Human Rights

Paisaje de Antofagasta de la Sierra, Argentina.

March 27 2024 Indigenous Rights, Mining, Public Participation

Court decision stops new lithium mining projects in Argentine salt flat, sets regional precedent

On March 13, the Supreme Court of Argentina’s Catamarca province ordered a halt on authorizing new lithium mining projects around the Salar del Hombre Muerto, in the department of Antofagasta de la Sierra. The high provincial court established that all projects must comply with the free, prior, and informed consultation of affected communities, thus granting the injunction filed by Román Guitián, Cacique of the Atacameños del Altiplano Indigenous Community. It is one of the most important rulings of recent times regarding care for nature and the protection of the rights of traditional communities. The court ordered the providence’s Ministry of Mining and the Ministry of Water, Energy and Environment to "refrain from granting new authorizations or environmental impact statements with respect to any work or activity" in the area until an environmental impact report with two fundamental characteristics is completed. The first is that it must be "cumulative and integral," covering the entire salt flat and especially the Los Patos River, which is in the same salt flat. The second is that it must consider the total impact of the companies that have applied for water use and extraction permits, and their potential to transform the environment in the same geographical area. Lithium mining in Antofagasta de la Sierra began in 1997 by the multinational company FMC, currently operating as Livent. The local communities denounced that the river and the Trapiche Valley were drying up because of the mining activity. The Alliance for Andean Wetlands (Alianza por los Humedales Andinos) celebrates this achievement of the Atacameños del Altiplano Indigenous Community and the Asamblea PUCARA (Pueblos Catamarqueños en Resistencia y Autodeterminación). The same model of lithium mega-mining that the Catamarca Supreme Court's ruling points to is being reproduced in the Puna region of Chile and Bolivia. In this sense, the sentence is an important precedent for the protection of the environment and affected communities, which should be replicated in all the regions of the continent affected by this extractive model. Governments must take measures to provide the necessary security guarantees for the territorial defense of local communities demanding the fulfillment of their human and environmental rights, both in Argentina and in other countries. QUOTES FROM ALLIANCE MEMBERS Claudia Velarde, co-coordinator of the Ecosystems Program of the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA) "What happened in Catamarca is a historic milestone for the protection of water, territory and life in Latin America. The Court's decision confirms that the concept of the cumulative impact of an extractive activity is fully valid and a transcendental aspect of environmental management. It also clarifies that any damage to the environment that may result in a violation of the right to life or personal integrity must be considered significant damage. It is a relevant precedent in every sense and a strong message: national and international environmental regulations must be respected, environmental impact assessments must be strategic and cumulative, the right to environmental participation must be guaranteed, and the energy transition must be just." Ramón Balcázar, executive director of Fundación Tantí and co-coordinator of the Plurinational Observatory of Andean Salt Flats (OPSAL) "This ruling is the result of years of work and shows the importance of articulating knowledge and legal strategies for the defense of territories from a wetland perspective, setting a precedent that should be extended to the entire region for a cumulative assessment of projects, not only lithium, but also metallic mining and the impacts of climate change. Unfortunately, our colleague Román Guitián was the target of death threats after learning of the ruling, in a country like Chile that has ratified the Escazú Agreement. In this sense, we must categorically reject any form of violence against the defenders of the Andean salt flats, as well as the political advantage that institutions linked to the greenwashing of mining have tried to take from such a complex situation." Cristian Fernández, coordinator of the Legal Affairs area of Fundación Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (FARN) "The recent ruling of the Court of Justice of Catamarca, ordering the preparation of a "cumulative and integral" environmental impact study for all lithium projects being developed in the Los Patos River basin, and requiring the local government to refrain from issuing any new permits or authorizations for the activity, represents a milestone in the environmental jurisprudence of our country. It consolidates the path started almost 15 years ago by the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation when, in the "Salas Dino" case, it demanded a cumulative impact study against the deforestation of native forests in Salta. In doing so, the Catamarca Court set a precedent that could be applied to the ecosystem damage suffered by the provinces of Salta and Jujuy due to the cumulative impact of numerous lithium projects in Salinas Grandes and Guayatayoc Lagoon."

