Please note: you are viewing an old version of this deal. The current version can be found here: Deal #805

Deal #805 Version #49462

Colombia
Created at
2013-02-15
Last update
2013-02-15
Last full update
2023-03-16

Land area

Intended size
186 000 ha
Comment on land area
This surface would correspond to the Siriri-Catleya oil exploitation project, in U'Wa indigenous people's territory (220 275 ha). Thomas Siron: The link to the columbian State Council's decision about the oil exploitation project named Siriri-Catleya doesn't work and I couldn't find other reference to the land surface involucrated. The Catleya block represents 910 km2 (see: http://www.bnamericas.com/news/petroleoygas/Ecopetrol_comenzaria_estudios_sismicos_en_Catleya_a_fin_de_ano).

Intention of investment

Intention of investment
  • [current] Mining
Comment on intention of investment
Petroleum

Nature of the deal

Nature of the deal
Exploitation permit / license / concession (for mineral resources)
Comment on nature of the deal
Thomas Siron: There is no land rights transfer but the state authorize an enterprise to explore and exploit the subsoil in an indigenous reserve ("resguardo").

Negotiation status

Negotiation status
  • [2004, current] Concluded (Oral Agreement)
Comment on negotiation status
Before the exploitation, according to the Constitution and OIT Convention 169, the State has to consult indigenous people who live in the affected area. In this case, U'Wa people refused the exploitation (one organization expressed it during the consulting process and other organization refused to participate in the process) but in 2006, the State Council decided that the project could go forward. I couldn't find recent informations about the state of the project.

Implementation status

Comment on implementation status
Before the exploitation, according to the Constitution and OIT Convention 169, the State has to consult indigenous people who live in the affected area. In this case, U'Wa people refused the exploitation (one organization expressed it during the consulting process and other organization refused to participate in the process) but in 2006, the State Council decided that the project could go forward. I couldn't find recent informations about the state of the project.