makes concessions for mining, open-cast mining, which is responsible for a great deal of environmental contamination and has repercussions in the communities, even displacing them.

So, all that is what we have to face in this situation.

MM:Dina, very many thanks for your words, for your time. I’m sure that you have a lot to do after your journey to El Salvador, so I’m very grateful to you for your time. Very many thanks.

DM:Yes, thanks to you too. ENCA has been a good accomplice to me in this project. We’ve set up an office and we’ve started an online newspaper – pasosdeanimalesgrande.com – and we accompany people who have no or few resources; thanks to the support that you have provided to us.

 

Interviewees: COPINH (Civic Council of Popular and Indigenous Organisations of Honduras)
Interviewer: Martin Mowforth
Location: COPINH’s office, La Esperanza, Intibucá, Honduras
Date: 23rd September 2015
Theme:
Key Words:peaceful resistance; indigenous rights; transnational companies; community radio; ILO Convention 169; Lenca people; CONATEL; repression; impunity; National Institute for Agrarian Reform.

 

Martin Mowforth (MM): Yes, it’s recording. Good, first, Marleny, what are your surnames?

Marleny Reyes Castillo (MRC): Reyes Castillo

MM: OK. So, Marleny, you are the coordinator of COPINH, one of the coordinators, is that correct?

MRC: The general coordinator is our colleague, Berta Caceres

MM: OK, and yourself?

MRC: I’m part of COPINH, a facilitator of COPINH.

MM: OK, and Selvín Milla also? You’re in charge of communications?

SM: Of course; in charge of communication and above all operations: organising security for the communities, in which right now there is a struggle and great risk. So we need – well, we aren’t trained 100 per cent but at least we have a basic protection strategy. Also radio training — a much needed alternative communication method. We train ourselves to use them, coordinating the 5 radios we have to tell everyone what’s happening and for training. Well, it’s not much; and we’re also working with young people with regard to training them on the protection of our surroundings and environment. And still, above all we’re working with women. As they say, without women, there is no revolution. So we’re with them right now.

MM: Yes, I was going to ask Marleny about protection for women. Can you tell me what you told me a few minutes ago about project ‘Focal’?

MRC: Well, first of all, thank you for the opportunity to speak; and especially for the solidarity between countries needing to know what COPINH is, what it’s doing and why it’s operating.

COPINH carries out several activities: opposition, training and public education for the indigenous communities. Amongst these is a project of facilitators, facilitating these processes particularly for women, directed especially at the communities. Where they can learn the methods of protection that COPINH offer, for example the [ILO] Convention 169, which they have to own. But in this, COPINH’s objective is to reduce risk, insecurity, intra-family violence, economic violence, sexual violence and the endless violence within these communities. This is the ultimate goal for COPINH, that this decreases, that it can’t keep happening – these women [in the communities] are the ones who are saying it – it’s they who denounce it and who have to act against this situation that they live with every day. Because COPINH is an anti-patriarchal organisation, without religion or politics. It has certain policies for popular education and training but not legal politics. So this project for the protection and for indigenous rights defenders of the indigenous people in the towns of Intibucá and La Paz is directed at different communities where COPINH has a presence and where women need help. At times, but not necessarily, you have to be in living in these communities but also they look out for you; COPINH is for everyone and we all fit in together.

So COPINH exists for this, to develop a process of education and training for women, where they get to know first-hand patriarchal domination – how to exclude themselves from this domination which has existed for years against women, this domination which exists because women haven’t had a voice. They’ve, well they’ve been cut off, they’ve been subjected to this situation because they haven’t been allowed out of the kitchen. Silent, blind and without power to confront the situation they live in. This then, is the work of COPINH – that these same women, when they enter the process, they break the ice. They know who’s with them, who’s there to protect them. COPINH can have an impact in protecting them, both through training, education and creating tools, and also by finding organisations to protect them. Because here it’s unbelievable the violence that’s imposed. This country, this country’s own government recognises the statistics of how many rapes occur, how many murders of women there are. That is statistically – but they don’t investigate anything: who did it or who organised it. And although, like COPINH, they file the complaint, these are filed away, they don’t follow it up and it goes unpunished. COPINH makes the denouncements and does this work, because we hope to achieve a reduction in risk, insecurity and women’s deaths. Above all, the protection of women’s territory, protection of Lenca territory, and if it’s possible then it can have the goal of national coverage. As we said before, COPINH is in more than 200 communities: it has a huge territory.

MM: All in Intibuca?

MRC: In Intibucá, Lempira and La Paz – all the Lenca people, and further still COPINH has a presence at national level. And if these women need COPINH to intervene to protect them, to reduce the insecurity and the risk, then COPINH is there. The same way they are now in Cortés.

MM: Ah yes? There too?

MRC: There are already women from Cortés included in the protection process. And from the moment they organise themselves – because the basic tool to be able to defend yourself, to protect yourself and realise your rights is to organise yourself. Then they enter COPINH and begin to train themselves. And when they enter this training, they quickly identify themselves as rights defenders. From the beginning they know that a person, a woman, a man, a child, the elderly, all defend a right, personally, collectively or in an organised way. This person then becomes a champion of indigenous rights.

MM: OK, many thanks for the explanation. And would you like to explain something about your radio system? About radio communication.

SM: I already said radio is an alternative form of communication. In total there are 5 broadcasters operating at the moment. We have 4 FM stations, and 1 AM that is a modulating frequency. We began broadcasting by radio out of necessity to communicate with the people, to understand what is happening. As we said before, the communications media in this country has been controlled by a dominant government system. In the end we said to ourselves, the worst thing is that it was very difficult to get a media outlet.