La chimenea del Complejo Metalúrgico de La Oroya, en Perú, vista desde un campo deportivo

March 27 2024 Mining, Toxic Pollution, Human Rights

5 milestones in the "Inhabitants of La Oroya v. Peru" case ruling

Our long-fought victory before the Inter-American Court sets important precedents for all communities seeking environmental justice in the Americas. The story of the community of La Oroya, Peru, in its quest for justice and reparations spans decades. The perseverance of the residents of this Andean town has borne fruit for the entire region, as they achieved a victory that sets important precedents for all communities seeking environmental justice on the continent. The Inter-American Court of Human Rights ruled in favor of the community of La Oroya, holding the Peruvian state responsible for violating the right to a healthy environment and other related rights, such as health and life, of its inhabitants by failing to take timely and effective measures to protect them from extreme levels of pollution from a metallurgical complex. AIDA has led the case from its inception, bringing La Oroya's struggle to the Inter-American Human Rights System and providing legal representation to the victims before the Court. Why is the international court’s ruling in "Community of La Oroya vs. Peru" such a joy and a door opener for us? We explain below, how the ruling: 1. Responds to the first case of its kind before the Inter-American Court. This is the first time the Inter-American Court has ruled on a case of toxic air and environmental pollution in an urban community. In its ruling, the Court recognized the disparate impact on women, children, and other vulnerable populations. It also addressed the importance of the rights of access to information and participation. 2. Recognizes and values the importance of a healthy environment as a human right. The Court recognized this right as a jus cogens (mandatory) norm and clarified the obligations of states to ensure a healthy environment for all people. A key point of the judgment is that states must avoid, prevent, and control environmental damage and its effects on human health by using all the means at their disposal. 3. Opens the door to accountability. The ruling sets precedents to hold states and companies accountable for taking the necessary measures to avoid lifelong impacts on people's health and the environment. The Peruvian state must provide financial compensation to the affected people of La Oroya, provide free and specialized medical care, adopt non-recurrence measures, and monitor air and water quality in places where mining activities are taking place. 4. Establishes the responsibility of the State in a case of contamination. In addition to stating that companies must act with due diligence and respect for human rights, the Court concluded in its ruling that the Peruvian state should have acted to protect and guarantee the rights of the people exposed to the contamination, using, among other tools, the precautionary principle. 5. Sets precedents for the entire region. The ruling goes beyond the Peruvian context, as it is binding on States Parties to the American Convention on Human Rights and sets an important precedent in Latin America for the protection of the right to a healthy environment and for the adequate supervision by States of corporate activities.

Vista panorámica de la ciudad de La Oroya, Perú.

March 22 2024 Mining, Toxic Pollution, Accountability and Transparency

Inter-American Court ruling on La Oroya case sets key precedent for the protection of a healthy environment

The Court found Peru responsible for violating the rights of residents of La Oroya, who have been exposed to unsafe levels of toxic contamination for generations. San José, Costa Rica. The ruling of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in the case "Community of La Oroya vs. Peru" sets an important precedent for the protection of the right to a healthy environment across the Americas and for adequate state oversight of corporate activities. The first-of-its-kind decision holds Peru accountable for its failure to protect the inhabitants of the Andean city of La Oroya who were exposed to toxic pollution from a smelter complex that operated without adequate pollution controls for a century. The Inter-American Court heard the case in a public hearing against Peru. 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 Peru before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in 2006. In October 2021, the Commission established the Peruvian government's responsibility in the case and referred it to the Inter-American Court. In October 2022, more than 16 years after the filing of the complaint, the victims presented the case before the Court in a public hearing, represented by the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA) and the Pro Human Rights Association (APRODEH), with the support of Earthjustice. "This ruling is a very important step forward and a key precedent for environmental justice in Latin America, as it is the first case in which the Court recognizes a state’s responsibility for violating the right to a healthy environment and the impact this has on the guarantee of several other rights," said Liliana Avila, coordinator of AIDA's Human Rights and Environment Program. "The Court also referred to the collective and individual dimensions of this right, acknowledging the differential impact of its violation on children, women and the elderly, and the important role of environmental defenders." In its judgment, published on March 22, 2024, the international court established the Peru’s responsibility for the violation of the rights to a healthy environment, health, personal integrity, life with dignity, access to information, political participation, judicial guarantees and judicial protection of the 80 people involved in the case; for the violation of the rights of the children of 57 victims; and for the violation of the right to life of two victims. The Court also concluded that the State was responsible for violating the obligation of progressive development by adopting regressive measures in environmental protection. "The decision is a fundamental precedent in international law that establishes the parameters of the State's obligation to regulate, control and remediate the effects of environmental pollution, as well as the obligations derived from the right to a healthy environment as an autonomous right and its interdependence and indivisibility with other fundamental rights of human existence, such as health, life and personal integrity," said Christian Huaylinos, Legal Coordinator of APRODEH. "It is also a great satisfaction for the victim’s two decades long struggle.” For more than 20 years, the residents of La Oroya have been seeking justice and redress for the widespread contamination caused by the La Oroya smelter complex, which was operated by Doe Run Peru from 1997 to 2009. The town has been recognized as one of the most polluted places on the planet. "Twenty years ago, when this fight started, I was carrying my banner saying that the health of the children is worth more than gold," recalls Don Pablo, a resident of La Oroya. "We never gave up, and now I am very happy with the Court's decision." In the judgment, the Court ordered the State of Peru to adopt comprehensive reparation measures for the damage caused to the population of La Oroya, including identifying, prosecuting and, where appropriate, punishing those responsible for the harassment of the victims; determining the state of contamination of the air, water and soil and preparing an environmental remediation plan; providing free medical care to the victims and guaranteeing specialized care to residents with symptoms and illnesses related to contamination from mining and metallurgical activities; ensuring the effectiveness of the city's warning system and developing a system for monitoring the quality of air, water, and soil; ensuring that the operations of the La Oroya Metallurgical Complex comply with international environmental standards, preventing and mitigating damage to the environment and human health; providing monetary compensation to victims for material and non-material damages. "What we expect now is that the ruling will be implemented, that for the first time the State will fulfill its obligations and guarantee our rights as environmental defenders," said Yolanda Zurita, a resident of La Oroya and a petitioner in the case. "Compliance with this ruling is the least we expect from a state that is committed to guaranteeing the rights of its citizens." Since 1999, the government of Peru has known that almost all the children living near the complex suffer from lead poisoning yet failed to offer proper medical care and remediation. For decades, the population of La Oroya was exposed to extreme levels of lead and other harmful contaminants, including arsenic, cadmium, and sulfur dioxide. Nearly all the children in the case have had lead and other heavy metals in their blood at concentrations many times higher than the guidelines established by the World Health Organization. And many residents suffer from chronic respiratory illness, in addition to stress, anxiety, skin problems, stomach problems, chronic headaches, and heart problems, among others. "This ruling issues a warning to governments across the Americas that they cannot sit idly by while multinational corporations poison local communities. Corporations will now be on notice that exposing families to unhealthy levels of industrial pollution is a violation of international law and governments must hold polluters accountable,” said Jacob Kopas, Earthjustice senior attorney. Resources Court's press release on the judgment, available here (in Spanish). Official summary of the judgment, available here (in Spanish). Full text of the judgment, available here (in Spanish). Background information on the case, available here. Folder with photographs, available here. press contact Víctor Quintanilla-Sangüeza (Mexico), AIDA, [email protected], +521 70522107

