A/HRC/29/25 42. In countries experiencing social conflict over natural resource exploitation, individuals who exercise their right to freedom of peaceful assembly are frequently framed as “inciting” communities to resist and disrupt “development projects”. Peaceful assembly and association rights are not seen as a legitimate vehicle to express concerns, but as deliberate attempts to undermine the State’s efforts to promote economic growth and development. Those who oppose natural resource exploitation activities are labelled as “anti-development” or “enemies of the State”. Attacks are also used as an intimidation tactic to force communities to accept exploitation projects. 43. It is particularly reprehensible when the vilification and stigmatization comes from the highest government authorities, as this sends a clear message to other officials that it is acceptable to perpetuate the intimidation and harassment of activists and defenders. Negative images of activists and human rights defenders are exacerbated when the media picks up on the portrayals and publishes them. 44. Negative perceptions of the exercise of the right to freedom of peaceful assembly are also manifested through the increasing harassment, intimidation and criminalization of activities by environmental, land rights and other activists and groups that advocate for the effective consultation and participation of affected communities in decisions affecting them. They are charged with crimes that often carry severe sentences, such as sabotage and terrorism. In Chile, the Mapuche indigenous peoples, who have long protested over the loss of their lands and territory, were charged (though eventually acquitted) under the country’s anti-terrorism law; legitimate protest had thus been equated with criminal offences (see A/HRC/21/47/Add.3, case CHL 1/2011, and A/HRC/19/44, case CHL 1/2011). In the Philippines, penalties have been imposed under the Penal Code for “grave coercion”, an offence defined as using violence to prevent another person from doing something that is not unlawful or compelling the person to do something against their will. 19 The Special Rapporteur was informed that peaceful protestors who obstruct mining company employees and equipment are often charged with grave coercion. Civil society organizations in Canada have expressed concern about the definition of “activities that undermine the security of Canada” contained in the Security of Canada Information Sharing Act proposed in Bill C51 (Anti-Terrorism Act) and the potential for the authorities to interfere with legitimate peaceful protests that they define as “undermining” security.20 The Australian State of Tasmania in November 2014 enacted the Workplaces (Protection from Protestors) Act 2014, which makes it a criminal offence to participate in a protest that may obstruct or prevent a business activity or access to a business premises (see also A/HRC/28/85, case AUS 3/2014). 45. Violations are perpetrated in many resource-rich countries where authorities and others rely on criminalization to intimidate communities into giving up their land for industry. In Brazil, confrontations between non-indigenous farmers and indigenous groups have led to criminal prosecution of the latter for occupying lands as a form of protests (see A/HRC/12/34/Add.2, para. 49). The Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples has reported that the Government of Argentina had responded to protests from indigenous groups opposing evictions or other projects by prosecuting those involved (see A/HRC/21/47/Add.2, paras. 51, 56 and 57). In Ecuador, the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights has expressed concern about the criminal investigations and convictions of indigenous leaders protesting against legislative proposals concerning water management and development projects (see E/C.12/ECU/CO/3, para. 10). 19 20 14 Revised Penal Code of the Philippines, art. 286. See British Columbia Civil Liberties Association, submission to the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security, March 2015. Available from https://bccla.org/wpcontent/uploads/2015/03/BCCLA-Submissions-on-C-51-For-website.pdf.