Dear Editor,
I wish to refer to Stabroek News’ front page article under the caption `Indigenous leaders call for hold on LCDS, REDD + Projects’ on Wednesday 10th March, 2010.
Kindly allow me to raise the following points:
Contrary to the APA’s views on the LCDS Consultations, the Government of Norway responded to President Jagdeo’s Request for Independent Monitoring of the stakeholder Consultation process in Guyana to ensure it was guided by internationally accepted principles and standards, by engaging the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) to monitor the LCDS Consultations.
The IIED issued a report at the conclusion of the LCDS Consultation process which stated that “overall, the independent monitoring team finds that the process of multi-stakeholder consultation surrounding Guyana’s Low Carbon Development Strategy has broadly followed Principles derived from international best practice and has met these criteria. It is the opinion of this team that the consultation process to the extent that its findings inform a revised LCDS can be considered credible, transparent and inclusive”. The report went on to state: the Government commitment to transparency and accountability has been exemplary during the preliminary consultation process of the LCDS”.
Amerindian lawyer Mr. David James also participated in the LCDS consultations being a member of the LCDS Multi Stake-holder Steering Committee (MSSC). He too can attest to the credibility, transparency and inclusiveness of the LCDS Consultations. Mr. James was also a member of the Government of Guyana Delegation to the Climate Conference in Copenhagen last year December 2009. But Mr. James needs to be consistent in his views on the LCDS consultations as he is saying different things at different foras.
Guyana’s LCDS and REDD+ initiative respectfully uphold the Principle of Free, Prior and Informed Consent when it comes to the participation of Amerindian communities and any views to the contrary can be deemed to be misleading, misinformation and destructive.
If the APA wanted to play a constructive and meaningful role in the LCDS process in Guyana, they would have accepted the invitation issued to them to become a member of the LCDS MSSC. But they chose not to be.
The Amerindian Communities should know by now that before they can become participants of the LCDS and REDD + initiative they will first have to give their consent after a consultation process.
The Amerindian communities should also know that they can opt in to the LCDS or REDD + Initiative at their own pace or in their own time.
Regardless what the APA says about the LCDS consultations process, they need to be cognisant of the fact that the consultations were monitored by a credible international organisation approved by the Government of Norway.
Finally, it is apparent that the APA exposed its ignorance about the application of the Free Prior and Informed Consent Principle (FPICP) by the LCDS consultations process and the REDD + Initiative. The report by the IIED stated “The LCDS has established the principle of FPIC as the standard for Amerindian communities to opt in to the forest protection Programme. The LCDS to date has made significant efforts to ensure that the requirements of FPIC have been complied with”. This is an indisputable fact.
Yours faithfully,
Peter Persaud