It took us a lot of effort to get this means of communication, and after so much struggle we began transmitting the first radio broadcasts. Of course, this had already been started before under another radio programme that was played in a paid slot, a very expensive slot. And the public only had that to listen to, the only communication which promoted struggle. After this we began to look for events to broadcast. We began putting radios in the places where there had been the struggle was greatest so the people would know what was happening, and also those who did the communicating. Then the risk began; threats came because it was said that we were against the system, perhaps, and well …

MM: Is it a licensed system? By the government?

SM: Yes. The result after all this was that the government, over time, began a governmental network called CONATEL. CONATEL began to suppress media outlets trying to eliminate them, because they said they were pirate channels, or community radios. Then we were talked about by some international convention, Convention 170 of the ILO [International Labour Organisation]. Then we began to push back: the media has to be free come-what-may – it’s a human right. Then they began to look for alternative methods, emitting another signal on the same frequency to try and eliminate us. We knew about the options, so we just changed frequency each time they messed with us. When the public knew most of the frequencies, we began to transmit a loud noise so they knew that we were moving to another frequency.

All this went on and a new fight began to expand our outlets. Finally, we found an AM frequency that had a strong signal, but we had to work even harder. After a time, we began transmitting this signal. The people began listening to it more on the borders, further afield, then they began to know more about the organisation and that motivated us even more. So much organisation, and at last we now have 204 communities with us. Eh, the effort it takes to maintain connected communities, and much more between – there aren’t basic resources to begin buying transmitters or recycle the bad ones. Then we have to ask ourselves where –  where needs a radio? In the beginning we said one here, where the office already is. Then we were emitting two frequencies: FM and AM along two channels. They interrupted the FM signal most because that was the easier than the AM. As soon as they interrupted the FM, we announced the swap to AM and changed straight away, so the public could change and continue listening.

This went on and then another struggle began in order to extend our means of communication at the end of which we got the AM frequency with a much stronger signal, but it meant we had to work harder. Well, after so much time broadcasting on that signal people began to listen to us more on the border, further away; and so they began to get to know our organisation better and to motivate us even more. The whole organisation, up to now, has 204 communities with us. We have to put in a huge effort to stay connected to these communities, and we’re missing even more because we don’t have the minimum economic resources to continue buying transmitters or to repair those that have broken down.

So, where are they, where do we need the radio? At the start we had one here where the office is. Then we said we were going to broadcast in the two frequencies, FM and AM. The FM frequency was interrupted more because it’s easier to interrupt than the AM. So they began to interrupt our FM signals; then we said we were changing to the AM frequency, and immediately people changed so that they could continue to listen to us.

Quite a time passed, and then we saw that Lempira needed a radio transmitter. We carried another transmitter that was also put in the same name, La Guenpica (?), and then we began to transmit from there. The people began supporting us even more because they had a media outlet and now they knew the truth of things. And well, after all this, they say there’s a remote mountain where there are indigenous people, where they are marginalised, where they have nothing, no education, no healthcare – they have absolutely nothing – they’re a really distant people. As an organisation we will go to work with them, working with them before establishing a media outlet, fighting because they made themselves an independent municipality. This was achieved after a lot of struggle, a lot of movement, a lot of protest, even a hunger strike. After that they installed a media outlet called Puca Hupalaca. After that they continued the struggle and saw another need, most recently – it’s a radio station called Radio Gualcate. It’s in Río Blanco and Tibuca and is one of the most recent FM stations – our fourth. There we’ve had transmission problems: the transmitter is small and the frequency is a little short, and well, we’ve had some difficulties.

Now everything is OK; despite all the problems, people are still following radio and are looking to protect and cement this radio communication from all attacks. Because it’s not just the media outlets that are attacked, but the people working within them: sometimes having to move all broadcasts for the day to a more secure location and make anonymous transmissions. Not having the Internet – that would make it simple to tell the people what’s happening abroad; having journalists and no one knowing who they are. These are the circumstances in which we have to operate. There you have it, this is a little of the alternative media we have on air, thanks to the public, thanks to their efforts, nothing more. It’s a little…

MM: Sure, but it’s important. Thanks to you both, and it’s Sara, right?

MRC: She’s our colleague, Liliam.

MM: Ah, Liliam. Thanks for talking and for having me. Thanks for all you’ve said, and we hope we work together a little more in the future – especially with James present.

Second recording (COPINH 2)

MRC: Against governmental impunity for the deaths of our colleagues who have fallen fighting to defend their territory, to defend the river; and against the arrival and international threat of the big companies; they died because they’ve defended their way of life, they’ve defended their territory, the river, and especially those that have defended control of the territory of the indigenous lands in the communities. Especially Río Blanco; Río Blanco has been one the communities to suffer the most violence. Thanks to the international companies, the government, so many have fallen and they don’t care. Although COPINH has collected lots of information on those cases that eventually come to light – who killed them? Who did it? They know the truth. These companies have a lot to answer for. These companies here …

MM: What’s the name of the company?

MRC: (?) In Río Blanco, it’s DESA.

MM: DESA?

MRC: Sinohydro.

MM: Ah, Sinohydro, yes.

MRC: They endangered the dignity and the stability of our colleagues in Río Blanco. Women have also suffered greatly: threats, psychological pressure and their lands having been taken from them. Now they’re there again. And they continue to threaten, to prolong an environment of intimidation, of threats and oppression against the people of Río Blanco.

MM: This is a Chinese company, right? But I thought I’d heard Sinohydro had failed, that the project had failed. Is there another company? Is that right?

Liliam (L): Yes, it was abandoned in the construction phase. But now about three months ago, another has come in through Santa Bárbara. This is something that’s going to affect part of Río Gualcal, because they’ve been felling to get the water there. So they’re always endangering the same indigenous communities of Río Blanco and Río Gualcal.

MM: OK.

