Human Rights

Landmark Inter-American Court Decision Requires States to Protect Human Rights in the Face of the Climate Crisis

In a groundbreaking advisory opinion issued today, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights clarifies the obligations of States to effectively protect people and communities from the harmful impacts of the climate crisis. The decision sets a powerful precedent for climate justice and offers critical guidance to national and international courts worldwide.San José, Costa Rica. In its Advisory Opinion No. 32, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights has taken a historic step toward strengthening global climate accountability. The Court sets a powerful precedent by establishing legal standards that States across the continent must meet to protect human rights in the face of the climate crisis. This landmark ruling is expected to drive a new wave of strategic climate litigation, enabling affected people and communities to access justice.“The Court’s decision marks a watershed moment for climate justice in Latin America and around the world, as it is the first time a regional human rights tribunal has clearly spelled out States’ legal obligations in response to the climate crisis,” said Gladys Martínez, Executive Director of the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA). “We welcome this significant step forward — one that will not only help protect communities and individuals, but also guide national and international courts, including the International Court of Justice, which is now developing its own opinion on this critical issue.”The Court recognized, for the first time, the existence of an autonomous human right to a healthy climate, derived from the right to a healthy environment. In light of Advisory Opinion No. 32, States across the region now have legal obligations to address the climate crisis as a human rights issue, in accordance with their domestic laws and applicable treaties and agreements, including:Guaranteeing a climate system free from dangerous anthropogenic interference, as a precondition for the exercise of other human rights.Respecting the principle of intergenerational equity, by ensuring that current generations leave behind conditions of environmental stability that allow future generations similar opportunities for development.Regulating, supervising, and overseeing, as well as requiring and approving environmental impact assessments, to fulfill their duty to mitigate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.Defining a mitigation goal; developing and maintaining an up-to-date mitigation strategy grounded in human rights; and strictly monitoring and supervising public and private GHG-emitting activities.Ensuring an equitable distribution of the burdens of climate action and climate impacts, avoiding the imposition of disproportionate burdens—this includes the fair allocation of the costs associated with the energy transition. In addition, the Court recognized in its opinion that local, traditional, and Indigenous knowledge is protected under Inter-American treaties and constitutes an integral part of the concept of the best available science—opening a new path for the enforceability and inclusion of these knowledge systems in responses to the climate emergency.“This decision by the Inter-American Court ushers in a new era for climate negotiations and litigation by providing individuals, communities, and civil society organizations with a clearer and more robust legal framework,” said Liliana Ávila, Director of the Human Rights and Environment Program at AIDA. “It empowers people to hold States accountable – both in climate negotiations and courtrooms – and to push for the structural changes needed to confront the climate crisis. This includes meeting their obligations on mitigation, adaptation, and addressing loss and damage, all while upholding fundamental human rights.”The Court’s decision responds to a request submitted in January 2023 by the governments of Colombia and Chile. In their petition, the two States emphasized that their populations — along with those of other countries across the Americas — are already experiencing severe impacts from the global climate crisis, including droughts, floods, wildfires, and other extreme events. They called on the Court to clarify how the American Convention on Human Rights should be interpreted in the context of the climate emergency, its root causes, and its wide-ranging consequences.“This decision serves as a binding interpretive tool for States in the region, opening new legal pathways to hold governments accountable for protecting human rights,” said Marcella Ribeiro, Senior Attorney at AIDA. “States must now align their domestic policies to meet the legal standards set by the Court — including, among other things, properly regulating corporate activity in the context of the climate crisis and ensuring a stable climate for future generations.”From the outset of the process, AIDA played a proactive role. The organization supported various communities across the region in ensuring their voices were heard by the Inter-American Court, submitting legal briefs that highlighted the socio-environmental impacts of the climate emergency on Indigenous peoples, women, children, people of diverse sexual orientations and gender identities, and on particularly fragile ecosystems such as coral reefs. AIDA also facilitated the participation of community representatives in the public hearings held as part of the process, which took place in Barbados and Brazil in April and May 2024, respectively.AIDA additionally submitted its own legal brief to the Court, arguing that the right to a “stable and safe climate” should be recognized as part of the universal right to a healthy environment – underscoring States’ obligations to prevent and mitigate the harmful effects of the climate emergency on their populations.The process saw the submission of more than 200 written observations — an unprecedented number for an Advisory Opinion of the Inter-American Court — reflecting the region’s strong engagement with the issue. Advisory Opinions play a vital role in shaping human rights law by clarifying how existing rights should be interpreted, thereby guiding States in how to uphold and enforce them within their territories or jurisdictions.Advisory Opinion No. 32 builds upon and reinforces earlier rulings, including the 2024 advisory opinion from the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, which clarified States’ obligations to protect the marine environment from the climate crisis. It also complements the forthcoming opinion from the International Court of Justice – the UN’s highest judicial body – which will define States’ responsibilities in the face of the global climate emergency.In a global context that demands ever-stronger climate action, the Inter-American Court’s decision reaffirms that governments must act based on binding legal obligations — not merely voluntary commitments. This legal milestone provides people and communities across the region a powerful foundation from which to demand real action and the full protection of their rights in a safe, just, and sustainable climate. Press contact:Víctor Quintanilla, [email protected], +52 5570522107 