March 08 2024 Climate Change, Human Rights

Communities in Nicaragua win Green Climate Fund withdrawal from project that violated their rights

In an unprecedented decision resolving a complaint filed in 2021, the Green Climate Fund terminated a forestry project because the developers failed to comply with the Fund's policies and procedures on socio-environmental safeguards. This non-compliance violated the human rights of indigenous and Afro-descendant communities. The Green Climate Fund, the world's leading multilateral climate finance institution, decided to terminate funding for a forest conservation project in Nicaragua because the developers failed to comply with the institution's policies and procedures on socio-environmental safeguards. The non-compliance violated the rights of indigenous and Afro-descendant communities, as the project threatened to exacerbate the situation of violence from which they were already suffering. The Fund had not made any disbursements for the project and project implementation had not yet begun. The decision, the first of its kind in the Fund's history, is in response to a complaint filed in June 2021 by representatives of the affected communities, with the support of local and international organizations, with the Fund's Independent Redress Mechanism. The Independent Redress Mechanism hears complaints from people who are or may be affected by projects or programs financed by the Fund. "This decision is a recognition of the tireless efforts of the communities behind the case, who were able to demonstrate the difficult situation they face, as well as a reminder of the importance of involving local communities in all stages of a project, from its conception," said Florencia Ortúzar, Senior Attorney at AIDA, one of the organizations that accompanied and provided legal support to the complaint process. In the complaint, the communities argued that implementing the project— called Bio-CLIMA: Integrated Climate Action to Reduce Deforestation and Strengthen Resilience in the BOSAWAS and Río San Juan Biospheres— would have serious impacts because: There was no adequate disclosure of information, no indigenous consultation, and no free, prior, and informed consent. The project would cause environmental degradation and increase violence against indigenous communities due to land colonization. The conditions imposed by the Fund's Board of Directors for project approval (including independent monitoring of project implementation and ensuring the legitimate participation of indigenous peoples) were not met. There was a lack of confidence in the Central American Bank for Economic Integration, the entity accredited to channel the funds, as to its compliance with the Fund's policies. There was a lack of confidence in the ability of the Government of Nicaragua, as the implementing agency, to fulfill its obligations in the execution of the project. The goal of the project, for which the Fund committed $64 million USD in 2020, was to restore degraded forest landscapes in Nicaragua's most biodiverse region (home to 80 percent of the country's forests and most of its indigenous peoples) and to channel investments toward sustainable land and forest management. However, the project was designed without adequate consultation, with a complete lack of transparency on the part of the sponsoring bank and ignoring the difficult context of violence and lack of human rights protection still suffered by indigenous communities in Nicaragua, particularly in the project area. In recent decades, the harsh local situation has only worsened because of organized crime, drug trafficking, the expansion of agriculture and cattle ranching, and the promotion of extractivist policies, as well as the lack of state protection. The investigation launched by the Independent Reparations Mechanism, which included field work and face-to-face and virtual interviews with all stakeholders, confirmed some of the allegations made in the complaint, including the lack of adequate consultation processes and the lack of free, prior, and informed consent of the affected communities. This is stated in the investigation’s final report. In July 2023, the Fund's Board of Directors, which was called upon to decide on the future of the project based on the Investigation Report, delegated the task to the Fund's Secretariat. As a result, neither the IRM nor the claimants had any further say in the matter. Finally, on March 7 of this year, the Secretariat announced its decision: to terminate the project's financing agreement, acknowledging that the developers had failed to comply with the Fund's policies, as alleged by the communities in the complaint. "The decision is a valuable lesson for the Green Climate Fund, whose policies and safeguards exist to prevent these unfortunate situations and must be applied rigorously and consistently from the conception of projects seeking funding," said Ortúzar. press contact Víctor Quintanilla (Mexico), AIDA, [email protected], +52 5570522107