MRC: The conditions in the area of Rio Blanco – they’re bad due to the risk and the insecurity of the locals. COPINH has done so much, lots of work, and they’re our colleagues there, so this is a major worry in the fact of the threat of these companies coming in. They’ve come back again, more repressive, more militarized; there’s even more repression than there was before. For us that is a very serious and difficult situation faced with what might be to come and what might happen in Río Blanco.

MM: Yes.

MRC: We’ve also had deaths of our colleagues who have defended their land, who wanted to have and protect a plot of land just in order to subsist. So they’ve peacefully resisted. This is the case in Somolagua, Santa Bárbara. In Somolagua, Santa Bárbara, a land struggle has begun because another group of people from outside the struggle wanted to take possession of our comrades’ lands. So there’s a small group there doing a lot, issuing threats, and we’ve had the death of one comrade resulting from this situation. He died a short while ago simply fighting to retake his land. And the death of our comrade Moíses, he died defending his lands. And now the action is stronger because the intimidation is even greater. The Secretary of the National Congress, Mario Pérez, is there; this man has been directing actions against the people, actions against Berta [Cáceres]. Lots of repression, with lots of aggression against our colleagues simply for defending their lands – because it’s a universal right, to have land to be able to survive. So, …

MM: I imagine he wants to own the land?

MRC: Not him, or rather there’s a situation where he has a great deal of power, being Secretary of the National Congress. This gives him power relating to the indigenous peoples, but the only weapon they [indigenous peoples] have is our organisation, COPINH, and Convention 169. This is the power they use to come here, in their wish to take our comrades’ lands and kill them, intimidate them, and to send in the soldiers.

MM: I imagine he’s a hated figure?

MRC: Of course, it’s abuse of power. And here’s another case of impunity. Enter the Government: there are a lot of cases where they’ve oppressed and weakened the struggle. Although COPINH hasn’t been weakened. But it’s a great worry that our comrades are falling in defence of their lands, wanting to protect their environment, their common holdings, their natural resources too. They just want to defend their land. And this resistance spurs on the military repression from the Government. It directly threatens our colleague, Berta [Cáceres].

MM: Yes, of course.

MRC: Because our position is the direct defence of our people, and also to ensure they’re respected and are not continually repressed or killed as they are now.

MM: Yes, of course. Tell me about the importance and the need for your programmes and your SOCA project. It’s very important.

SM: Yes, it’s very important. Firstly, it facilitates our production of material and also the resources required. Although it’s only a bit, it helps us a lot. The detail is in the time that passes, upon doing this work we’re undertaking.

Marleny already spoke about all the killings, the impunity, and this goes on. It’s a struggle which never ends; well, it’s very difficult to bring it to an end. The people here won’t give up, come-what-may, despite the fact they kill more of our friends – it only infuriates people more. In the case of Río Blanco, it seems that people had heard that the company came here from other countries and were annoyed about it. And it started again – all over again. Today they started a committee here, the General Coordinating Body in Rio Blanco and Intibucá, doing more training with the people. Well, they had said this week that the Government was going to suspend the military support for the company. It’s not happened, there are more soldiers than before, more armed security guards; and they’ve already started making roads without asking the community. They want to divert the river, and the people don’t want that. The people have a right to control the territory and so they’ve held them up. Their milpas [corn fields] are going to be damaged – their river is sacred to them because that’s where their spirits live, where everything lives. For us it could be a myth perhaps, but for them it means defending their way of life and it doesn’t matter whether it’s with their own life. Yesterday we stayed the night in Somalagua, a place in Santa Bárbara where the land has recovered. A new landowner came along – these landowners take possession of the land – so as COPINH is the only organisation in the country, it doesn’t matter if the landowners have arms, we go in all the same. We make the effort because the people won’t give in, come what-may. And so we go in, and afterwards we’re all threatened. If she’s the first to enter, they put her in prison, and they know how it goes: here they kill people. They kill people because they know they’re indigenous – three times exploited. It’s racism, it’s based on class, and well also …

MM: Also because of their gender?

L: Yes, because they’re women.

SM:  It’s also because they’re women. Then after all this struggle, not only in Bocallán, where these days they’ve been fighting. For example, tomorrow we’re going to Santa Elena, La Paz, there’s another hydroelectric project there financed by Congress…

L: Deputy Gladis Aurora López.

SM: Gladis Aurora López is a Deputy in the National Congress and a [Ministerial] Secretary, right?

L: Vice President of Congress.

SM: Vice President of Congress. Because she thinks she has money, because she thinks that the people are indigenous, and because she thinks that killing people is a game. She’s killed to build a hydroelectric dam no matter whether the people want it or not – and those that don’t want it she kills.

We’ll keep up the resistance as long as necessary, and tomorrow we’re going to carry on another check-up. Because on the riverbank there are recovered areas, areas where people have gone to stop them building the hydroelectric plant along the riverbanks. These are the efforts people are making every day.

More threats, in a place called la Dica del Pira (?). It’s threatened now with a military base, an opal mine, a rare precious rock. And also they want to build a hydroelectric dam – and they are trying to do so now; they already have permissions, and people have already been evicted, with everything. They began from a place you need a car to find, although people resisted: they walked for a full day to try and kick out the machines. So although the people do everything to resist, they are threatened every day, many in a place called Robuca, San Francisco or near where we have the radio. Now here is one of the most threatened places of all because it’s where the people put up the most resistance. More resistance, more oppression. And so, on the other side of the river we have other places of resistance which they’re using the chainsaw on: here is another place with a lot of involvement from the people. And now we’re waiting for them to arrive, the people are prepared, to fight back against this coup. There are still more places where they’re working and where resistance is more difficult. But the struggles continue in all the communities, but what concerns us most is that they’re killing more people. More killings, and more denunciations, but no response. Not one of them is in prison, not one, they say: tomorrow we’ll catch them. They don’t pay us any attention solely because we’re indigenous; they think this, right? They can do whatever they want to us, they can even kill us. And most of us are threatened. Perhaps today you see three of us; perhaps after the night you’ll only see one or two of us. Any of us could die and nobody cares.