Opinión Consultiva 32: Inter-American Court Links Climate Crisis to Human Rights

Media Advisory: Inter-American Court Decision on Climate and Human Rights Approaching

Expected Release: Early July 2025The Inter-American Court of Human Rights is expected to release a historic Advisory Opinion in early July, clarifying how states must uphold human rights in the context of the climate crisis.This legal milestone follows public hearings where frontline communities, Indigenous leaders, and civil society organizations shared powerful testimony on the real-world impacts of environmental degradation and government inaction. The Court’s decision will have far-reaching implications for climate policy, state accountability, and the protection of environmental defenders across the Americas.From the beginning of the process, AIDA assumed a proactive role, promoting the involvement of communities affected by the climate crisis in Latin America. We supported a diverse array of amicus briefs and community testimonies before the Court in public hearings and presented our own amicus brief arguing that the right to a “stable and safe climate” should be recognized as part of the universal right to a healthy environment.Spokespeople Available for Media Interviews:Legal Experts & Organizational LeadersMarcella RibeiroSenior Attorney, AIDALanguages: Portuguese (native), Spanish, English Expertise: Community participation, just transition, climate reparationsBased in: Brazil Available for: Interviews and background briefingsLiliana ÁvilaProgram Director, AIDA Languages: Spanish (native), EnglishExpertise: Human rights law, climate litigation, regional legal mechanismsBased in: ColombiaAvailable for: Interviews and background briefingsFrontline Community VoicesWe can coordinate interviews with several key members of frontline communities who testified directly before the Court during the public hearings.These spokepeople bring a vital human and territorial perspective to the legal decision and are available for media conversations in Spanish and local language, with interpretation support as needed. Background Materials:AIDA's amicus brief on the right to a safe and stable climate.Civil society contributions from around Latin America, on the Climate Litigation Platform for Latin America & the Caribbean.Frontline community interviews from the Manaus public hearing.The Manaus Declaration signed by nearly 400 people and organizations from across the continent.AIDA's background ABC on the Advisory Opinion process. Media Contacts:Victor QuintanillaMedia Coordinator, AIDA 📧 [email protected]📱 +52 55 7052 2107Lorena ZáratePositioning Coordinator, AIDA 📧 [email protected]📱 +52 55 7052 2107  

From rights to remedies: What's at stake in the Inter-American climate advisory opinion