March 04 2024 Large Dams, Indigenous Rights, Mining

Defending the Volta Grande do Xingu in the Brazilian Amazon

"Certain lives exist only in the Xingu River, mine is one of them. And also that of the indigenous and riverine peoples. Can these lives be destroyed?” The question posed by Sara Rodrigues Lima - a local river dweller, fisherman and researcher - highlights the paradox that one of the most biodiverse, ecologically, climatically and culturally important regions in the world is also one of the most affected by socio-environmental impacts. The Volta Grande (or "Big Bend") of the Xingu River, located in the heart of the Brazilian Amazon, is home to a unique ecosystem and is a key region for the conservation of global biodiversity. For centuries, it has been home to indigenous and riverine peoples who have shared ownership of the river and the Amazonian rainforest, providing sources of food, water, identity, culture and mobility, among other things. This link has translated into livelihood systems based on caring for and defending the territory and their own existence, which are now severely threatened. Since 2015, this region has been the target of large extractive projects that threaten the livelihoods and physical and cultural survival of traditional peoples and communities. This has been accompanied by violence against people defending this Amazonian territory. In order to deal with this situation, the affected peoples and civil society have created a network that unites and strengthens their efforts. The Alliance for the Volta Grande do Xingu, formed by social movements and organizations, including AIDA, supports and coordinates actions to defend the region as a living and healthy territory. The coalition has taken the case to the United Nations. The cumulative impact of two megaprojects One of these projects is the Belo Monte dam, whose construction has caused irreparable environmental damage and human rights violations for several generations. The drought caused by the diversion of the river to generate electricity, as well as the ineffectiveness of the mitigation measures implemented, have led to an ecological and humanitarian collapse in the Volta Grande. Currently, thousands of traditional families are suffering from the death of fish, extinction of fishing, lack of food security, impoverishment, physical and mental illnesses. Another major threat to the region and its traditional inhabitants is the Volta Grande project, where the Canadian company Belo Sun intends to build the largest open-pit gold mine in Brazil. The coexistence of the two projects poses the risk of overlapping areas of direct impact. In this scenario, the potential damage to the environment and to indigenous and riverine peoples will be irreversible. The Belo Sun project is proposed to be built less than 10 kilometers from the Belo Monte dam, on the banks of the Xingu River, in the midst of indigenous lands, protected areas and traditional communities. The magnitude of the synergistic and cumulative impacts of the mine and hydroelectric dam has not been assessed. Also ignored were technical analyses that pointed to the serious impacts of the use of cyanide, the contamination of the river, and the risks of a dam breach that, if it were to occur, would flood 41 kilometers along the river and reach nearby indigenous lands. In addition, the state excluded indigenous peoples, riverine and peasant communities from the environmental licensing process for the mining project. Because they live outside the demarcated indigenous lands or more than 10 kilometers from the project, some indigenous peoples were not considered affected or consulted about the implementation of the project. The lack of consultation and public participation of indigenous and riverine peoples led Brazilian courts to order the suspension of the mining company's operating license. Violence and threats against human rights defenders The arrival of Belo Sun in the area is a serious intervention in the socio-cultural environment of the Volta Grande do Xingu. The overlapping of the mining project in a territorial polygon inhabited by traditional peoples, rural groups benefiting from the agrarian reform, and artisanal miners has led to community divisions and violence against those who oppose the mine. In the context of the project's development, there have been reports of illegal land purchase and sale contracts to evict rural families, threats to the area's inhabitants by private security companies, and violence against peasants claiming agrarian reform lands acquired by the mining company, which are the subject of legal proceedings. Threats of violence against environmental and human rights defenders have also increased in intensity and severity. Some of them have had to leave the area to protect their lives, and those who remain in the area face constant risks and threats. Defending the Volta Grande and its people before the United Nations One of the most important actions of the Alliance for the Volta Grande do Xingu has to do with advocacy in the Universal Periodic Review (UPR), a special process of periodic review of the human rights record of the 193 member states of the United Nations. At Canada's fourth UPR cycle in Geneva in August 2023, more than 50 civil society organizations and communities affected by Canadian business activities presented a report highlighting human rights abuses from 37 projects in nine countries in Latin America and the Caribbean, including Belo Sun's Volta Grande project. The document includes recommendations to ensure that states exercise effective environmental oversight that requires human rights due diligence on the part of companies operating in their territories. One of the defenders of the Volta Grande was part of the delegation in Geneva. In addition to denouncing the abuses suffered, he reported on the risks posed by the socio-environmental impact of the Belo Sun project. More than 20 countries and 13 permanent missions and UN agencies took note of the situation in the region. The results of Canada's fourth UPR cycle, released last month, include 34 recommendations directly related to the Alliance's report. Canada has not yet accepted these recommendations, but may do so at the next session of the UN Human Rights Council, which concludes on April 5. As a follow-up to the UPR advocacy, the Alliance submitted reports on the impact of the Belo Sun project to UN Special Rapporteurs. One of them, sent to the Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, focuses on the situation of vulnerability and criminalization of human rights defenders. Similarly, the Alliance submitted a report to the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights highlighting the human rights violations committed by Brazil in the Belo Monte and Belo Sun cases, as well as the lack of effective measures to require human rights due diligence by the companies responsible for these projects. Networking in these international spaces to expose the pattern of environmental impacts and human rights violations of extractive economic projects in Amazonian territories has been one of the alliance's strategies of resistance and denunciation. The conservation of the Amazon and the protection of its peoples are incompatible with the large-scale mining planned by Belo Sun. States have an obligation to prevent serious and irreversible damage to the environment and the population. In the case of Belo Sun, Brazil has the opportunity to avoid repeating the environmental tragedy of Belo Monte and to declare definitively that the mining project is unsustainable from a socio-environmental point of view. The road to these demands and the achievement of these goals will be full of challenges and struggles. But courage and resisting are inherent to those who live in and defend the Amazon. The defense of the Xingu River Basin as a free, vibrant, healthy and safe territory for its peoples and its defenders is an urgent call for social mobilization for the social-ecological protection of one of the world's most important ecosystems.