Well no more. And does the world ask itself? I suppose sometimes; no one knows; the world doesn’t know who dies anymore. They only think of the city, where they write about if the child of a millionaire is killed; but killing anyone poor? That’s not important. And because of this we’re stereotyped by what we what we have in this country, well San Pedro, and it’s so sad. They kill less in the capital and in San Pedro than they do here. But only the indigenous, that’s how it is. And COPINH is one of the few organisations that have survived against all these attacks. We’ve survived because people like you have come, something I give thanks for every day, because you come but you also follow-up. You know it right? At least COPINH exists there. We’re going to offer resistance for our Mother Earth, since we the indigenous people have such love of nature, our Pacha Mama. Because we know that we have only this: we’re all in this boat travelling together. We have a saying that ‘the earth doesn’t need me, I’m the one that needs the earth’, therefore, I love it every day. I will fight from dawn ’til dusk for her, and if I should wake up and survive, well surviving for her doesn’t matter. And one of the types of training we give so that people can survive is that we do not train militarily, nor do we have arms, or anything like that. But what we train people in are methods of protection, how to hide, how to survive, how to know when you can go up to look out. Also we train them to know how to protect things, and how to at least protect our Mother Earth. We tell ourselves: when they kill us, we enter into the earth and from there our blood from the struggle will germinate to give even more support to our people. That is our saying, it’s not that of the hydroelectric companies; they chase the money and give little thought for what they exploit. No matter what they call us: stupid, guerrillas, troublemakers, that we don’t have training, or that we’re narrow-minded and oppose progress. For us, progress isn’t their economic development. For us, our progress is that the river runs, that it flows naturally and that we can support the river we have there. [Laughs], but that is our version of development, ours is that the indigenous people can continue as they are, because they lack for nothing. They don’t need anything, not even a mobile phone. They don’t lack anything between then. They don’t need anything because they live in peace. Ever since the arrival of the great civilisation, or the ‘progress’ of I don’t know what – for me it’s a step backwards. But come what may we’ll carry on fighting, keep searching for those community bonds in order to strengthen their groups and ensure they’re respected. Now it’s more difficult than ever, but there’s an organisation of the state that …

MM: What’s it called?

SM: INA [National Institute for Agrarian Reform]

MM: INA. Ah yes, INA.

SM: For me, our way of seeing as indigenous people is that we are just employees for the State where they spend money without it doing anything. Here there’s been many a year where they don’t give us anything, they don’t do anything, months go by with nothing happening. They don’t have anything to say in the whole valley, or it doesn’t matter to them what happens in the communities. Because they don’t live here, they don’t give a damn about it. Apart from that, what they mainly do is repress us, and come in to check our papers and telling us how much better it would be for the indigenous people to leave because there are fights you just can’t win. But the people aren’t disheartened, they come out of it more motivated. We say that we’re at least going to fight back. We live there all the time, and we spend all our time there. And because of this we have our communications outlets – I speak on the radio for instance. I’m one of those ….; we come and go, we spend time in people’s houses so that they aren’t detained or arrested. It’s a difficult situation and not at all easy to keep it up. To carry on – but this is life, right? It’s great you’ve come, because it gives us more to shout about. Although our voice is small here, it has reached the other side of the world – a part of the world I don’t [laughs].

MRC: Also as COPINH, it’s important to recognise that the strongest threat in Honduras, right now this year and especially from the beginning of August, is in the conclave of San Pedro Sula. The 12th and 13th, that’s when the international companies come in.

MM: Yes.

MRC: They come for the buying and selling of our land. That is one of the greatest threats for us the indigenous peoples. It’s because of this we’re organising ourselves in peaceful resistance, to stop these huge companies. Because the government is selling our lands to them. It’s offering it to the big transnationals. Faced with the entrance and threat of these big companies, the mass education directed towards the communities is even more vital to COPINH. Our people have to be awake, well informed about what’s happening. The people won’t allow them to take our lands, rivers, and resources – not for a second. They come to explore, with the only objective being economic ambition because they want to extract our greatest national resources, an absolute fortune, whilst our people remain in poverty. The only riches that we have as indigenous peoples are our lands; and that’s why we oppose them. Because the Government, President Don Juan Orlando Hernández, is offering any of our lands as business collateral.

MM: Yes, so many concessions for the hydroelectric companies, and the mining companies also.

MRC: Of course, it’s this we’re against.

MM: This is one of the main themes of this book. And the problems that are caused by the transnational corporations. In every chapter we describe the problems caused by these intrusions into all Central American countries. I have them right now in Honduras, due to the sale of land for …

MRC: Yes, they’ve taken almost everything.

MM: Yes, OK. Thank you very much.

MRC: You too.

MM: Many thanks to you all.

END

 

Interviewees: (from left in photo)  Elvín Maldonado, María-José Bonilla, and Juan Granados – All members of the Camamento Environmentalist Movement (CAM)
Interviewer: Martin Mowforth
Location: Campamento, Olancho, Honduras
Date: Wed. 20^th August 2010
Theme: Deforestation in Olancho, Honduras; threats to defenders of the forests
Keywords: TBC
Notes:

.

Martin Mowforth (MM): Could you give me an explanation of the difference between CAM and MAC, and your relationship with MAO and the region?

