Following the mass international campaign in Spring 2001 from individuals and organisations like yours, the World Bank delayed the finalisation of its resettlement policy and made some minor modifications to the retrograde document. While public pressure got some damaging elements removed, the policy still has serious problems that will violate the rights of indigenous peoples and other vulnerable groups.

Most alarming is the fact that the proposed policy will still permit the forcible relocation of indigenous peoples even where it may result in "significant adverse impacts on their identity and cultural survival" (para9: draft OP4.12).

This alert urges you to take action to try to persuade the World Bank to make final amendments to the policy and adopt a clear presumption against any forced relocation of indigenous peoples.

UPDATE:

The final amended resettlement policy will be sent for approval at the end of August 2001 or in September 2001.

SOME LIMITED GAINS:

Your pressure succeeded in getting the Bank to remove some of the most offensive proposed provisions. For example, the mention of "illegal use of natural resources" has been removed and the draft policy now makes clear that people adversely affected by parks will *participate* in project *design* as well as implementation.

REMAINING OFFENSIVE AND DAMAGING PROVISIONS - Red Alert:

The most damaging provision proposed in March 2001 draft policy that permits the Bank and its borrowers to forcibly relocate indigenous peoples even if it may result in "significant adverse effects" on their "cultural survival" REMAINS IN THE FINAL JULY 2001 DRAFT IN A *NEW* PARAGRAPH, which admits that the Bank will assist such forced relocation "where it is not feasible to avoid such displacement" (paragraph 9: 9 OP4.12).

The retention of this offensive provision in the final draft without any modification is a slap in the face for activists who pushed hard to get this language removed or modified.

Other principal concerns raised by indigenous peoples' and civil society organisations have not been addressed in the July 2001 draft sent for Board approval. This final draft:

- does not incorporate the principle of prior, free and informed consent and so is contrary to international human rights standards like those of the ILO and those being developed by the Organisation of American States (OAS) and the United Nations; 

- does *not* define voluntary resettlement. This creates a perverse incentive for borrowers who may be tempted to characterise relocation as "voluntary" and thereby avoid any policy requirements. 

- does not require social and poverty risk assessments. These are only acknowledged as "good practice" (footnote 4: OP4.12) 

- does not cover indirect impacts;

ACTION REQUIRED: THERE IS A NEED TO PUT IMMEDIATE PRESSURE ON THE BANK'S BOARD

Write, fax and *telephone* your Executive Director (ED) expressing concern about the final draft policy. Click here for sample letter. (A complete list of World Bank Board of Executive Directors and their contact details is available at: http://www.bicusa.org/mdbs/wbg/execdir.htm )

Copy letters to your ED to:

(a) Broad Strategic Advocacy Position:

There is a need to send a strong message to the World Bank's governing body that this policy is not acceptable to indigenous peoples and civil society. Push the World Bank hard on its verbal commitment at Prague last year to make explicit reference to human rights in Bank documents. Urge the Bank once again to integrate reference to human rights law and international standards for development in its resettlement policy.

(b) Specific recommendations:

As well as these broad points, press your ED to table specific amendments to the policy to ensure there is clear protection for the rights of indigenous peoples and other disadvantaged social groups.

(i) Suggest that paragraph 9 of the resettlement policy is strengthened to read as follows [suggested new language in bold]: "Bank experience has shown that resettlement of indigenous peoples with traditional land-based modes of production is particularly complex and may have significant adverse impacts on their cultural survival. For this reason, the Bank will only finance projects involving the resettlement of indigenous peoples or other ethnic minority communities if the Bank can ascertain that: (a) the resettlement is taking place with the informed consent of indigenous peoples; and (b) the compensation package includes land-based resettlement; and (c) the compensation package incorporates culturally compatible social and economic benefits. [footnote highlighting the need to apply provisions of OD4.20]"

(ii) Insist that the policy clearly defines what is meant by "voluntary resettlment" with transparent procedures for verifying how genuine consent has been obtained by the Bank and its clients. These definitions and safeguards for voluntary resettlement should be added to the mandatory Bank Procedures 4.12 (BP4.12) part of the policy with further details in the Resettlement Sourcebook.

(iii) Recommend that the policy *require* a social and poverty risk assessment for *all* Bank assisted operations involving or likely to cause resettlement in order to fully assess direct AND indirect impacts