Bolivia's Indigenous Peoples Bring their Demands to the Constituent Assembly

Readers:

Here is another post as part of our continuing front line reports from the Constituent Assembly in Sucre, where elected delegates struggle to draft a new Bolivian constitution. In the past week new chaos has descended on the process, as some groups have stepped up protests demanding that Bolivia move its national capital from La Paz to Sucre (which is already the judicial capital). We'll have a post specifically devoted to that issue shortly. In the meanwhile, Democracy Center team members Lily Whitesell, Leny Olivera and Aldo Orellana offer this important post on the demands by Bolivia's indigenous groups in the historic process underway.

Jim Shultz

Bolivia's Indigenous Peoples Bring their Demands to the Constituent Assembly

On the Thursday before August 6, Bolivia’s Independence Day, more than 100 indigenous leaders and representatives arrived in Sucre from communities from the far reaches of Bolivia’s highlands. Heads held high with dignity and authority, they walked up the steps of Colegio Junin, left their names or identification cards with the guards, and strode into the main patio.

Each leader, accompanied by a few members of their communities, carried a small metal bastón (cane) with Andean designs and woven decorations as a symbol of their authority. Many also carried a leather braided cord over their shoulders, which symbolically could function as either a rope or whip. They were wearing brightly colored clothing and hats typical of their communities, with ornately woven bags holding coca leaves hung over their ponchos.

This was the third visit from the leaders of CONAMAQ, the highland indigenous organization. CONAMAQ is one of the more politically independent groups in the Unity Pact, the alliance of nine organizations that represent Bolivia’s indigenous and campesino (small-scale rural farmer) groups in the Constituent Assembly.

This was not a visit to congratulate the Assembly representatives, however. The leaders were angry, believing that Assembly representatives had been playing politics with their demands.

First they visited some of the commissions, assessing the representatives’ work and presenting their demands. Taking the central plaza, they then began a ceremony to open dialogue with the representatives that were there. They placed an aguayo (a traditionally hand-woven cloth) on the ground and spread coca leaves on it. (In traditional cultures, chewing coca leaves together is a way of inviting the participation of all parties present.) The leaders took their canes and, approaching the center of the circle, formed a pyramid out of them over the aguayo, each supporting their cane with the others there. They then began to speak, taking turns.

One indigenous leader described why they were there, “It is because of CONAMAQ that the Constituent Assembly was convoked. It is because of the first nations, the indigenous people of the highlands and lowlands….” Another spoke about the importance of their demands, “The proposal of the indigenous first nations must be taken into consideration by these commissions – because these proposals have been worked on for not just one year…These proposals have been worked for during 500 years, during the 500 years of cultural resistance!”

As the commission meetings let out, Assembly representatives joined the circle. After the indigenous authorities spoke, the representatives took their turns. An academic well-respected by the CONAMAQ community began, asserting the representatives’ continued commitment to their communities and original demands. He was followed by the president of the Land and Territory Commission, who handed out a report that included the articles the commission had passed.

Esperanza Huanca, a representative from the high plains and mountains of northern Potosi, then gave an impassioned speech on the importance of the demands of Bolivia’s indigenous people. She declared, “We cannot forget our six demands which are nonnegotiable, which we will never renounce – The Plurinational State, Indigenous Autonomies, Control over Renewable and Non-Renewable Resources, Land and Territory, Direct Representation, and Judicial Pluralism!”

Each of these demands refers to a specific proposal that was presented to one or more of the Assembly’s 21 commissions. But what are these proposals, what problems do they aim to fix, and what has become of them?

The Plurinational State

The demand to describe Bolivia as a plurinational country as part of the Constitution’s theoretical and ideological framework is a demand that came from the alliance of Bolivia’s thirty-six indigenous groups and the Afro-Boliviano people.

Among those groups, the Quechua and Aymara are considered indigenous “nations” – because millions of people in Bolivia and other Andean countries speak these two languages, share a common culture, and hold identities that transcend political boundaries. For those groups, recognizing Bolivia as a state that encompasses many nations of people has as much to do with Bolivia’s identity as their own.

However, the “plurinational state” is not only about recognizing a multiethnic identity. For indigenous groups all over Bolivia, using those words to describe the country also signifies a deeper commitment to creating space for both traditional indigenous and contemporary urban methods of public participation in decision-making, justice, and representation.

Autonomies

One of the proposals to build new space for traditional ways of decision-making is to create autonomous indigenous regions and municipalities. Autonomy, however, is not just an indigenous issue. That commission was given the charge of one of the other most controversial issues of the entire Assembly – departmental autonomy, the central demand of PODEMOS.

The issue of departmental autonomy goes back for several years. In the election of July 2006, Constituent Assembly representatives were decided and four of Bolivia’s nine departments voted for greater autonomy in a nationwide referendum. Pando, Beni, Santa Cruz, and Tarija line the eastern side of the country, which coined the term “media luna” (half-moon) as a common way of referring to the departments who voted for autonomy and whose leaders are often at odds with the Morales administration.

Autonomy has since turned into a rallying cry for the political leaders of the media luna, who would like nothing better than to have greater independence from the national government. It is also their top issue in the Constituent Assembly, where the commission on autonomy is stacked with the strongest representatives from each side. Saúl Ávila, MAS representative from Santa Cruz and president of the commission, noted that nine political party leaders are in his commission.