On January 9, 2023, Chile and Colombia jointly submitted a request to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) to clarify State obligations in the face of the climate emergency. The request raised critical questions about States’ duties related to the prevention, adaptation, mitigation, and reparation of climate impacts, as well as the protection of environmental defenders and the promotion of equity.The process, which included the submission of over 200 written observations—an unprecedented number for an advisory opinion before the Court—and three rounds of hearings in April and May 2024, has created a unique space to understand the legal positions of States, international organizations, civil society, and Indigenous Peoples.In this webinar, co-hosted by AIDA, CDH - Honduras, CIEL, Earthjustice, ERI, FACE, Greenpeace International, La Ruta del Clima, UCS, and other allied organizations, we explored the transformative potential of this historic advisory opinion.We shared key reflections on the legal arguments presented to the Court, the broader scope of the proceedings, and what an ideal outcome might look like. We also examined how this opinion—alongside others issued or pending before international courts such as ITLOS and the ICJ—can strengthen climate justice, guide State action, influence climate litigation, and make a meaningful difference in people’s lives across Latin America and beyond. SpeakersElisa Morgera, UNSR on climate change and human rights.Alana Lancaster, West Indies University, Cave Hill Campus, Barbados.Sandra Reyes and Dagoberto Majano, Mesa Justicia Climática, Cedeño community, Honduras.Moderator: Luisa Gomez, CIEL. Recording 

Small investments with great impacts. Territorial gender-just climate solutions

Since 2016, the Global Alliance for Green and Gender Action (GAGGA), together with other actors, has promoted a series of initiatives to strengthen the inclusion of a gender perspective in climate finance, particularly within the projects and financial flows of the Green Climate Fund (GCF).The GCF is the first international climate finance fund to incorporate a gender perspective as a central pillar of its operations, becoming a key framework for advancing equity in the access, use, and allocation of climate resources globally.However, international climate finance that reaches countries is often disconnected from the actual needs of the local communities it is meant to benefit— especially women. This poses a critical issue that demands urgent attention— communities have the right to participate in decisions that directly affect them. At the same time, it misses the opportunity to incorporate local knowledge into solutions— knowledge that could make them more relevant and effective in addressing the climate crisis. In its special report on climate change and land, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2022) highlights that incorporating women’s knowledge of land management helps mitigate degradation and supports the adoption of integrated adaptation and mitigation measures.Gender-responsive climate finance goes beyond allocating resources to women and promoting gender equality—it requires rethinking how financial and climate solutions are designed and implemented. This means acknowledging the diversity of women, removing barriers to resource access, defunding so-called ‘false solutions’, and supporting initiatives that tackle the structural causes of climate change.In Latin America and the Caribbean, many local climate solutions remain unknown to decision-makers. As a result, they struggle to receive support, be replicated, or serve as inspiration for other initiatives benefiting the same communities. This publication presents five case studies of successful, locally developed climate solutions with a focus on gender and climate justice. The goal is to strengthen collaboration between those responsible for providing and implementing GCF resources and civil society organizations.The case studies show the efficiency that can be achieved when resources are channeled directly to civil society organizations and communities. All the projects were carried out with budgets under USD 50,000 and made significant contributions to transforming the structural conditions that heighten the vulnerability of territories, women, and other marginalized groups in the face of the climate crisis.  Read and download the publication 

Reimagining the circular economy from the extraction territories. Proposals from Latin America

