A/HRC/39/17/Add.3 make way for large plantations, especially palm oil plantations, is a cause for concern. A dispute between 14 communities in El Estor in Izabal and a palm oil company, which is delaying the granting of title to the Q’eqchi’ communities of Sierra de las Minas and Caxlampop Paxte, has still not been settled. 41. There are worrying instances of labour exploitation and violation of labour rights on the San Gregorio Piedra Parada coffee plantation, where for years the company deducted the workers’ social security contributions but failed to remit them, as a result of which the workers found themselves without pensions just at the time that they were evicted from their lands. In 2017, one of these workers was killed in the course of a peaceful demonstration. A recurring complaint is that, in many of these situations, claims before the ordinary courts do not succeed. 42. There have also been violations of rights over lands and territories, owing to a lack of consultation and consent in the establishment and management of protected areas. The Protected Areas Act of 1989 does not protect the rights of indigenous peoples or stipulate the requirement of consultation and consent. At the same time, licences have been granted for the exploitation of natural resources in protected areas, such as the Laguna Lachúa National Park in Alta Verapaz. The same disregard of indigenous peoples’ rights seems, as claimed by a number of Q’eqchi’ and Poqomchí communities, to be evidenced by the implementation of the reduced emissions for deforestation and degradation (REDD+) programme. 43. The Special Rapporteur held meetings with representatives of the Coordinating Committee of the Agricultural, Commercial, Industrial and Financial Associations and also with private-sector companies and associations, including Minera San Rafael, Tahoe Resources and the Oxec I and II hydroelectric power plants, which provided documentation on their projects and their corporate social responsibility activities. They alleged that there had been cases of theft, offences against workers and other employees and the destruction of property in plantations and facilities. Despite the fact that, in 2014, the Coordinating Committee signed up to an institutional policy on human rights and business, none of the companies concerned have carried out human rights impact studies. The Special Rapporteur recalls the obligation of companies to respect due diligence and the human rights of indigenous peoples. 44. The Special Rapporteur wishes to express her concern at the massive escalation in the violation of indigenous peoples’ rights that is occurring against the backdrop of these projects. It is also a matter of grave concern that the communities’ peaceful protests in the face of this situation seem to be considered by the State and the third parties involved to be examples of criminal activity that undermines public safety, yet no measures are being adopted to resolve the structural problems and the human rights violations that are causing the situation. Forced evictions 45. Among the most serious consequences of the failure to protect indigenous territorial rights are the forced evictions of indigenous communities. The Special Rapporteur received testimony on indigenous communities forcibly evicted from areas under the protected areas regime and from lands claimed by public institutions, individuals or businesses. 46. In many cases, the evictions are ordered by the Public Prosecution Service on the grounds of the offence of aggravated trespass, a legal concept adopted in 1996 that gives communities no opportunity to prove their rights over the occupied lands. Eviction orders are carried out by the National Civil Police and, where protected areas are involved, staff of the National Protected Areas Council. On occasion, the army has participated. It is claimed that private security personnel have participated in some cases. No prior examination of the Land Register was made to check on the rights that the communities might have over lands that were allegedly illegally occupied, while the possibility of traditional ownership, or the possession in good faith enshrined in law, was disregarded. Prior notification is rare and communities learn about an order only when the security forces arrive, often in disproportionate numbers, and order immediate eviction. Before the evictions, orders are usually issued to seize members of the community, who are then detained. The Office of GE.18-13268 9