Lagunas de Siecha, Parque Nacional Natural Chingaza, Colombia.

February 26 2024 Toxic Pollution, Climate Change, Human Rights

Forest fires: How can we help prevent them?

The recent huge fire in the Valparaíso region of Chile has been described as the country's biggest disaster since the 2010 earthquake. But this year, as in previous years, forest fires and their deadly consequences are not an isolated phenomenon in Latin America. In Colombia, the fires forced the government to declare a national disaster and prompted civil society to call for comprehensive protection of Colombia's forests and páramos. Fire also reached part of Argentina's Patagonia region. Ninety percent of forest fires are caused by humans, particularly through activities such as logging and slash-and-burn agriculture. The climate crisis is contributing to their greater intensity and frequency, increasing the risks to forests, species and communities. In addition, wildfires affect air quality and thus human health If this situation is the result of our actions, it is also in our hands to prevent it. What can we do to prevent fires? Here are some actions that different actors in society can take to contribute to this important task. What can governments do? Design and implement laws to ensure forest security and ensure compliance with existing laws. Develop education campaigns to raise public awareness of the importance of forests and how to care for them. Strengthen fire prevention and suppression infrastructure, including spray planes, containment barriers, and technology to constantly monitor the health of forests. What can businesses do? Reduce emissions of gases that heat the atmosphere and increase the risk of wildfires by switching to cleaner energy sources. If flammable waste is generated, implement policies to dispose of it responsibly. Train their work teams to respond to these types of disasters. Promote best practices that help protect the environment. What can citizens do? Organize garbage collection groups and avoid making campfires and/or practicing livestock and agricultural activities in the forest. Obtain and disseminate quality information about the importance of these ecosystems for life on the planet. Follow safety instructions, such as wearing masks and/or evacuating smoke-contaminated areas. Be vigilant and make sure we know how to report fires and what action plans are in place to protect our nearby forests. It is essential that governments, businesses and citizens work as a team to protect forests and promote a culture that cares for the environment and all life.