Among the various global commitments to address current climate crisis, international governance bodies, such as the United Nations, have provided guidance on the need to duplicate renewable energy production and electromobility to decarbonize the global energy mix, calling this process “energy transition”. However, this implies intensifying the extraction of minerals that make the development of these technologies possible. Each region of the world plays a different rol within the supply chain of minerals that will be used in decarbonization proceses. Latin America has been identified as one of the regions with vast mineral reserves that would fuel this transicion proposal. However, in this context of mining interest there is the tendency to make invisible the populations that inhabit these territories as well as their hydrogeological systems of local, regional and global significance.Lithium is one of the minerals that has noticeatly increased its commercial interest in terms of progress on energy decarbonization. It is in the Gran Atacama region, which encompasses areas of Argentina, Bolivia and Chile, where the greatest global reserves are found. Nevertheless, for lithium to be available it requires going through a complex international supply chain, which is particularly complex since it includes mineral extraction, its refining to battery-grade, production of electrodes for batteries, production of batteries and, finally, production of electric vehicles.This situation, of increased demand for minerals in complex global supply chains, generates warnings about the risk for the region to recreate a new cicle of extractivism, should public policies that integrate in an effective way environmental, social and territorial development standards, are not devised and implemented.Circular economy, closely related to the energy transition process, arises as a key strategy to overcoming the logic of traditional linear economy system (take - make - consume - throw away). Its aim is to reduce pressure on the territories and common goods through the incorporation of sustainability criteria to supply chains, by promoting a more rational management of the mineral resources extracted.However, this way of understanding circular economy, linked to minerals for energy transition, is also supported by the expansion of extractivism, especially in the Global South. This comes as a result since decarbonization options requires a huge amounts of minerals for energy storage, and these are extracted at the cost of high environmental and social impacts that threatens the resilience of the ecosystems from where they are extracted posing a risk to the populations that inhabit them.Taking into account these limitations, a circular economy proposal, from the perspective of Latin American extraction zones and applied to transition minerals, should contribute to guarantee that changes in the energy mix towards technologies with fewer Greenhouse effect emissions (widely known as energy transition), be truly just throughout all the stages of the process. This implies avoiding the creation, expansion and/or deepening of sacrifice zones, as well as ensuring environmental restoration, guaranteeing compliance with human rights as well as reparation of those rights that have been violated. Furthermore, it should take into account the biophysical boundaries and resilience capacity of the environments.   Read and download