Juan Granados: We are the Campamento Environmental Movement. We had an alliance with the Olancho Environmental Movement (MAO) and with other organisations like the Catacamas Environmental Movement (MAC). I said that we had an alliance because it has not been maintained due to differences between the previous managers. They did not have the ability to manage some internal situations within the different movements. It created a small rivalry between the leaders and there was therefore a slight distance between them. But the new Board of Directors is trying to make new alliances with these other organisations, especially with Olancho, and if it’s possible, with organisations outside of Olancho, from other places at a national level, and also an international level if possible. We want to have an alliance with all of the organisations that are not environmental, such as organisations representing coffee producers, and with organisations of the same civil society that are on the list of organisations that there are in our municipality and in the country.

MM: Could you give me an idea of CAM’s mission?

Juan: Inclusive of what we have written. We are a civil society organisation. With our values and principles we advocate policy and peaceful resistance to defend natural resources and human rights. This is CAM’s mission.

MM: What are the problems in Campamento and around the town?

Juan: We have found that the biggest problems have been created through the economic interests of the people that take advantage of the natural resources, especially the forest. So, this was one of the issues that motivated us to found these organisations, like CAM.

MM: When was CAM founded?

Juan: Our organisation was founded in 2002. The other communities had already begun, although empirically and without support. They tried to look after the natural resources, especially the forest. The other communities have been fighting to defend natural resources for some 15 years. Owing to the merciless felling of the forests, we saw ourselves obligated to found an organisation to defend the natural resources and the peoples’ rights, because at the same time as the massive exploitation of the natural resources, the rights of the people that live in the local communities are being violated.  It was because of this that we decided to organise an environmental movement.

The MAO already existed, under the direction of father Andrés Tamayo.  As we indicated, we supported each other. Equally, we also received support from the Catholic church and from all of the other communities. With Andrés Tamayo, we marched from Olancho to Tegucigalpa, we walked and we were there on the trail for 6 and 8 days – we ate on the street. We did three marches for the life and the natural resources, in defence of the environment. So this was how we started off running CAM and later we continued, taking into account that we wanted to run an organisation that protects and defends natural resources and the human rights of the most displaced classes.

MM: And apart from the problem of the forests, do you have any other programmes? For example, recycling or waste treatment programmes?

Juan: We still do not have these types of programmes, because we don’t have the economic capacity nor the management to have projects like these that would have any benefit – because they would minimise the environmental impact of pollution, for example, in the basins, micro-basins and the environment in general. But we do have a vision to implement all types of mitigation to diminish the environmental pollution, so we are trying to make alliances with different organisations to see if we can all push in the same direction. We are trying to make alliances with local authorities. We are counterparts in projects, but with some limitations because we do not have money nor economic support. We are trying to see how we can make these contacts with other organisations. With some NGO’s that want to support us, we have a personal capacity to be able to manage projects in different communities, including at the level of Olancho. We are in a better position because we have complete freedom to do these types of projects in communities.

MM: Where do most of the organisations funds come from?

Juan: Some small projects generate some income which goes towards the continuing development of the environmental movement. Previously, we also had support from the (missing word) fund, but now we are making contacts again to see if we can continue with projects that we hope will be supported. Because the truth is that we are experiencing an institutional economic crisis, because we don’t have money for the upkeep of the office or goods for the organisation. We sometimes face important limitations. So we are going to see where we can find support, making some formalities and some contacts.

MM: In terms of ENCA, we are disposed to receive proposals for financing, but only in small quantities. I can receive them through ENCA’s email, but I alone cannot decide. It depends on ENCA’s committee. We have three meetings per year, every four months more or less. I already mentioned the human rights problems. Are there problems in terms of the abuse of human rights as a result of your work with CAM?

Juan: We have identified that some people in some places, in some communities, including here, within the same urban town, are found without the necessary public services, e.g. they don’t have the necessary diet, a dignified living space, they don’t have a job, or their income is very low, not enough to support their family. So I view these cases as not having the same rights as other people. We have seen that there is too great a difference between the social classes and things seem to be very unfair. When there is some support for the communities, especially the municipalities, it almost never reaches the people. Sometimes help is given to those who have less need, to those who have more necessities to be able to survive, and not to the most humble people. So you see how the rights of people to receive support and to have benefits are overridden by others who receive support even though they don’t need it as much.

Sometimes we see in the countryside that there are people that disrespect their property, they interfere with their properties, they extract resources, for example in this case of the forests, so the problems continue.  They continue drying up water sources, then the temperatures increase as a product of global warming and all of these things, so we see it as an insult to the rights of the people.  However, we are working on this with the people, raising their awareness and their skills so that they can understand some of the laws that grant them rights, such as the new environmental law.  We are also trying to see how we can communicate the Water Law with the communities, because this is also a right that they have and in some cases it is being pushed aside.  The formulation of the Water Law is trying to have influence and it has had influence, but it has not been understood by the people, and we want it to be.

Because of this, we are not very strong because everything moves through economics.  We have the staff and the necessary equipment but we don´t have the resources to mobilise these things.

María-José Bonilla (MB): Recently I brought in support from CAM, I am the administration.  There are already three victims dead, I think that this is a violation of human rights.  Last May it was José Alberto.  So they are found in these areas … but … and it is never seen, and nobody realises that most people can be exploited while … This law is very complicated, the authorities find themselves very limited, because the maderenos are … so to touch the system is … it would be threatening against the people that protest against them and this is a fight they want to win, but it is a little difficult.

MM: Is there evidence of a relationship between the maderenos and drug-traffickers?

Juan: We cannot be sure, but they have acquired too much power, I feel, because whichever crime by whoever the strongest group may be is not enough for them to be arrested, or the damage that they are doing to this country controlled.  As my colleague said, there have been many deaths, and this leaves a lot of evidence that they are people that are accustomed to these types of crimes.  When these types of crimes are seen to be committed by people who are involved in the struggle, it is believed that they could be a type of vehicle between the people involved in drug-trafficking and the timber companies.  Because they react when their interests are threatened, and their operation is like this, violent, murders and stuff. This is the struggle that we have, in a few years already there are thirteen martyrs who died for the defence of natural resources.  And before, there were others like Carlos Luna, Jeannette Kawas, Carlos Escaleras, and others.  We have recorded some thirteen environmentalists murdered in our struggle and this is only in the Olancho area.

