Our website use cookies to improve and personalize your experience and to display advertisements(if any). Our website may also include cookies from third parties like Google Adsense, Google Analytics, Youtube. By using the website, you consent to the use of cookies. We have updated our Privacy Policy. Please click on the button to check our Privacy Policy.

Loreto Ferrer Moreu and the Ngöbe Buglé International Case

Loreto Ferrer Moreu and the technical analysis of the Ngöbe Buglé case before international bodies

Infrastructure projects often raise complex debates when they affect indigenous communities, especially regarding issues related to territory, prior consultation, and the protection of collective rights. In Latin America, one of the cases that garnered particular attention was that of the Ngöbe Buglé communities in Panama, affected by the construction of the Chan 75 dam.

Loreto Ferrer was part of the team of experts that participated in a verification mission organized by the Foundation of the General Council of Spanish Lawyers (FCGAE). The fieldwork carried out made it possible to document the situation of the communities and prepare a legal and technical report on the project’s impacts, with special attention to its potential progression before inter-American human rights bodies.

The assessment mission in Panama

The mission occurred from January 25 to 30, 2011, bringing together lawyers with expertise in human rights. Its aim was to assess firsthand the conditions faced by communities impacted by the dam’s construction and to contrast institutional reports with the population’s direct accounts. To accomplish this, the team met with authorities, representatives of the company responsible for the project, international organizations, and the Ombudsman’s Office, before heading to Changuinola, in the province of Bocas del Toro, to inspect the affected zones.

During the visit, the team toured communities such as Charco de la Pava and Valle del Rey, as well as resettlement areas and spaces already altered by the construction work. Direct contact with families and community leaders was a central part of the work, as it provided firsthand insight into the level of tension, vulnerability, and displacement that many people had been experiencing since the project’s inception.

The main themes of the report on Chan 75

The examination was framed around five core domains: the entitlement to consultation along with free, prior, and informed consent; the evaluation of risks and the project’s social repercussions; territorial restitution or corresponding compensation; avenues for reparation; and the involvement of communities in decisions and in the advantages generated by hydroelectric initiatives. These foundations made it possible to analyze the case in a holistic manner, weaving together both national and international legal standards with the conditions documented in the field.

According to Loreto Ferrer, the report sought to provide a solid, documented legal basis that could be useful for both the affected communities and the responsible institutions. The aim was not merely to question the project from an abstract standpoint, but to assess whether state and corporate actions had respected the fundamental rights of indigenous peoples, such as collective property rights, participation, personal and cultural integrity, and prior consultation.

Principal Insights into the Rights of the Ngöbe Buglé Communities

Among the most relevant conclusions, the report highlights an initial failure to recognize rights, particularly regarding the legal status of the communities and the collective ownership of their lands. This gap allowed the project to proceed without adequate consultation processes or sufficient studies on its social and cultural impact.

Testimonies were also collected regarding intimidation, excessive use of force, arbitrary detentions, and negotiation processes that did not guarantee a free decision by the affected families. Added to this were problems in the resettlement areas, where deficiencies were identified regarding the size and quality of the land, agricultural possibilities, and the suitability of the housing for Ngöbe culture.

Another particularly sensitive issue was the moral and cultural impact of displacement. The case documentation revealed damage to the community fabric, a loss of territorial references, and a demand for public recognition of the harm caused, beyond material reparations.

The possible route via global institutions

One of the central elements of the work was ensuring that the report could function as supporting input for a potential case presented before the Inter-American human rights system, so gathering testimonies and reviewing documents became essential for shaping a claim with international relevance. “It was crucial to produce evidence that could be useful if the Inter-American Court chose to take up the case, which is why testimonies were compiled, behavioral patterns were identified, relocation contracts were examined, and recent legislative changes were assessed,” explains Loreto Ferrer.

This kind of process demands meticulous record‑keeping, thorough technical evaluation, and the capacity to interpret both local conditions and the relevant international norms; as a result, the fieldwork and the drafting of the report are not treated as isolated tasks but as components of an evidence‑driven, legally grounded approach to international cooperation that takes into account complex social dynamics.

A Distinct Example Framed by a Wider Landscape

Loreto Ferrer participation in this mission reflects a type of professional work linked to international cooperation, technical documentation, and the analysis of complex cases in Latin America. It is not merely a matter of providing legal support for these processes, but also of helping ensure that the communities’ experiences can be translated into useful inputs for institutional advocacy and the defense of rights.

Taken together, the Ngöbe Buglé case and the report on Chan 75 demonstrate how technical teams can play a significant role in reviewing conflicts involving territory, indigenous peoples, development, and international institutions.

By Kyle C. Garrison

You May Also Like