The Amerindian Peoples Association (APA), in a press release on Thursday said it remains open to collaborating with the Architecture for REDD+ Transactions (ART) to arrive at a fair and transparent resolution to its appeal in relation to a carbon credits programme funded by US company Hess.
The APA had, in a previous public statement on October 27, explained that it was informed by the ART Secretariat that its appeal would be dismissed at 6:01pm of that day if the advocacy body did not sign ART’s terms of reference for the appeal.
According to the APA, following consultations with its executive committee and staff, it determined that ART’s terms of reference, without the APA’s proposed revisions, did not ensure impartiality, effectiveness, nor transparency of the appeal process. The APA said it could not move ahead in full confidence with the process if it [the process] did not contain the minimum guarantees for fairness and accountability for all parties in line with international best practices, as reflected in ART’s own Complaints Guidance. The APA says that at this stage, ART has not published its dismissal order and the indigenous advocacy body says it continues to remain hopeful that the ART is seriously considering its recommendations and remains open to engaging the organisation to ensure an equitable consultation process in the implementation of the appeal mechanism.
The APA also says it has consistently worked with ART to ensure that the appeal process is in line with ART’s own guiding principles which include consideration for the legitimacy, impartiality, and transparency of its complaints and appeal mechanism. These principles, the APA says, also mirrors international best practice principles for grievance mechanisms as set out in the United Nations Guiding Principles for Business and Human Rights. As explained in their previous statement, the APA’s revisited its recommendations which included measures that would:
• Clarify the ART Secretariat’s role in the ART appeal process.
• Ensure that the appeal committee is able to consult with subject-matter experts, such as in Guyanese law and international human rights standards for indigenous peoples.
• Ensure that the appeal committee can consider any relevant information in making its decisions.
• Ensure that the appeal committee will consider the substantive issues raised by the APA, relating to the Government of Guyana’s compliance with TREES and its role in respecting indigenous peoples’ rights to their customary decision-making processes and free, prior, and informed consent.
• Provide greater independence between the appeal committee and the ART Secretariat.
• Allow for greater transparency surrounding the appeal process itself, which would enable continuous learning on ART’s grievance mechanism
The APA said that these recommendations are regarded as being vital to ensuring that the ART appeal process facilitates a balanced, informed, and responsible ruling not just in the APA’s case but for future grievances as ART’s role in international carbon market trading will have deep and lasting implications for other countries and other communities’ participation in these processes. The APA reiterates that its position cannot be viewed as a “win” or “lose” in the appeal, as its legitimate concerns reflect a need to improve the participation of indigenous communities in climate financing mechanisms.
The organisation reiterated its call for further engagement with the ART Secretariat to consider its recommendations for improvements to the appeal process for all parties.
Earlier this year, the APA utilized the grievance mechanism under ART to lodge a formal complaint with the institution that issued US$750m in jurisdictional carbon credits last year.
The complaint was lodged with the Winrock Architecture for REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation) Transactions (ART) Secretariat. It alleges that the principle of Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) was not applied for the issuance of the carbon credits for the period 2016 and 2020.
The formal complaint came close to three months after US oil company, Hess Corporation, purchased US$750 million worth of the jurisdictional carbon credits from Guyana in December last year.