This is a dangerous place to lead the fight.  When we attempt to touch these big, powerful interests, there is a huge difficulty because this is where the vast differences exist, and it seems that those that manage the laws always try to make things flexible in favour of the most powerful, which violates the rights of the majority, of the poor.

MM: This question is maybe a little reckless or rude, and if you do not want to answer then that is fine.  What is the relationship between the current government and the resistance?

Juan: Well, the truth is that we feel that many of the governmental decisions, both nationally and locally, are not very beneficial to the large majority.  I have said to you before that in these struggles of reform there have been some attempts from leaders to reform some Constitutional laws.  I feel that it has not been as beneficial to them, so they try to supress, to uncover the people and to top it all they do it in a violent way.  For us, the civil society, what happened in our country has been a coup d´état.  We do not agree with the coup because it brings us many problems, there have also been many deaths during the resistances struggle to defend the interests of the large majority, many leaders have died.  We do not agree with the acts of the authorities in this respect.

MB: CAM as an organisation, in terms of political questions, cannot … because the majority of the organisations members … because it is not possible for us to be environmentalists and we are not supporting the political parties nor the right-wing …. But as people, there are many of us on the directors board that are great leaders of the resistance and have supported the marches and everything.  Also there have been many violations of human rights, and because of this we cannot be in favour of whoever caused them.  The mission of a person that is an environmentalist …

MM: Do you want to add anything more about the development of this area or the problems that you have as an environmental NGO?

CAM’s lawyer, Elvín Maldonado enters the room.

Juan: Our aim is that they take into account the opinions of the large majority of the communities, that they are able to participate in large discussions, because our problem is that, because I don´t know whether in other countries they allow these things, but in our country, the poor people, from the countryside, are not allowed to participate nor make decisions in big national decisions.  We see that we are excluded in the decision making by companies, important politicians and millionaires.  We feel that they are people that are not going to make decisions that will be in favour of the large majorities.  Sometimes they make decisions that favour us, but without the participation of the poor people, the lower class people.

We want the possibility of being taken into account by the leaders of the civil society, by organisations, because we have very civilised and well organised communities, but we don´t have the economic solvency to be able to work with more force or with more demonstrations.

We often have limitations, because we have to give money from our pockets to be able to mobilise ourselves, to buy fuel, to maintain some things, so we have these difficulties.  If support existed from other organisations that took the same line or had the same values as us, we would like to participate with them and create a network with these organisations.  So when we have problems in the future, that is to say, the vision would be different, it would not be the same as ours is now.  It seems a good idea to me, and from what you have told us I think that if we are in agreement with what we both want, then we would like to stay in contact to see what you can do for us, and what we can do for you.  We have the freedom but with this freedom we run the risk of losing our lives, because there has already been proof of many deaths.  We are not bullet-proof, we are exposed, we do not walk around armed.  We do not favour the powerful and important people in this country, in fact the opposite is true, so when we begin this type of struggle, generally it is the leader that risks the most.  Rather, we think that if we had protection, so that we could have a little more security it would make a big difference, because we struggle as we do.  When you or any other organisation representative wants to come to visit us, we will open our doors and be available to meet them and to support them.

Elvín Maldonado (EM): … part of your job is to complete these types of works, but as we forget in these countries, according to the mayors, the local governments have limitations.  To us these opportunities come, and we are making the most of them.  We informed the Forest Law, the wildlife and protected areas laws were passed some time before.  We actively participated in this movement.  Most recently, we also informed the Water Law, and they have passed the law already. We need the internal rules, we need, as an organisation, to read and understand this law so that the Honduran town can know what this law means, because at present in Honduras there is an escalation in the sale of water sources, and privatisation.  There is a boom in clean energy, but this will come to an end, or, it seems that this kind law will create small hydroelectric plants to sell us energy, but these are agreements for 30 or 50 years.  Then will come the privatisation of water.  I believe that now is a crucial time for us, we need the help of organisations, because we have much to do here but few resources.

We thank you for your visit, we hope that it will not be the last time that we see you.  We are here with open doors, you only have to call us and we will help you to see how we live, what we have done and what there is still to do.  In terms of the environment there are barbarous actions that have to be taken and we are going to do what we can with our economic limitations.  We need a range of contributions to help us, we are weak organisations, this we know and we will give you information to see what we can do.  We thank you for coming all the way from London.  We have already met with journalists from England, more people have come here.  The truth is that we only receive judgement from the United States, this is what dominates here.  The other day we were sent an email, which informed us that the State Department is giving the green light to the Senate, I don´t know to who, to give economic help to the timber companies in Honduras.  This means felling of the forests.  We dislike the double-speak, because on one hand they tell us that they will protect us, and on the other hand, they say that they will fell the forest.  We are powerless in this respect, we have nothing more to defend ourselves than the little that we have here, but maybe we will end up crushing them.  So we need international alliances, who are turned on enough to help us, because maybe their things are stronger.

Juan: This is the 90 year old woman who walked to Tegucigalpa three times. Doña Catalina.

EM: We have run walks of 240 km in protest.

(Interview cut short by failure of battery in recorder.)

END

Interviewee: Alfredo López
Interviewer: Martin Mowforth, Amy Haworth Johns, Rachael Wright and Lucy Goodman
Location: Triunfo de la Cruz, Faluma Bimetu radio station
Date: 16 August 2010
Theme: TBC
Keywords: TBC
Notes: Translation by Karis McLaughlin. Please note that ‘…’ denotes that the recording at this point was indecipherable.