Motagua River: A story of contamination and a call for justice

The Motagua River, Guatemala's largest river, is severely polluted with sewage, solid waste, and other types of waste.It flows into the Caribbean Sea, so contamination reaches those waters, as well as the Mesoamerican Barrier Reef System - the world's largest transboundary reef - and the Honduran coast, causing unquantifiable social and environmental damage.Polluting activities occur throughout the river basin, including sub-basins and micro-basins.In general terms, the contamination has deteriorated the health and violated the right to water, development and a healthy environment of all the people living in the basin.The contamination of the Motagua is a problem that has been going on for decades and requires urgent long-term measures that contribute to the sanitation and integrated management of the river basin.Where is the Motagua River?The Motagua River is one of the main rivers in Guatemala. With a length of 486 km, it crosses 96 municipalities and 14 departments of the country. It originates in Quiché, a department located in the northwest, and flows into the Caribbean Sea.It is at its mouth that its flow meets the Mesoamerican Reef, which extends for approximately 1,000 km and covers the territorial waters of Belize, Guatemala, Honduras and Mexico. Thus, the pollution carried by the river deteriorates the health of the reef system, which is home to the second longest barrier reef in the world.The Mesoamerican Reef protects thousands of kilometers of coastline from currents, waves and storms. In addition to being a breeding and feeding ground for a great diversity of species, it is a carbon dioxide sink and a detoxifier of water and air. The ecological and economic health of the entire South Atlantic area depends on its conservation.In addition, pollution from the Motagua River reaches the coast of Honduras and spreads to Amatique Bay, located along the eastern coast of Guatemala and Belize. This is clearly a transboundary problem.Where does the pollution in of the Motagua River come from?The largest volume of contamination of the Motagua River comes from Guatemala City, the capital of the country, mainly through the waters of the Las Vacas River, which receives a large amount of solid waste from the Chinautla River, as well as sewage that is discharged into its waters on a daily basis.Solid waste from the Chinautla River, which flows through the municipality of the same name, comes from a landfill located in Zone 3 of the capital. Any small landslide in this landfill generates waste that is automatically dumped into the river at any time of the year.The pollution that the Chinautla river carries also consists of a large amount of sewage, generated by at least 500,000 people living in the northern part of Guatemala City, which does not receive any previous cleaning treatment.In the municipality of Chinautla there are numerous illegal landfills. In addition, many private vehicles and collection trucks dump waste on the banks of the Chinautla and Las Vacas rivers.According to data from the Integrated Environmental Management of the Motagua River Basin project, financed by the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), it is estimated that 66% of urban solid waste in Guatemala is not collected and there is no guarantee that the remaining 34% is properly disposed of. In addition, of the total number of landfills in the country, 88.32% are illegal or do not have municipal authorization.Most of the waste is dumped in streams and/or on surfaces that are susceptible to dragging, ending up in one way or another in water sources, such as the Motagua basin.In other words, the main source of contamination of the Motagua River is the poor management of solid waste and water resources in the country; the lack of compliance with existing regulations on wastewater discharge, disposal and treatment of waste and solid waste; as well as the lack of a water law.Who is affected by the contamination of the Motagua River?The contamination of the Motagua River affects the entire population of Guatemala. In the lower basin, it directly affects people dedicated to fishing, who have seen their catches reduced.And, by harming tourism in the Caribbean, it also affects the communities that depend on tourism for their livelihoods.As a basin-wide problem, the contamination of the Motagua affects those living in the main sub-basins and micro-basins of the river, including the indigenous communities of the Mayan Poqomam people in the cities of Chuarrancho and Chinautla.In Chinautla, the contamination affects the living conditions, health, environment, water sources, economy and culture of more than 18,000 people.The restoration of the Motagua River is crucial to improve the quality of life of at least 30% of the Guatemalan population, as well as those affected in neighboring countries.Actions to rescue the Motagua River from contaminationIn the face of the serious degradation of Guatemala's largest river basin, the damage to key ecosystems such as the Mesoamerican Reef, and the human rights violations that pollution generates, urgent measures are required, among them:Verify compliance with environmental and municipal regulations, as well as prevent and halt environmental damage at the source through regulation, monitoring, supervision and oversight of activities that affect the rights of the inhabitants of the Motagua River basin.Strengthen regulations related to wastewater disposal and solid waste management so that they are implemented in a timely manner through complete treatment systems in the municipalities of the basin.Initiate actions to enable the socio-environmental restoration of affected ecosystems throughout the basin, including political, legislative and administrative measures to strengthen the legal system and allocate sufficient financial resources to ensure the protection of waters and territories. 

