Educational Media Reviews Online

In 2005 Montana Explorada, subsidiary of Glamis Gold, a U.S./Canadian transnational corporation that has industrialized silver and gold mining in many Latin American countries, received 45 million dollars in funding from the World Bank (the first mining company in the world to receive such funding) to develop underground and open pit mining.

In 2003 Montana Explorada initiated construction of a mine in San Miguel Ixtahuacan, San Marcos, Guatemala. By 2005 Glamis Gold wanted to extend its operations to the neighboring municipality of Sipakapa. Sipakapa, a small agricultural and livestock breeding community of 14,000 persons of mostly Mayan descent, were against the project. At heart were the following issues:

The developers planned to use sodium cyanide, an extremely toxic and lethal substance to separate the gold from rock. In its operations, Montana Explorada would use 6 tons of sodium cyanide daily. In total the project would produce 30 million tons of rock waste, and the possibility for water and environmental contamination was high. This was a concern given that members of the community of Siria Valley in nearby Honduras where Glamis had been mining gold since 2000 were coming down with skin infections, respiratory problems, nausea, and children were suffering from hair loss and rashes. It is felt that the cause of these health issues, where there was no effective treatment, was the sodium cyanide bleaching process.

As an agricultural community Sipakapa is heavily dependent on water. A Sipakapa farming family uses 30 liters of water a day, and the mining project planned to use 250,000 liters of water an hour; that is the amount of water one farming family would use in 22 years.

Further, Montana Explorada planned to mine 2.1 million ounces of gold and 29.2 million ounces of silver to create $870 million dollars in profit. The state of Guatemala would see less than 1% of the profits.

On January 19, 2005, based on ILO Convention 169 (International Labor Organization), the Constitution of the Republic, the Municipal Code, and the Law of Rural and Urban Development, the people of Sipakapa requested that the Municipal Council organize a Community Consultation on whether or not mining exploration was acceptable in their municipality. Montana Explorada refused to recognize the autonomy of the Municipal Council and take part in the Consultation, saying the matter was being handled in a devious manner. Out of 13 towns, 11 voted overwhelmingly “No” to mining, one town voted in favor by a narrow margin of 3 votes, and one town abstained. Two days after the Consultation, the Municipal Council led by the Mayor issued Act 26 2005, in which among other things it was agreed that the town would comply with the Consultation. On June 28, 2005, the Human Rights Ombudsman declared the Consultation legitimate and legally binding and all documentation was presented to the President of the Congressional Commission of Energy and Mining, in the Congress of the Republic of Guatemala. Sipakapa had made itself clear. They were not for sale.

The film sends a decisive message on the problems of mine exploitation without becoming burdensome and took an even handed approach in handling conflicting testimony. Sipakapa was using a legal and democratic method to oust Montana Explorada. While this avenue needed to be dealt with, much time in the film was spent following the voting at the Community Consultation so that the interviews with the community and the mining corporation as a whole were not in-depth. Incidents between the community and the developers were touched upon, such as a bus driver who was murdered by a security guard hired to protect the mining facility, but there was also a lack of the history of the area, which would have added a context to the resistance. The documenting of Sipakapa villages organizing to exercise their right for the Community Consultation was brief. The color quality was not sharp and at times the film came across as grainy. The subtitling of the film is problematic because the words come across the screen very quickly, making it hard to read and keep up with the action. As a first time effort for director Alvaro Revenga, Sipakapa Is Not For Sale, does an impressive job with presenting the issues of mine exploitation in developing countries, and exposing some of the questionable manner in which mining companies push forward their agendas. Nevertheless, it fails in showing the grassroots movements of human rights development and protest.

• Anaconda Award for Best Documentary, PRAIA, Bolivia and Ecuador, 2006
• Best Documentary, Indigenous International Film and Video Festival, CLACPI, Oaxaca, Mexico 2006