Montones de sal en el salar de Uyuni, Bolivia

February 20 2024 Indigenous Rights, Mining, Freshwater Sources

Lithium unveiled: Origins, extraction and environmental implications

One of the paradoxes of the energy transition is that it replaces the use of fossil fuels with mineral resources whose extraction and refining can have negative impacts on ecosystems, species and communities. This is happening with lithium, a mineral that has traditionally been used in glass and ceramics to provide greater adhesion and hardness, but is now being used primarily to make the batteries required by technologies that eliminate or reduce the use of fossil fuels. This has led to an increase in its demand. The serious social and environmental impacts of its extraction have been hidden or minimized. What makes lithium special? Lithium is a mineral in high demand due to its unique properties: It is the lightest metal with the highest electrochemical potential. It has a high energy storage capacity. It is malleable, so it can be adapted to different sizes, shapes and designs. These qualities make it a key material in the manufacture of batteries for cell phones, computers and, most importantly, electric vehicles. Lithium is considered key to the energy transition because it can be used to store non-conventional renewable energy, such as wind and photovoltaic power. Where it is: The so-called "lithium triangle"? The primary sources of lithium are salt flats, which are wetlands covered with a saline crust that contain brines, bodies of water in which many salts and elements, including lithium, are dissolved. Salt flats are attractive to the mining industry because of the relative technical ease of exploitation, low operating costs and low energy requirements to extract lithium from them compared to other sources. Worldwide, the salt flats of Argentina, Bolivia and Chile account for 54 percent of lithium resources (potentially mineable material). In addition, Argentina and Chile hold 46 percent of the world's lithium reserves (the portion of known resources with a high level of confidence and proven economic viability). The mining industry has dubbed the region where the mineral is concentrated the "Lithium Triangle" - because that is all they see there - which includes northeastern Argentina, northern Chile and southern Bolivia. But there is much more than lithium in this region. There are also communities, ecosystems and species that depend on these salt flats. The region's inhabitants are engaged in small-scale ranching and subsistence agriculture, activities that require water, an already scarce resource in these latitudes. How is lithium mined from the salt flats? The procedure is as follows: The salt flat is drilled. The brine is poured into large pools or basins. Wait for the water to evaporate so that the lithium concentration increases. When the concentration is sufficient, the brine is sent to an industrial plant. The brine is chemically treated to produce lithium carbonate, which is marketed for battery production. Lithium extraction, especially by this method, involves huge consumption and loss of water because: Water is lost in pumping brine. Evaporation in ponds requires two million liters of water for every ton of lithium produced. Water is also needed in the final processes to obtain lithium carbonate and separate it from the rest of the compound. Lithium mining is threatening South America's salt flats, which are Andean wetlands, affecting local water availability and threatening the survival of communities and species living around these fragile ecosystems. The energy transition is urgent, but it must be equitable and not at the expense of other natural resource extraction that endangers people and the environment. sources -Maritza Tapia, “Claves del litio: el metal más liviano y con mayor potencial electroquímico”, Universidad de Chile. -Heinrich Böll Stiftung Colombia, “Litio: los costos sociales y ambientales de la transición energética global”. -Florencia Ballarino, “¿Qué es el litio, para qué sirve y de dónde se extrae en la Argentina?”, Chequeado. -Wetlands International, “El impacto de la minería de litio en los Humedales Altoandinos”. -Rodolfo Chisleanchi, “‘Triángulo de litio’: la amenaza a los salares de Bolivia, Chile y Argentina”, Mongabay Latam. -U.S. Geological Survey, Mineral Commodity Summaries, January 2023, “Lithium”.

Plenaria de cierre de la la vigésimo octava Conferencia de las Naciones Unidas sobre el Cambio Climático (COP28) en Dubai.

