“The sale by the Government of Guyana of forest-based carbon credits was fraudulent”
Janette Bulkan of the University of British Columbia writes that the government had no authority to sell REDD credits from titled village lands without explicit Amerindian agreement.
In December 2022, the Government of Guyana signed an agreement with Hess Corporation to sell the oil company US$750 million worth of carbon credits.
At the signing, John Hess, CEO of Hess Corporation said,
“Many companies, many countries make pledges about net zero. We are actually showing action. The country of Guyana is showing action and steps to make 2050 net-zero a reality.”
Hess Corporation, ExxonMobil, and China’s CNOOC are extracting oil from the massive Stabroek offshore block. This is deep-water offshore drilling — the riskiest kind, as Amy Westerveld notes in a recent article for The Intercept: “How Exxon captured a country without firing a shot”.
Small portion of Guyana’s REDD credits represent “real and additional emission reductions”
Both the oil drilling and the carbon credit deal with Hess Corporation are extremely controversial. In December 2022, a group of carbon trade experts wrote an article warning that “While only a small portion of the issued credits represent real and additional emission reductions, all of Guyana’s issued ART/TREES credits can be used to offset emissions.”
ART refers to the Architecture for REDD+ Transactions that was established in 2018 to produce a standard for jurisdictional REDD credits. The REDD+ Environmental Excellence Standard (TREES) is the standard that ART developed. Guyana’s carbon credits were verified under the ART/TREES scheme.
Hess Corporation is using the carbon credits to greenwash the fact that its operations are making the climate crisis worse:
The purchase of these carbon credits is an important part of Hess’ commitment to support global efforts to address climate change and for the company to achieve net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.
In March 2023, the Amerindian Peoples Association (APA), a Guyanese Indigenous Peoples’ organisation, made a formal complaint to Winrock International, the Secretariat for Architecture for REDD+ Transactions.
The complaint states that the government did not carry out a process of free, prior and informed consent before the Architecture for REDD+ Transactions issued the carbon credits in December 2022.
On 18 May 2023, the ART Secretariat rejected the complaint. “The review, which included stakeholder interviews and a close examination of the validation and verification process, determined that ART’s processes were followed,” according to a statement put out by the ART Secretariat.
Free, prior and informed consent “not properly sought . . . nor was it given”
Last week, Stabroek News reported that the Upper Mazaruni District Council stated that “proper consultations on carbon trading were not conducted in their communities, neither was their free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) given to sell carbon from their customary lands.
Stabroek News reports that the Upper Mazaruni District Council put out a press release stating that although the government provided some information on the Low Carbon Development Strategy, the meetings were not specifically about carbon markets and Architecture for REDD+ Transactions.
The council’s press release states that,
These are separate topics that should have had separate consultations. In addition, the government did not listen to our request for funding and support to train our own resource persons, who could travel from village to village to consult with our people on both the LCDS and the carbon trading plan. If the government had supported us in this way, we would have been able to take our own time to understand these plans and come to our own decisions on them. The cluster meeting held in Kamarang Village was insufficient for proper consultation. In addition, putting information on websites is not helpful for villages with limited internet access. . . .
Like the APA, we are concerned that our FPIC was not properly sought in this matter, nor was it given.
We know that our peoples acting collectively may exercise this right. The National Toshaos Council provides valuable advice, but it cannot exercise this right on our behalf. These rights are important for use and for indigenous peoples all over the world where other countries want to sell carbon credits like Guyana. . . .
We do not agree with the attacks on our rights. We call on the NTC chair and executive body to desist from issuing statements that claim to speak for our communities when we have not agreed to these statements. We are unhappy that the government misrepresents consultations with indigenous peoples to people outside of Guyana. We also call on the Office of the Vice President and the NTC executive body to cease their attacks and devote their energy instead to engaging constructively with our communities to address the legitimate concerns that have been raised.
Stolen property
On 3 July 2023, Stabroek News published the following letter from Janette Bulkan, of the University of British Columbia:
Dear Editor
I support the statements of the Upper Mazaruni District Council (UMDC) which you reported on 28 June (‘Upper Mazaruni council restates that carbon trading consultations defective’). Any Amerindian Village Council can agree to dispose of natural resources of the titled Amerindian Village Lands only through compliance with sections 13, 14, 34 and 44 of the Amerindian Act cap. 29:01 2006. These sections require a properly convened village meeting and a vote of at least two-thirds of villagers in favour of such disposal. So far as I know, none of the titled Amerindian Villages has convened such a meeting or passed such a vote.
Consequently, the sale by the Government of Guyana of forest-based carbon credits was fraudulent, including from the 2.299 million hectares of forest on Village Lands on 01 December 2022; the Government had no authority to sell any of the resources on the titled Village Lands without explicit Amerindian agreement at Village level. This was a sale of stolen property, and Hess Corporation is likewise criminally guilty of purchasing such stolen property, having been informed of the illegality.
Both Winrock/ART as owner of the TREES scheme and Aster Global Environmental Solutions as auditor were informed in December 2022/January 2023 that their failure to apply the Amerindian Act led to these criminal acts. Both companies appear to be legally accessories to the crime of stealing titled Amerindian resources. In your report on the previous day – 27 June (‘Amerindian groups meet with carbon credits scheme verifier’), there was no sign that Aster Global had taken account of the information published in the Press in Guyana and Norway in December 2022 which had pointed out this illegality.
The UMDC would be justified in invoking the Judicial Review Act cap. 03:06 2010 to require the Government to restore the carbon credits to the affected titled Amerindian Villages, and to pay appropriate damages for the theft.
Sincerely,
Janette Bulkan
December 2022 Official website of Guyana Forestry Commission " $360M approved for forest payment verification fee for the sale of its carbon credits, to the Architecture for REDD+ Transactions (ART)" https://dpi.gov.gy/360m-approved-for-forest-payment-verification-fee/ while credtis sold to Hess for 750 m $ (almost half is verification fee)
This failure of FPIC mirrors the same government processes here in British Columbia - A government announces a scheme, for instance: rezoning all your lands, announces a “public” meeting, a 1800- number and a web site, and all you see at the “meeting” is predetermined information boards. No roll-call of residents is taken, no vote is held, and the proposal is deemed approved. So the Guyanese government is simply importing these same “democratic” methods. What’s not to like?
Of course the offsets are stolen; and the country is captured without firing a shot. This is a glimpse of the future, when the big corporations have subsumed these lands, one at a time. And with the ongoing mergers/acquisitions, which will be the final three, then two, then one monster corporation?