The majority proposal that the commission finally issued was to allow for both departmental and indigenous autonomies. The departments that voted for autonomy will automatically become such, given greater control over their department. A parallel structure will be created at the municipal level. Municipalities will be able to declare themselves either autonomous or as majority indigenous through a referendum. If they desire to do so, several indigenous municipalities can come together to form an indigenous “region”. Under the proposal, an indigenous region will have responsibilities similar to that of a department, but will still coordinate with their corresponding departmental authorities. In addition to greater freedoms, the autonomous regions, departments, and municipalities will also be given greater responsibility in running the everyday business of their jurisdiction – providing roads, education, health services, water and electricity, as well as promoting environmental conservation, economic development, and tourism within their jurisdiction.

The Pacto de Unidad, CONAMAQ among them, has criticized the proposal for giving the departments too much power over the indigenous autonomies. On the other side, PODEMOS wrote the commission’s minority proposal, in which they advocate against indigenous autonomies and for granting greater powers to the departments – particularly, a larger role in the administration of the ongoing Agrarian Reform (see below).

Judicial Pluralism and Direct Representation

Two other ways of creating new space for traditional ways are through judicial pluralism and direct representation.

The Bolivian courts and justice system has a reputation for being slow and oftentimes corrupt, particularly in rural areas. Many communities feel that going to the courts is an investment they can’t afford to make with little promise of a fair result. “True” community justice, say advocates, is a fair, public decision that both provides real consequences and can improve the community (when the punishment is a community service requirement, for example, making mud bricks to build a new school). It is based on the idea that social control is one of the best forms of preventing future crimes. The new proposals allow for judicial pluralism – both community justice as well as the traditional court system – within the Constitution.

Direct representation is another key demand. Bolivia’s indigenous groups often feel that the traditional political party structure and election system is foreign to their own culture. Direct representation would mean that each indigenous group would have a representative in Bolivia’s legislative system, selected through their own traditional norms and procedures, which vary from one community to another – not through political parties or written-ballot elections.

Land and Territory

One of the worst injustices indigenous people throughout the Americas have experienced is the appropriation of their lands. Colonizers took control of lands that had been controlled by communities for generations. That practice continued under Bolivia’s dictatorships and democratic governments through political favors and concessions to cattle, lumber, and gas and oil companies.

You could imagine how a just system would have worked – early in the country’s history, a survey would have been done, and parcels of land that were inhabited would be granted officially through land titles to communities. That never happened. Instead, the people who lived on the land were considered just another natural resource to be sold with the land and exploited – planting and harvesting crops, mining, cutting trees, building roads, and working in gas and oil fields.

The Agrarian Reform of 1952 was intended to remedy the situation by means of redistributing Bolivia’s land from hacienda owners to those that worked the land. However, the reform was mostly implemented in the highlands and valleys of the Andes Mountains, leaving the Amazon tropics mostly untouched. A 1996 law was passed to extend the reform and recognize indigenous territories, which Morales strengthened with greater implementation, enforcement, and an additional law passed in late 2006. Here's a link to a useful report by Douglas Hertzler on the land reform issue.

For those fighting for those rights, the next step in this process is establishing indigenous autonomies through the Constituent Assembly, and guaranteeing the rights of those communities to determine how their land and natural resources will be used.

Control over Renewable and Non-Renewable Resources

How Bolivia's natural resources - gas and oil, water, valuable minerals - will be used and sold has been one of the biggest sources of conflict of the last ten years in Bolivia, and, one could argue, of its entire history. It is a country that was rich in silver, tin, rubber, guano, lumber, and now gas and oil, but it has a record of exploiting natural resources and taking them abroad with little benefit for the development of the country.

So it comes as no surprise that 7 of the 21 commissions are dedicated in some way to the use and development of Bolivia’s natural resources – from gas and oil to water to the land. The commissions determined that local (municipal and indigenous), departmental, and regional autonomies would have control over the use of renewable resources.

However, non-renewable resources, the proposals declare, are the property of the Bolivian people as a whole. And if natural gas, for example, is discovered on land that belongs to an indigenous autonomy? The question still remains as to whether the people of the indigenous autonomy have the right to a consulta, the equivalent of a social impact statement which would be taken into consideration in the final decision, or the right to veto the development of that natural resource if it would devastate their native lands. Many who have advocated for the right to veto worry that it may be one of the first cards to be traded at the bargaining table.

The Bargaining Table

When the Constituent Assembly resumes work after two weeks of conflict over the Capitalia issue (look for a forthcoming blog about that topic) and finish the work of the joint commissions, we will see the real defining moment of what the Constituent Assembly is able to accomplish. The leadership of the Assembly, the heads of the political parties, and the commission presidents will meet in the Settlement (Concertación) Commission to hammer out as many of the differences as possible between the majority and minority proposals.

This will be the true bargaining table, when Assembly representatives from each side will try to negotiate the other side’s support for their most important articles. It goes without saying that those that have bet the most on the Assembly’s success will be waiting by the door, paying careful attention to each political deal and trade.

Written by Lily Whitesell, Leny Olivera and Aldo Orellana