Peru indigenous groups demand withdrawal of bill targeting Asháninka land along Ene River

A coalition of indigenous-rights organisations is urging Peruvian lawmakers to abandon proposed legislation that critics say would clear the way for large-scale energy infrastructure on Asháninka territory in the Ene River basin without adequate free, prior and informed consent. CARE Peru and allied groups issued a statement on 2 May 2026 categorically rejecting Bill No. 14442/2025-CR, warning that its passage would hollow out legal protections that indigenous communities have relied on for decades.

The bill, currently before the Peruvian Congress, proposes modifications to the regulatory framework governing energy-concession areas that overlap with indigenous territories in the central Amazon. Advocates for the legislation argue it would accelerate investment in power generation and transmission, addressing Peru's chronic electricity deficits in outlying regions. Opponents counter that the measure bypasses the consultation mechanisms mandated under International Labour Organization Convention 169, to which Peru is a signatory, and effectively hands discretion over land use to concession-holding companies rather than the communities who live there.

The Asháninka of the Ene River basin are among the most politically significant indigenous groups in Peru. Their leaders were central figures in the peace process that ended Peru's internal armed conflict in the 1990s, and their land-rights agreements have long served as a reference point for indigenous territorial governance nationally. That history is precisely why advocates say the proposed law represents a reversal of hard-won protections.

CARE's public statement, distributed on 2 May 2026, stops short of attributing intent but is unambiguous in its conclusion. "This bill must be archived," the coalition said, adding that any legislative approach to energy development in indigenous territory must begin with the consent of affected communities, not proceed in spite of it. The statement draws a direct line between the proposed legislation and the risk of territorial fragmentation in one of the most biodiverse and politically fragile stretches of the Peruvian Amazon.

Energy policy and indigenous rights have been on a collision course in Peru for years. Successive governments have touted hydroelectric potential in the Ene basin as a cornerstone of national energy strategy, while indigenous organisations have repeatedly secured injunctions against exploratory activities they argue were launched without proper process. The outcome of those disputes has been mixed, with courts sometimes ruling in favour of communities and sometimes finding that consultation had been conducted in form though not in substance.

The structural tension in this case is not unique to Peru. Across the Amazon basin, states seeking to expand energy infrastructure face a hard choice between the speed of streamlined permitting and the legal obligations created by indigenous consultation frameworks. When permitting processes are accelerated, the communities most directly affected frequently argue they bear the environmental and social costs of development from which they derive little benefit. When consultation is conducted rigorously, the timeline for energy projects extends in ways that frustrate government planning cycles.

What makes the current Peruvian moment distinctive is the legislative form the pressure is taking. Rather than a single concession dispute working its way through the courts, opponents are contesting a change to the underlying regulatory architecture. If Bill 14442/2025-CR passes in its current form, it would shift the default burden of proof in land-use decisions, making it harder for communities to mount legal challenges to individual energy projects after the fact. CARE and allied organisations are pressing for pre-legislative withdrawal rather than post-hoc litigation.

The Peruvian Congress has not yet scheduled a vote on the measure. The government of President Dina Boluarte has broadly signalled support for energy-sector liberalisation as part of its economic programme, though it has not taken a formal position on the specific bill. Congressional sources have indicated that the proposal is under review in the Environment and Indigenous Peoples Committee, where it faces a divided reception.

The stakes for the Asháninka communities are immediate and territorial. A withdrawal of protections would not necessarily mean projects proceed immediately, but it would alter the leverage balance in any future disputes over concession areas along the Ene River. For energy policymakers, the question is whether Peru can meet its electricity demand growth targets without a legal reckoning over process. Those two imperatives are currently on a course to meet in the Peruvian legislature, and the outcome will be watched closely by indigenous-rights advocates across the region.

This publication's coverage prioritises indigenous-led and civil-society sources on stories affecting Amazonian communities. Peruvian government and congressional communications have not yet issued formal responses to the CARE statement; this article will be updated if they do.

Wire provenance

This editorial synthesis draws on the following public wire/social posts:

• https://t.me/pressenza/4828