In this article, the authors describe how the International Financial Corporation of the World Bank, and the 77 global financial institutions that have signed on to the Equator Principles, have come to the conclusion that social conflict with indigenous communities needs to be resolved through the application of free, prior, informed and consent. While the requirement to obtain consent of an indigenous people would appear to make it more difficult for extractive industry projects to proceed, theories of dispute resolution developed by the Harvard Negotiation Project suggest that where consent is obtained, it is more likely thatc onflicts will be reduced.

The objective of this article is to review and analyze the different arguments and legal excuses made by the Government and the private sector in Peru, this for the purpose of that the first-mentioned institution fails or avoids its juridical obligation of execute the preview consultation process for the indigenous peoples in Peru, this whenever the State is going to adopt a legislative or administrative measure susceptible that will affect directly to the indigenous peoples. In summary, this article seeks to analyze about the juridical problems founded at the moment of the implementation of the preview consultation process in our Legal System. If we consider that Convention 169 ILO, and the right to consult has been in force since February 2nd of 1995, and the Constitutional Court established on binding jurisprudence that the Convention in question is a norm that no needs a legislative development for its effectiveness, thus we can conclude that, rather than arguments is about legal excuses. / El objetivo del artículo es revisar y analizar los diferentes argumentos y pretextos jurídicos utilizados por el Gobierno y el sector privado en el Perú, para que el primero incumpla o evada su obligación jurídica de realizar el proceso de consulta previa con los pueblos indígenas en el Perú, esto cada vez que el Estado prevé adoptar una medida legislativa o administrativa susceptible de afectar directamente a los pueblos indígenas. En buena cuenta lo que hace el artículo es analizar los problemas jurídicos encontrados al momento de implementar la consulta previa en nuestro ordenamiento jurídico. Si tenemos en cuenta que el Convenio 169 de la OIT, y el derecho a la consulta estaban vigentes, y eran exigibles en el Perú desde el 2 de febrero del año 1995, y que el Tribunal Constitucional ha dicho en jurisprudencia vinculante, que el referido convenio es una norma que no necesita desarrollo legislativo para desplegar sus efectos normativos, podemos concluir, que más que argumentos, se trata de pretextos jurídicos.