The Marlin deposit was discovered through regional exploration in 1998 by Montana Exploradora, S.A. and was later purchased by Francisco Gold Corporation in 2000.
[4] In May 2010, the organization Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) released a study carried out with the University of Michigan on metals levels of blood and urine in a self-selected sample of 18 area residents and 5 Marlin mine workers; as well sampling four river locations and five drinking water sources.
The study, characterizing its findings as “qualitative, preliminary and descriptive”, reported that, on average, individuals residing closest to the mine had higher levels of certain metals when compared to those living further away.
The PHR study also found that “none of the levels in the samples exceed those considered acceptable by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and by widely recognized scientific standards”.
The authors did not refer to the baseline study data which showed river water to have naturally high metals levels prior to the existence of the mining operation.
A year prior to the Goldcorp takeover, residents of Sipacapa filed a complaint against Glamis with the Office of the Compliance Advisor/Ombudsman (CAO) of the World Bank Group, alleging that the Marlin mine was "developed without adequate consultation and in violation of the rights of indigenous people".
The report also stated "As a result of an aggressive and at times factually unfounded campaign focused against the project, some people – predominantly in Sipacapa – believe that these risks have not been adequately monitored, managed or mitigated."
Similar to the 2005 CAO's report, the 2010 PHR study noted that “it was clear during our visit that many area residents suffer from psychosocial stress and that much distrust and miscommunication exists amongst and between the various stakeholders – area residents, non-governmental organizations, representatives of the Marlin mine, government officials.” Rather than resulting from miscommunication local residents may be experiencing "stress" as a result of a company hired paramilitary group shooting a local woman in the head because she refused to sell her land to the company.
One source of controversy and much of the basis for claims of lack of adherence to indigenous rights stems from the results of a 2005 referendum in which approximately 98% of 2,500 participants (out of 14,000 residents, although reported as representing 44.3% of the voting population[9]) in the Sipacapa municipality voted to reject mining in the area (no referendum has been held in San Miguel).
In February 2010, the Committee of Experts of the International Labour Organization (ILO) of the United Nations also called for the suspension of the Marlin Mine.
On May 20, 2010, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, an independent body of the Organization of American States (OAS), granted "precautionary measures" for the members of 18 Maya indigenous communities surrounding the Marlin Mine.
The government also stated that an assessment by the Ministry of Health and Social Welfare did not detect any disease linked to suspected contamination produced by the Marlin Mine.
[15] In December 2011, IACHR announced that based on information presented by the state and the petitioners, it was revising the precautionary measure to no longer call for the closure of the mine.
The revised precautionary measure requests that the State ensure that the 18 communities have access to potable water than can be used for human consumption.