.

Alfredo López (AL): This radio station was burnt down on the 6th January [2010] and the campaign was launched. Dominic and his organisation [ENCA] took part in the campaign, and on the 6th February we re-launched the radio station on air. This booth was burned, number two, booth number one as well, where we are broadcasting from now.

People came from the United States, Canada, England. We worked for three weeks. We launched a new radio network, of Mesoamerica, with participation from Guatemala and Honduras. It was in this community, Triunfo de la Cruz. Also, for the first time Radio La Voz participated from Zacate Grande, which is an island where there is now a radio … in the south, right next to El Salvador. That is where the problem is with a man named Miguel Facussé, a problem that we also have here … He wants to destroy the radio, but we are fighting together. We are very poor, so we have to unite to fight together.

… ongoing attacks on the radio … and that is why the research on the radio station fire … we suspect that it was the same authority as that which burnt down the radio station. Because we do not intend to say anything, we are silent. That is why now … a lawyer for the networks, of the World Association of Radios (Asociación Mundial de Radios, AMAR) … the 25 we are waiting for the visit of the attorneys, because we believe that the radio station fire cannot be left like this. We are thinking about really putting on the pressure here so that … for us we will press charges, an appeal to the Court …

This is specifically the case … there is something very important that we are doing now … in Honduras to be able to make a proposal … for community radio. It is not to change the law, but so that the law has a … because the Honduran radio spectrum is owned and belongs to the oligarchy – Facussé, Ferrari, Callejas – but now we want to democratise … that is the work that we are doing as pioneers of alternative communication … was the first. Sure, there are other local radio stations … but they are of a social-commercial nature, we are … we have been on air for more than 15 years, so that … a lot of work. But now, as we are part of the National Front of Resistance, we have convinced them, because they too have realised that communication is power, so they are willing to work with us.

We are in the cities, the slums, we are doing … because they also want their community radio stations. Until now we had a lot of radios stations in the rural areas, but now there is a big demand in urban zones, the areas … and now we are arriving, we are nationalising the idea and it is taking some force.

Here also in Triunfo de la Cruz there is a claim against the State of Honduras in which we have to work a lot … in the international courts, in the Inter-American Commission. Much of that work … is coordinated by us and it is us who is dealing with the documents and having meetings with the State … space with great force and many people are waiting on what we are … the case of Triunfo is … that is why we are working hard. And there are another three cases. This is the case of the community of San Juan, which is … Cayos Cochinos is another case that we have for the violation of human rights and … Punta Piedra where we also have a communication project. So these are the cases that we have …

We here, the situation is … we are in a proposal for recovering our land which … takes us in front of the authorities accused of seizing our land, but the lands … so they accuse me of stealing the land, which supposedly they … for now there are many, but some do not walk …

They are politicians, they have the power and money. The last problem we had was precisely with a politician, a former deputy. About three weeks ago I came … meeting centre, in a place that …. I did not expect it to be so serious, I went, and I went alone …. I went to the carrera because he did not expect that … as 12 people were demolishing a house, burning … it was not my home, I went, at the entrance, I said … and they demolished the house … huts … he said he would file a complaint with the police, I went with the police, the police did not want … the ex-deputy was Don Antonio Fuentes Fosas, friend of …

Now we are building …

Before the coup we were doing … the campaign that we did, the police came to pay us aP1000686 visit to threaten us … We have never had visits from the police, even though we worked … because we have Convention 169 of the International Labour Organisation which protects us … its own communication, always, and when we do not go to the city … before the coup, after when the campaign begun … broadcasting Radio Globo, when Radio Globo was closed … a month later the fire happened, that is why we are very suspicious of authority …

Martin Mowforth (MM): Radio Globo was closed?

AL: Yes. Radio Globo continued broadcasting only on the internet and we can get the signal here. We downloaded it here and put it on air.

MM: Can you explain the case of the fishermen?

AL: The Cayos Cochinos Foundation has done a sort of zoning of the Cochinos Keys, in some areas artisanal fishing is allowed and not in others. The problem is that the fishermen live from fishing and they use artisanal equipment, they do not use GPS, or technology, sometimes they use oars, sometimes they fish with some small sailfish. So they do not know where you can and cannot fish, and since there are no signs they often fish where they believe the fish are. So the Foundation seizes them and confiscates everything, takes some of them prisoners. There is a type of fishing that we call los chorros, five or six people go and when there are signs of fish they put out the net, they round up the catch and pull it to shore. That fishing … and that is something very important for us communities because when they catch fish, nearly the whole population arrives. They call them chinchorreros, because they use a big net, they are people from the community, the Garifuna. They have to go out quite a way, because the net is quite large. They cannot do this job anymore, it is prohibited.

Apart from this they were doing some reality shows, Italian film companies were coming to make films here. There is big money involved. But what is happening with this? Why do they take certain areas of the Cochinos Keys? And when they are filming no one can pass through there. If you have to go fishing you cannot pass through the middle of the keys, you have to go around, some 15 kilometres, to go fishing, and if a fisherman works with the oar, he does not have a motor or anything, and if they are filming for 15 days, no one can pass. We condemn that, and I personally went to do an inspection because there had been lots of complaints from the fishermen because they could not go out. The military is looking after … at the request of … that park authority, also our Garifuna organisation. So those from the Foundation said that I could do an inspection, but the Italian would not allow it … so he told me that I should come back another day, but I did not come back because we do not have the time to be going. … to Italy, and they responded that many people were granted work … that the reality show had improved the living status of the fishermen.

