A Voice For the Voiceless

MISSION

The Advocacy Project seeks to help community-based advocates produce, disseminate and use information, and so become more effective advocates for human rights and social justice

Groping for Common Ground

Where does this leave Rio Negro's long struggle? Certainly, that struggle looks less lonely and unreasonable, when placed in the content of Guatemala's current debate over reparations. Rio Negro shares the same goals as hundreds of communities seeking redress for past injuries. A national plan has been drafted. All that now remains is political will on the part of the government, pressure from the outside, and money.

What makes Rio Negro unique is, of course, the link with Chixoy dam and the involvement of the World Bank. Speaking generally, Marco Antonio Aguilar told Peter Lippman that he did not feel the World Bank was responsible for what had happed in Guatemala.

"The Guatemalan state is responsible, through the army. We can't ask the World Bank, for instance, for restitution. This must come from the Guatemalan state."

That view, which is not shared by Rio Negro or its supporters, reflects the ombudsman's mandate. The ombudsman represents all the communities that suffered-not just those that had the misfortune to meet face to face with a dam.

World Bank officials in Guatemala City told The Advocacy Project that the Bank would continue to search for ways of helping, but within the framework of the Bank's program for support to the government of Guatemala. Among other things, says the Bank, this provides funding for the Guatemalan peace process and several anti-poverty programs.

Taking the campaign to California: Jesus Tecu Osorio from ADIVIMA on a speaking tour of California organized by Nisgua. Peter Lippman of The Advocacy Project translated for Jesus and took this photo.

One possible compromise might be for the Guatemalan government to establish a special reparations fund for key communities, including Rio Negro, with support from the Bank. This would have the double advantage of jumpstarting a national program on reparations, along the lines suggested by the truth commission, while placing Rio Negro's needs firmly within the context of reparations-and not handouts.

This would need a lot more discussion. Would such a fund take the form of a grant or a loan? Who would control it-the community or government? Who would benefit-communities or individual victims?

But the basic principle might prove acceptable to both sides. It would seem totally consistent with the World Bank's support for FONAPAZ, its desire to further assist Rio Negro, and its stated commitment to Guatemala's peace process. Whatever their doubts about social funds, critics of the Bank might like to see it engage more directly in this critical phase of reconstruction. It certainly has more to do with social and emotional recovery, than with economic development.

Such a formula was not ruled out by Bank officials in Guatemala, but it was described as premature by Rio Negro's international allies. For now, their tactic is clear and simple: get the Bank to accept responsibility for the events at Chixoy and allow the damaged community to start assessing its own losses-on their own terms.

"It has to start with process," insists Grahame Russell of Rights Action, which has supported the struggle for impunity in Rio Negro over the past five years.

"The Rio Negro survivors must be helped to assess their losses as a community before there is any discussion over the details. That has to begin with the Bank accepting responsibility. It can't be a matter of the Bank doing Pacux any favors."