WHEREAS: The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous
Peoples and International Labour Organization Convention
169 concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in
Independent Countries are internationally-recognized
standards for Indigenous Peoples’ rights.1
Violation of these
rights presents risks for JPMorgan that can adversely affect
shareholder value, including reputational damage, project
disruptions, and civil and criminal liability.2
JPMorgan has a
history of financing projects and companies that violate
Indigenous rights, including bankrolling the Dakota Access
pipeline in 20163
and providing $1.8 billion to Enbridge
between 2016 and 2020 to enable the widely opposed
Enbridge Line 3 and Line 5 tar sands pipeline reroutes.4
Indigenous leaders from the Great Lakes tribes have called
Enbridge’s Line 5 pipeline reroute “an act of cultural
genocide.”5
A 2022 ruling found that Line 5 was operating
illegally on Bad River Band territory since 2013.6
Michigan’s
twelve federally recognized Tribal Nations requested
President Biden to decommission Line 5 in 2021,7
noting
Enbridge’s deceptive tactics, poor environmental track
record, and risk of “catastrophic damage” to Indigenous
rights.8
Companies like Enbridge, financed by JPMorgan,
consistently fail to meet the international standard of free,
prior, and informed consent (FPIC) with affected tribes.9
JPMorgan is additionally the subject of ongoing protests for
its role as the largest financier of oil and gas operations in the
Amazon rainforest that pose “an existential threat” to
Indigenous Peoples.10 For example, JPMorgan finances Gran
Tierra Energy, which has been connected to Indigenous Rights
violations of the Inga and Pastos people in Columbia since
2012.11 Despite making commitments to protect UNESCO
sites,12 JPMorgan finances PetroAmazonas, which operates in
the Yasuni UNESCO Reserve despite clear Indigenous
opposition.13 Ecuadorian courts ruled in 2019 that Waorani
Peoples were not adequately consulted.14 In August 2023, a
referendum vote opted to halt drilling in Yasuni Park, which
the company estimates will cost $1.2 billion in income.15
JPMorgan faces reputational risk if its climate commitments
are discredited by its own financing activities.16 JPMorgan’s
human rights and risk management policies do not clearly
define FPIC, nor include guidance on how JPMorgan
addresses companies with track records of violating
Indigenous rights. Though JPMorgan adheres to the Equator
Principles to manage environmental and social risk,
Indigenous experts have described them as “critically weak”
and not aligned with international human rights standards.17
Effective policies that protect Indigenous rights are critical to
managing material risk.