Families of La Oroya demand Peru comply with Inter-American Court ruling

One year after the decision, the state has still not implemented the ordered reparations. The population lacks comprehensive health care and is once again exposed to toxic contamination due to the reactivation of the La Oroya smelter complex, which is operating without adequate environmental management.One year after the Inter-American Court of Human Rights ordered the Peruvian state to provide comprehensive reparations to the residents of La Oroya, after finding it responsible for violating their rights, the victims are still waiting for the ruling to be implemented and for state to comply with its international obligations."It's already been a year since the ruling was announced, how much longer will we have to wait?" asked Yolanda Zurita, a resident of La Oroya and a petitioner in the case. "Enough is enough! We demand that the Peruvian state immediately comply with the ruling of the Inter-American Court, which will benefit not only the victims of the case, but also the population of La Oroya and the country exposed to toxic substances from the indiscriminate development of extractive and industrial activities in our territories."On March 22, 2024, in a landmark decision for the protection of a healthy environment in Latin America, the Court responded to the long and tireless search for justice by the families of La Oroya, who have been affected for decades by the extreme levels of contamination from the La Oroya Metallurgical Complex (CMLO) and the lack of adequate protective measures by the State, which today ignores the ruling and underestimates its importance.Although the Court ordered the State to ensure that CMLO's operations comply with international environmental standards and to prevent and mitigate damage to the environment and human health, the opposite is currently the case: the complex has reactivated its operations without having modernized its facilities to prevent and mitigate the environmental and health risks it generates for the population.It is urgent that the CMLO stops polluting and that the Peruvian State adopts the measures required by the Court to modernize it in accordance with international environmental standards of environmental protection, in compliance with the ruling."With the reactivation of the metallurgical complex, the people of La Oroya are once again being exposed to levels of pollution that endanger their lives; the Inter-American Court's ruling is clear and the State is obligated to comply," said Rosa Peña, senior attorney with the Inter-American Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA). "The delay in complying with the ruling is re-victimizing the families who have been demanding justice for more than 20 years."The court also ordered the state to provide free medical care to the victims and to guarantee specialized care to residents with symptoms and illnesses related to contamination from the mining and metallurgical activities. Today, however, comprehensive health care is not guaranteed in La Oroya. It is necessary that the State, through and in coordination with the Ministry of Health, the Regional Health Directorate of Junín, the General Directorate of Environmental Health, and health care providers, create and implement the protocol for comprehensive care for victims in La Oroya, as established by the Court.The ruling set a historic precedent for the control of industrial pollution by states. For the Peruvian State to make real progress in its implementation, it is imperative that the Attorney General's Office issue the Compliance Resolution."Despite the deadlines set by the Inter-American Court for the Peruvian State, there has been virtually no progress in the implementation of the ruling," said Christian Huaylinos, coordinator of the legal department of the Pro Human Rights Association (APRODEH). "Above all, the nature of the case must be taken into account, which implies that La Oroya has been classified as a sacrifice zone due to the high levels of contamination; therefore, the need to fully compensate the victims is urgent." Background of the caseLa Oroya is located in the central mountain range of Peru, in the department of Junin, 176 km from Lima. In 1992, the US company Cerro de Pasco Corporation installed the La Oroya Metallurgical Complex (CMLO) to process mineral concentrates. The complex was nationalized in 1974 and operated by the state under the name Centromin Peru until 1997, when it was taken over by Doe Run Peru, which operated it until 2009. In short, the CMLO is over 100 years old.In La Oroya, most of the people affected by the CMLO contamination, including children, have lead levels higher than those recommended by the World Health Organization. In some cases, they have registered higher levels of arsenic and cadmium, in addition to stress, anxiety, skin problems, stomach problems, chronic headaches, and respiratory or cardiac problems, among others.In the absence of effective responses at the national level and on behalf of the victims, an international coalition of organizations filed a complaint against the Peruvian State with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in 2006. In October 2021, the Commission found the Peruvian government responsible and referred the case to the Inter-American Court. In October 2022, more than 16 years after the international complaint was filed, the victims, represented by AIDA and APRODEH with the assistance of Earthjustice, brought the case before the Court. Press contactsVíctor Quintanilla (Mexico), AIDA, [email protected], +52 5570522107María Nieve Sullón (Peru), APRODEH, [email protected], +51 984926868 

Why is lithium mining in Andean salt flats also called water mining?

