The Constitutional Court put us in that dilemma; we have to choose between shutting down the Yasuní oil wells or allowing the extraction of black gold to continue. The slowness of our institutions led to the fact that we decided on this consultation ten years late; ten years ago it meant not exploring, not starting exploitation, today it means plugging the wells, reducing the national income, laying off workers, indemnifying companies that do business, companies and people who provide them with materials and services and leaving the inhabitants of the area without health, education and other benefits they currently receive.

In addition, the judges of the Court, as wise in the laws of the state, and neophytes in practical life, in the functioning of that same state, ordered that everything should be closed for a year, if it was so foreseen in the consultation, without being allowed to know is it technically possible, which would not be the case.

In addition, and very importantly, the methods and systems for oil extraction have developed at an incredible speed, significantly reducing the damage to nature. Not taking into account that the damage has already been done and that the fields of action will be used by other people for other activities of equal or greater impact on the environment. Among other things, I listened to the new manager of Petroprodukción (a new one comes every six months), who I understood to be a former official, explaining the current exploitation methods that greatly reduce environmental damage and the area in which it operates is only 80 hectares, among the thousands of hectares of ITT- And. In the same interview area, on Channel 6, I heard the mayor of the area, in Tiputini, confirm that the population of the area is against the consultation because of the benefits that the oil operation brings them; if consultation were to take place among the local population, rejection would undoubtedly be widespread. We will see the results. One is pseudo-intellectual appreciation from the city, and the other from the countryside. Some are talking about getting international funds to compensate for the loss of production, but that has already been tried and failed, so the current exploitation has been stopped.

A belated call for consultation would produce great damages such as those I am generally pointing out. It is irresponsibility that someone has to pay for.

Every exercise of public office carries with it responsibility.

Judges of the Constitutional Court are responsible for the damage they cause to the state. If they have time, they should cancel the consultation call. As another contradiction, I understand that it is the responsibility of the CNE, to save, they say – how many billions can be lost -, the consultation will be held at the same time as the general elections.

We’re already hearing candidates fumble to explain their positions, often without saying whether they’re for or against.

Save yes, destroy no! (OR)