News

The Mapuche take on energetic projects to protect their land

The Chilean government allows the expropriation of Mapuche land to build an aqueduct · Hundreds of families have been evicted because of several projects planned in the area

Struggle by Mapuche communities to defend their land from multinational corporations has intensified in recent weeks. To the current problems related to water projects in the region of Araucania one must add now the threat to Mapuchean communities in the Rivers Area.

Forced expropriation

The region of Araucania is witnessing a number of conflicts caused by the company Aguas Araucanía, which is owned by a Japanese firm. The Mapuche community living in the area has reported the infringement of their fundamental human rights and reported that the Chilean Defense Council authorized the expropriation of 800 squared meters on November 25 in order to build an aqueduct of drinking water in Mapuche land.

This is not the first time the corporation, which has changed hands in a number of occasions in recent years, raises controversy. It was reported for polluting the river Cautín last January. In relation to this, the Mapuche community also accused the government of connivance with the company since the administration neither opened an in-depth inquiry on the matter nor brought disciplinary measures against the firm.

Conflict in the Rivers Area

Conflicts in the region of Araucania are not the only ones the Mapuche community has to deal with. The large-scale water power station project affecting the rivers area and the protected territory of the Maihue Lake is also being opposed. The Cunco region is also under threat by the hydroelectric project planned by the company GPE, a corporation that had already been involved in the eviction of several families before flooding 800 hectares of land.

Despite the number of defeats inflicted on Mapuche communities, there have been a few successes such as the temporary prohibition of the building of a dam in San Pedro River, which included its diversion, or the controversy sparked by a new act approved by the Parliament. According to its dispositions, the law does not provide for the penalization of projects retrospectively.