January 31 2024 Climate Change, Human Rights

After COP28 in Dubai: The complex road to Baku and Belém

By Javier Dávalos, Claudia Velarde and Marcella Ribeiro* The twenty-eighth United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP28), held in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, was the largest ever in terms of the number of participants. The representatives of the States Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Paris Agreement held intense discussions under the scrutiny of stakeholders from various sectors. The final results lack the clarity and ambition needed to define the next round of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). However, the fact that for the first time in almost 30 years all fossil fuels (coal, oil and gas) were mentioned in the main decision of the meeting represents a before and after in climate negotiations. This fact also marks the way towards the next conferences: COP29 in Baku (Azerbaijan) and COP30 in Belém do Pará (Brazil). Below we take stock of COP28 and analyze its implications for the future of climate action in Latin America and the Caribbean. Progress at COP28 For the first time, the outcome document mentioned the need for a transition away from fossil fuels in energy systems in a fair, orderly and equitable manner, accelerating action in this critical decade. The text of the global stocktake of the state of implementation of the Paris Agreement also clearly stated the goals of tripling renewable energy and doubling energy efficiency. The Glasgow target for reducing methane emissions by 2030 was affirmed, as was the exit from inefficient fossil fuel subsidies. Key elements of the work program on just transition pathways were defined, including its scope, objectives, results and institutional arrangements. What was missing at COP28 With regard to the energy transition, there was a need for greater determination to close the door on false climate solutions. On the one hand, there was a call to accelerate nuclear energy and abatement and elimination technologies (carbon capture, utilization and storage) and, on the other, it was noted that "transition fuels" could facilitate this process while ensuring energy security, implicitly giving a free pass to fossil gas. In terms of adaptation, no real progress was made towards a framework for climate action based on the protection of the ocean, wetlands and forests. Nor was there reinforcement of operational synergies between the key policy processes governing terrestrial, freshwater, coastal and marine ecosystems worldwide. While the first step was taken to operationalize the Loss and Damage Fund, the decision did not include a reference to human rights in its objectives and mission. In addition, it limited the participation of indigenous peoples and local communities on the Board of the Fund under the category of invited observers. It also failed to mention the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities, meaning that the fund would be financed solely by grants. In addition, the World Bank was designated as the fund's administrator, putting at risk that the communities most affected by the impacts of the climate crisis would have access to resources in an agile, direct and debt-free manner. Regarding the just transition, it was not recognized that the energy transition puts different pressures on the territories where raw materials or critical minerals such as lithium, copper and cobalt are obtained. This affects Latin America in particular. As a result, developed and developing nations disagreed on whether to keep the transition at the national or international level. And so the transition was not considered an integral and plural transformation process that implies creating socio-political conditions to restructure the organization, ownership and distribution of the current production and consumption systems for the enjoyment of the right to energy. The countries failed to reach an agreement on the substantive elements of the new quantified financing target. Progress was limited to definitions of the process and procedures for defining it. In 2024, there will be at least three technical dialogues to discuss the elements of the target such as amounts, timelines, financing targets by area, and how progress will be measured. What's next: Heading towards COP29 and COP30 The next climate conferences will have to navigate complex contexts, marked by the long-standing crisis of multilateralism, the unfair distribution of burdens for the energy transition—particularly in terms of the exploitation of critical minerals—,and the growing co-optation of negotiations by the corporate interests of fossil-related companies. In this context, the performance of Latin American countries at COP28 is an indication of how their positions for COP29 and COP30 will be constructed: Brazil sought to position itself as a "climate champion" but could not hide its strong fossil fuel extraction agenda. As host of the upcoming COP30, Brazil tried and failed to explain away membership in the expanded Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC+) without success. Then, days after COP28, it tendered 613 oil blocks in the Amazon with a view to becoming the world's fourth largest oil producer by 2030. Despite this, Brazil created a new work program on the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, which it will take as a banner to COP30, together with the protection of nature and the fight against deforestation. Colombia, for its part, was the most vocal leader on the urgent need for transition, announcing its accession to the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty and maintaining clear interventions on the exit from fossil fuels in its panels and public interventions, which positions it as a regional leader for the upcoming conferences. Ecuador missed the opportunity to obtain funding and support from the international community to implement the Ecuadorian people's decision to close the ITT oil field in Yasuni Park. This omission could be remedied at COP29 because, beyond the delicate internal context, the South American country has just under a year to comply with the legal obligation to implement this decision and the international community can and should support the decision to close the ITT oil field in Yasuní Park. In another area, and within the process of the Advisory Opinion on the Climate Emergency, AIDA, together with other organizations, requested that the Inter-American Court of Human Rights refer to the decision adopted at COP28 regarding the Loss and Damage Fund, as it does not comply with or satisfy the obligations of States under international human rights law. It is expected that the Court will recognize the right to climate reparations and clarify that the establishment, implementation and operation of this fund does not exclude the possibility of making claims for reparations for losses and damages, nor does it block other judicial or administrative processes, measures or mechanisms for access to justice and comprehensive reparations for people affected by climate impacts. *Javier Dávalos is coordinator of AIDA's Climate Program, Claudia Velarde is co-coordinator of the Ecosystems Program, and Marcella Ribeiro is a senior attorney with the Human Rights and Environment Program.

January 31 2024 Oceans, Freshwater Sources, Climate Change

Our vision for a just future

Latin America is key to protecting biodiversity and combating the global climate crisis. Its forests, wetlands and marine ecosystems are among the most important carbon sinks on the planet, a service weakened by activities such as the exploitation and use of fossil fuels. At AIDA, we envision a region where the environment and communities, especially those in highly vulnerable situations, have lasting protections. To achieve this, we select precedent-setting cases that result in new, replicable tools and strategies that add to the protection of a healthy environment in the region. Having celebrated 25 years of working for the right to a healthy environment in the region, AIDA is poised to enter a new quarter century as a robust, multidisciplinary organization. In the coming years, we will continue and strengthen our pursuit of environmental and climate justice through two interconnected initiatives, each with defined lines of work: 1. Promotion of a just energy transition A just energy transition implies transforming the power relations between those who pollute the most and the rest of the world, avoiding the deepening of socio-environmental conflicts and protecting the rights of communities and people involved in energy generation processes. As this is an issue that cannot be addressed only at the national level, AIDA will contribute its regional vision to increase the scope of local and national decisions, enhance legal strategies, and strengthen a proposal for the continent’s transition. We will focus on: Avoiding dependence on oil and gas. Halting the extraction and use of coal. Promoting renewable and sustainable energies. Advocating for human rights-based climate finance and governance. 2. Protection of life-sustaining systems The ecosystem services that sustain life in Latin America and the world—including natural carbon capture and storage to mitigate the climate crisis, and the provision of clean food, air, and water - are at risk due to the lack of ambitious and effective actions. To ensure the livelihoods of life systems on the continent, both in rural communities and large cities, AIDA will focus its efforts on: Protecting the ocean, from the coasts to the high seas. Preserving freshwater sources and traditional territories. Defending culture and traditional livelihoods. Improving air quality. In the coming years, from our regional perspective, we will continue to contribute to solutions that center nature and communities, and that effectively address the continent’s social and environmental challenges.

