A few weeks ago, the National Mining Society (SONAMI) appealed to the Second Environmental Court in Chile to invalidate the creation of the Desierto Florido National Park in the northern Atacama region. The argument: regulatory expropriation.

 

The park, created on June 12, 2023, by the Ministry of National Property through Decree 12, seeks to protect the "inland Mediterranean desert scrub ecosystem of Skykanthus acutus and Atriplex deserticola, where the phenomenon of the flowering desert, of singular floristic importance and tourist attraction, occurs episodically, creating a space conducive to scientific research, environmental education, and the development of regulated tourist visitation activities.“

 

The administrative act was approved by the Comptroller General of the Republic on June 2, more than two years ago.

 

Among its objections, SONAMI mentioned that ”the process of creating the park was not carried out with citizen participation, which did not allow concession owners to give their opinion." To support its argument, it reported that the protected area would overlap with 376 mining concessions.

 

It added that the delimitation “has a direct effect on areas suitable for mining, without proper environmental justification or an analysis of the impact on pre-existing rights.”

 

The controversy is not new. The dispute between mining (along with various other high-impact productive activities) and the protection of unique ecosystems (and even traditional ways of life) is a constant. In fact, it could also be said to be eternal.

 

We know this in the Aysén region of Chilean Patagonia, with the current 312 salmon farming concessions in the Las Guaitecas National Reserve, 4 in the Isla Magdalena National Park, and 2 in the Laguna San Rafael National Park. Where any type of action to achieve the objective for which they were created is torpedoed by the salmon farming industry, despite the fact that this sector is recognized as the main threat to these protected areas.

 

It is strange that SONAMI talks about regulatory expropriation. If there is one sector that expropriates public and private subsoil through convoluted administrative and legal procedures, it is mining. Something similar happens with the water rights system and aquaculture concessions.

 

In all these cases, those who apply for concessions do so regardless of the ownership of the associated natural elements: adjacent land in the case of water, soil in the case of underground mining, and the sea, which is a national asset for public use in the case of salmon farms. And the applicants can be individuals, companies, or corporations, regardless of whether they are controlled by foreign capital.

A clear example is the offensive by the Newmont mining company in the Aysén region. The world's leading gold mining corporation.

 

A 2019 article published in Interferencia reported on the more than 50,000 hectares of mining concessions held by this company north of Coyhaique.

 

“The land registered by the US company is located near the border with Argentina, an area characterized by lenga and ñire forests. In addition, many of these areas contain archaeological and paleontological heritage,” the article stated. It also warned about Newmont's environmental record: in Guatemala, in 2009, a man was burned alive by company workers; in Peru, it faced a conflict “after 150 liters of mercury were spilled in June 2000 at the Yanacocha mine in the Cajamarca area.” Problems have also been reported in Honduras and Mexico.

 

It is in this context that, for some time now, the company has been carrying out road works in the Lago Verde district to facilitate its exploration in the Cerro Aguja sector. The initiative has been included in the portfolio of projects being reviewed by the region's Pro-Growth and Pro-Employment Cabinet. And for several years, the regional ministerial secretariat of National Property has maintained lease agreements with the company for the same purpose. In fact, the former regional ministerial secretary of mining included representatives of the company in the Regional Mining and Geology Board.

 

The fact that the authorities of this government are fully aware of what a company with these credentials does and seeks would not be a problem if it were not for the fact that in the community directly affected (both for and against), there is almost no information about this type of work and objectives.

 

We know this because councilmen (councilmen!) have turned to us to request information that has been denied to them through various channels.

 

So, when SONAMI (and other sectors) talk about regulatory expropriation because they want to establish a national park, what do you call what mining, the salmon industry, and energy companies do every day?

 

This behavior by institutions and companies runs counter to the basic principles of the Escazú Agreement, to which Chile acceded as a signatory state on September 11, 2022. That was more than three years ago.

 

The international treaty enshrines the right to information, participation in decision-making, and access to environmental justice for all those affected by decisions in this area. The aim is to achieve social peace and sustainable development.

 

This is because when certain sectors repeatedly refer to the need for legal certainty, this should not only apply to investment, which is important in itself. It must also be so for those who live in places that are often cannon fodder for external interests, without having any idea of what is being plotted behind their backs.

 

All this, without forgetting the essential: a protected area is for the benefit of society as a whole. A concession on public land (whether land or sea) remains, even if they try to dress it up as a common good, a private benefit.