They fire a warning ahead of Congressional attempts to change the Forestry and Wildlife Act.

He may return to discussion in plenary session next week. Congress recently rejected proposal to change Forest and Wildlife Act (Law No. 29763) through an autograph including a provision that abolishes the requirements for the land-use change process, promoting legal logging in Peru.

The full return will take place as part of the reconsideration requests by Congressmen Nilsa Chacon (People’s Power) and Elvis Vergar (People’s Action) submitted Thursday, March 23 after an autograph was rejected in a full 51-no vote. .

implied

The autograph has caused controversy because among its provisions it introduces “agricultural exclusion zones”, which would not carry out “classification of land according to the ability to wider use”, that is, identifying and classifying them according to their usefulness, as well as requirements for land use change, thereby removing the filter to determine if the area is suitable for forest or agricultural land.

According to experts, this could exacerbate problems such as land encroachment, land trafficking and social conflicts associated with the territory, opening the door for new owners to settle in forested areas, as well as overlapping these areas with communal lands in the process of registration of ownership. . violating their right to territory; and giving more power to issue certificates of tenure, which is contrary to the Forest Act itself, which prohibits the issuance of these titles or certificates of tenure.

Similarly, the approval of this autograph may benefit sectors that have not previously met the requirements of the Forestry Act, weakening forest protection, environmental management, and encouraging legal deforestation.

Cesar Ipenza, a lawyer specializing in environmental law, pointed out that “we cannot continue to promote deforestation with laws that supposedly benefit small farmers.”

“In the context of climate change that we are facing, we must respect existing laws and institutions,” he said. And he remarked, “We Amazons want activities that make the well-being of all viable while respecting our forests.”

warning voices

January 25 at Congressional Andean, Amazonian, and Afro-Peruvian Peoples, Environment and Ecology Commission Approved the search report with a recommendation to file signed the aforementioned law, which was observed by the executive branch last year.

This opinion reflects the position of the indigenous organizations AIDESEP, ORPIO, ORAU, ONAMIAP, which rejected this autograph, demanding that this measure be subject to prior, free and informed consultations, and warning that indigenous territories are under threat.

In addition, it should be recalled that the Forest Law was widely discussed with the indigenous peoples as a result of the negotiations concluded after the unfortunate events in Bagua. Similarly, more than a hundred indigenous and civil society organizations spoke out demanding an autograph in the archives of Congress.

March 2 National Forestry and Wildlife Service (Serfor) issued a statement expressing concern about this proposal by the Congress of the Republic because, as they warned, threatens Peru’s forest heritage and biodiversity.

According to them, this will weaken international commitments and agreements signed by Peru, such as the Joint Declaration of Intent on REDD+ signed by the governments of Peru, Norway and Germany (DCI); Convention on Biological Diversity, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Green Growth Strategy, Peru Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with the European Union (EU), Peru Free Trade Agreement with the United States, which contains the Forestry Annex, to draw attention to the important environmental, social and economic aspects associated with the Peruvian forests and their inhabitants.