If we talk about the situation that is occurring now, there is a revolt. The day after tomorrow there is a commission going to Tegucigalpa, because as you see, I told you that I come from the area of … the people are angry. Yesterday there was a serious meeting, that commission leaves for Tegucigalpa, to protest against the … No, I think it is with different ministries, it is a serious meeting, and then, like the case in the Interamerican Court we do not know what will happen, because right now there is a lot …

They have been deceiving the people … the fishermen have not been consulted, they have not been told how they are going to be able to fish and how they are not going to be able to fish. Only line fishing is allowed.

We are working. There is a boy with two bullets in his hand … in one of the operations. That is one of the cases which we are going to present in front of the Commission. The boy has practically lost the use of his hand. There are other fishermen, including one of my brothers, who were going fishing, they took the boat … and they left them adrift, swimming, they were helped by other fishermen. We are preparing the video, it is going to come out, because we are sending it to the Commission, with the testimonies of those affected. It was terrible. Without doubt, we are hoping to win this case, the case of El Triunfo too. We hope to win them all.

Already we have put forward a case, the case of Alfredo López against the State of Honduras, because I was in jail for six years and six months, charged with a crime that I never committed and not even now do I know if there was … Right now we are in compliance with the … we are in that now, the State is talking. That is the case that has driven the other cases, especially El Triunfo de la Cruz. The State never fulfils everything with the sentences, but at least they made an attempt because otherwise no one controls them. We know that the United Nations is of the same States, but … independent of the OAS. In addition, the sentences … and the case law (jurisprudencia) is important.

There was also a programme here that was called the Land Administration Programme of Honduras (Programa de Administración de Tierras de Honduras, PATH), for land titling, and this programme was for … throughout Honduras, even us, the Garifuna communities, but in accordance with their vision, of the State, for doing business, that is, that they were going to privatise here. We had to sue the World Bank because they were providing the funds … and the inspection panel of the World Bank … we were right. So now PATH cannot be done in the Garifuna communities, and therefore all the properties that have been the subject of negotiation by the banks … that is why the recoveries which I was speaking about at the beginning … it is common land and it cannot be seized.

PATH operates in Honduras, but not in the indigenous towns, here we are working on our own titling. If we had not sued the World Bank, now we would not have … because it was a state policy, it was a proposal for …

MM: This proposal is from the Government?

AL: Yes, and the Bank was … the banks, also the World Bank and the IDB.

MM: … by environmentalist groups about the Cochinos Keys Foundation … this conflict, they have … what is your relationship with Fundación Prolansate?

AL: No, there is a lot of conflict and that relationship, especially here … has a lot of history. Why? Because Fundación Prolansate says one thing in statements and in reality does something else and so we’re not very enamoured of them.

Los Micos beach and resort, the mega-project … a golf course with 18 holes, was a relationship of the … if not that of the protected areas … some conventions, for example, the Ramsar Convention … they were being violated if filled in for a golf course. Then, the director of the Prolansate Foundation was ousted and then they changed their discourse, they said that yes you could do …

Before that, in 2003 … another case. That is why the relations are not good. One of Prolansate’s boats … passed by and there were children … went by at full speed, it took out these children and one of them died. We appealed for the case. What did they do? They won over the mother … balls to us because we were considering a lawsuit. Then the lady … they gave 10,000 lempiras to the boy’s mother and that put a stop to the lawsuit, because they said that they had made a settlement … we had to forget the case, but that was a precedent for us … the environment and the people, of course.

They did that here, about three months ago … they came here, I do not know what they were doing, inspecting, and they seized … Then the fishermen, as they do not know where to turn, came here, to the radio, it was full … we, they cannot come to confiscate nets without saying what is happening or what they are going to do … what they are doing at least. They came and seized the nets. The people were agitated. So here we made several reports, we spoke to the fishermen … were listening to the authorities. A meeting was called … Natural Resources and Prolansate, who were involved in the seizures, and the fishermen, and we were there to help guide … What was the meeting for? To explain to the people that what they were trying to do was explain the size of the nets which would be allowed, but that they were not seizing.

MM: They are asking what are the rights of … the fishermen, what they can and cannot do.

AL: There is a decree that gives them the right, supposedly for protecting the area, but not for harassing the people, they confuse the situation, because they wanted to explain that you cannot fish with some nets … that also we use traditionally. But I say to them, ‘but if we have used it for so many years, for so much time, why do you now come and tell us which is the right size of net?’ Furthermore, they should come first and then make the seizure … but you come and do things first and then come to explain it. Because the point is that there is a decree … so as there is a decree for the Anercagua Park (Anconcagua?), it is a legal matter, but … to prevent abuses, but they do not count … so the lawsuits.

They did not consult us … we are going to do such thing, they do it, and OFRANEH like it does not exist. That is why the government itself is in trouble with these projects because we have seen that with these projects, you cannot, we do not agree, but they do it. But they need us to tell them that … from the organisation. The decree says that you have to consult the organisation representing the Garífuna and officially we are one of them.

… they are doing to counteract this, as a government strategy … that is supposedly participation of the Garífuna people, but the council (patronatos) is not handling it … it is uncomfortable negotiating with you, they get hold of something else … you are going to represent … but it is not that really they are doing it in the right way.

… one or two projects of the IDB or the World Bank, so they sponsor them. This is how things are, which is why there are communities that we are not going to be able to save, some will be lost … show them some of the things that … we can go there to the land and we can take a look, right now.

AL: FUCSA, the last one which was terrible, there was a team of fishermen from here in Triunfo, fishing in Cuero y Salado [Protected Area]. They fired on the fishermen at night and killed one of them.

MM: FUCSA is an environmental organisation, like Prolansate.

Second File

MM: The other thing that Alfredo was saying a little while back was that, given the relationships with the environmental organisations like Prolansate and FUCSA, they believe that they have to work with nature and natural resources all the time and it is they who have to look after them.

END