By Víctor Quintanilla, David Cañas and Javier Oviedo* According to official figures, approximately 2.2 billion people worldwide lack access to drinking water.Despite this panorama, threats to this common good from overexploitation and pollution are increasing. One such threat is the accelerated extraction of lithium in Latin American countries, driven by corporate and state actors to meet the energy transition needs of the global North.Lithium extraction involves enormous water consumption and loss and is essentially water mining.On the continent, the advance of the lithium industry particularly threatens the salt flats and other Andean wetlands of the Gran Atacama region—located in the ecological region of the Puna, on the border of Argentina, Bolivia and Chile—where more than 53 percent of the mineral’s resources (potentially exploitable material) are located.Lithium mining exacerbates the natural water deficit in the area, threatening not only the salt flats, but also the many forms of life that live there. Where does the water used in lithium mining come from?First, it’s necessary to point out that salt flats are aquatic ecosystems located at the bottom of endorheic or closed basins. There, rivers do not flow into the sea but into the interior of the territory, so the water forms lakes or lagoons often accompanied by salt flats due to evaporation.In the salt flats, freshwater and saltwater usually coexist in a delicate balance that allows life to survive.The regions with salt flats, such as the Gran Atacama, are arid or semi-arid, with high evaporation and low rainfall. There we find freshwater aquifers at the foot of the mountains and brine aquifers in the center of the salt flats, both connected and in equilibrium.Brine is basically water with a high salt content, although the lithium mining industry considers it a mineral to justify its exploitation and minimize the water footprint of its activities.In addition to being essential for life, the waters of the salt flats are a heritage resource because they are very old—up to tens of thousands of years—and have been the livelihood of the indigenous people who have inhabited the Puna for thousands of years.When the mining industry moves into a salt flat, it threatens the natural balance and directly affects the relationship between water and the social environment, as well as the relationship between water and other forms of life.To extract lithium from a salt flat, the traditional procedure is to drill the salt flat, pour the brine into large ponds, wait for the water to evaporate so that the lithium concentration increases, send the lithium concentrate to an industrial plant and subject it to chemical treatment to separate the lithium from other salts and finally obtain lithium carbonate or hydroxide: a raw material used mainly in the manufacture of batteries.The continuous and large-scale extraction of brine from saline aquifers alters the natural balance of groundwater. As a result, areas that were previously filled with brine are emptied, causing freshwater from nearby aquifers to move in and occupy those spaces, becoming salinized in the process.The final processes to extract lithium carbonate and separate it from the rest of the compound also require water, which is drawn from surface or underground sources that also supply local communities.Therefore, the water used in lithium mining comes from:Underground freshwater and brine aquifers.Surface sources such as rivers and vegas (land where water accumulates). Therefore, the inherent risk of lithium mining is the overexploitation of these water sources. How much water does lithium mining use?The extraction of lithium by the methods described above involves an enormous consumption and loss of water, which is not returned to the environment because it completely used up, because its properties change, or because it is simply lost through evaporation.According to scientific data, the average water overconsumption in lithium mining is as follows:150 m3 of fresh water used to produce one ton of lithium.350 m3 of brine per ton of lithium.Between 100 and 1000 m3 of water evaporated per ton of lithium produced. To illustrate the loss of water resources in lithium mining, the water lost to evaporation is equivalent to the total water consumption of the population of Antofagasta (166,000 people) for two years. This Chilean city is located 200 km from the Salar de Atacama, where more than 90 percent of the country's lithium reserves are located.In addition to water depletion, lithium mining can also contaminate the resource by producing wastewater containing toxic substances. Our vital relationship with waterUnlike the mining industry, which sees water as just another resource to be exploited, the indigenous communities living in the area have an ancestral connection to the resource on which their economic and productive activities depend, as well as their customs, traditions and worldview.These communities must now confront the pressures on water from the advance of lithium mining, driven by outside interests.But they are doing so with courage, developing processes of defense of water and territory.Let us learn from them to defend a common good without which no way of life is possible.Learn more about the impacts of lithium mining on Andean salt flats in this StoryMap (in Spanish)Watch the recording of the webinar “Evidence of hyperconsumption of water in lithium extraction and production” (in Spanish) *Víctor Quintanilla is AIDA's Content Coordinator; David Cañas and Javier Oviedo are scientific advisors. 

Colombia: Communities and workers win first court ruling on coal mine closure that protects their rights

The Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA) celebrates the ruling of the Constitutional Court of Colombia, which recognizes the rights to due process and participation of communities and workers in the closure of coal mining projects in the department of Cesar. This ruling comes after years of insistence by these groups, who filed a tutela lawsuit. In this case, AIDA contributed with a legal brief that includes the analysis it has conducted on the issue of closure and responsible exit in Latin America, from the perspective of the right to a healthy environment and other human rights.Below, we share the statement of the communities and workers on the occasion of the ruling.The Constitutional Court of Colombia issued the first ruling on mine closures in the country (T-029 of 2025). It guaranteed due process and, consequently, the effective participation of the communities and unions representing more than 20,000 people in the more than four municipalities affected by the environmental, social and economic impacts of the first irregular abandonment and closure of large-scale coal mines in Colombia.We, a group of affected communities and dismissed workers from Cesar and Magdalena, have led a legal action for more than four years to ensure a public dialogue through a large consultation table where the communities, dismissed workers, local authorities and the affected citizens in general of the mining municipalities of La Jagua, El Paso, Becerril and Ciénaga can know and participate in the definition of compensation and restoration measures that the multinational Glencore - Prodeco must carry out in these municipalities as part of its mining abandonment and closure plan, which is in the process of being approved by the National Environmental Licensing Authority (ANLA).In this ruling, the court determined that the Seventh Administrative Court of Valledupar violated the fundamental right to due process by considering that the multinational company had complied with this participation process with a SINGLE socialization meeting held in November 2022 in these municipalities, which is clearly insufficient and does not comply with what was agreed in the minutes of the meeting, where the commitment of the parties was to convene the GREAT TABLE OF DIALOGUE AND CONCERTATION in the presence of the affected population of these four municipalities.The court ordered to initiate again the opening of the contempt proceeding against the legal representative of Grupo Empresarial PRODECO S.A. and to review the compliance with the judgment and the agreement contained in these minutes.We, as communities and unions of the mining corridor, supported by national and international civil society organizations, and represented in court by attorney Rocío Torres Bobadilla, consider that this public roundtable may be the last opportunity for us to make a balance of what has happened in our territories after 25 years of exploitation and achieve measures for Glencore to compensate and restore all the impacts caused.Therefore:We invite Glencore - Prodeco to a constructive dialogue, to avoid evasive maneuvers and to respect the importance of this judicial decision.We request the Colombian State, headed by the ANLA, the DEFENSORIA and the PROCURADURÍA to accompany us in this process, support this judicial decision and strengthen our protection measures to guarantee our safety as leaders in this process to comply with this ruling.We request national and international organizations to continue supporting us to guarantee a real and effective participation and that this GREAT CONCERTATION TABLE is fulfilled. Finally, we ask the entire population of the country and especially of the municipalities of La Jagua, Becerril, El Paso and Ciénaga to accompany us, support us and join us in a great process to DEFEND THIS JUDICIAL DECISION which is HISTORIC for our territory in order to restore and compensate the serious environmental and social impacts caused by the irregular mining closure and to find measures to address the great poverty and unemployment we are experiencing.Join us to be heard, to heal our territories and to recover our economy.Signed byJunta de acción comunal de BoquerónConsejo Comunitario Afrodescendiente Coafrovis de la Victoria de San IsidroRed de Mujeres del Municipio del Paso Asamblea Campesina del Cesar por la Restitución y el Buen Vivir Asociación de Usuarios Campesinos (ANUC) el Paso Sindicato Nacional de Trabajadores del Carbón (Sintracarbón) Sindicato Nacional de los Trabajadores de la Industria Minero-Energética (Sintraminergetica) Sindicato Nacional de los Trabajadores Mineros Asociación del Reguardo Sokorhpa del Pueblo Indígena Yukpa Consejo Comunitario Caño Candela de Becerril Junta de Acción Comunal del Barrio Don Jaca en Santa Marta Corregimiento de Cordobita en Ciénaga (Madgalena) Vereda el Hatillo Representante Junta de Acción Comunal Sororia de la Jagua de Ibirico Centro de Estudios para la Justicia Social Tierra Digna Rocío Torres Bobadilla- environmental rights defender National and international organizations and defenders that SUPPORT US:Universidad del Magdalena Universidad del Magdalena Clínica Jurídica Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA)London Mining Network PAX Holanda PAX Colombia CNV InternationaalSolifonds Multiwatch ASK Switzerland-Colombia Working GroupUrgewald Polen –Transiciones JustasAna Catalina Herrara - labor rights defenderÁngela Velandia Cruz – human rights defender