January 30 2024 Coral reefs, Oceans, Freshwater Sources

The triple planetary crisis: What is it and what can we do about it?

You may have heard that humanity is facing "a triple planetary crisis.” In the words of United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres, this crisis "threatens the well-being and survival of millions of people around the world." But what exactly does it mean? The triple planetary crisis refers to three interrelated problems: climate change, pollution, and biodiversity loss. Each of these problems is a crisis with its own causes and effects, but all three converge and feed on each other. All three affect human rights, and more intensely impact people in vulnerable conditions. The climate crisis The United Nations considers climate change to be humanity's most urgent problem and the greatest threat to human rights. Climate change, which involves long-term changes to the planet's temperatures and weather patterns, can completely alter ecosystems. Although changes in climate can occur due to the natural patterns of the planet, what we are facing is caused by human activities. Since the Industrial Revolution, there has been an accelerated change in the planet's average temperatures. One of the primary causes of that change is the exploitation and use of fossil fuels. The climate crisis, then, refers to the consequences of climate change caused by human activities, which include: an increase in the intensity and severity of natural events such as droughts, fires, and storms; rising sea levels and the melting of the poles; changes in the hydrological and climatic cycles that affect biodiversity; and impacts on the enjoyment of human rights. The pollution and waste crisis The dominant economic system, dependent on consumption, implies the generation of high levels of pollution and waste that have a great impact on human and ecosystem health. Air pollution is the leading cause of disease and premature death worldwide. The World Health Organization estimates that 7 million people die prematurely each year because of poor air quality. Air degradation is caused by emissions from factories, transportation, and forest fires. Those who lack access to less harmful technologies for cooking or keeping warm also breathe polluted air in their homes. Air pollution is related to climate change, as many of the emissions also warm the planet. Pollution caused by plastics and microplastics is another global concern, as it directly affects biodiversity. An increasing number of studies are finding that plastics are affecting the health of people and other living things. They take centuries to decompose, and are derived from petroleum, a fossil fuel. And we can’t forget pollution caused by extractive activities which, in addition to generating greenhouse gas emissions and leaving in their wake chemicals that are toxic to health, degrade freshwater sources and large tracts of land. The biodiversity loss crisis Biodiversity loss refers to the decrease and disappearance of biological diversity: flora, fauna, and ecosystems. This crisis is caused by the two previous crises, in addition to the overexploitation of resources and changes in land use—which cause overfishing, illegal hunting and trafficking, and deforestation—and the introduction of non-native and invasive species. This loss also implies the decline of many of the species on which we depend. Its impacts extend to affect food supplies and access to fresh water. One example is the Amazon, the world's largest tropical forest and a global climate stabilizer. It is home to 10 percent of the planet's known biodiversity and is the ancestral home of more than 470 indigenous and traditional peoples. The Amazon is endangered by colonization, deforestation, and extractive activities, among other threats. The situation is so serious that the point of no return for the Amazon, in which deforestation levels cancel out its capacity for regeneration, is no longer a future scenario. Actions to confront the triple planetary crisis The triple planetary crisis is a complex problem involving diverse stakeholders and requiring multidisciplinary solutions. Although local actions and individual lifestyle changes can help, many of the necessary actions require decisions on a global scale and profound changes to economic, political, and social systems. According to the United Nations, global actions to confront the crises must include: Limiting global temperature increase to 1.5 degrees: this means that global emissions should be reduced by 45 percent by 2030, with the goal of achieving carbon neutrality by 2050. Accelerating the expansion of clean renewable energies: to achieve the above, a drastic reduction in the use of fossil fuels is required to make way for energy systems based on renewable sources that are sustainable over time and respectful of the environment and people. In addition to combating climate change, this would reduce air pollution. Investing in adaptation and resilience: this means considering those who are already suffering the impacts of the climate crisis in the solutions, with emphasis on the nations, people, and communities in vulnerable situations and who are least responsible for these crises. Conserving and protecting 30 percent of the planet: this applies particularly to areas of biodiversity importance, including the ocean. It also implies actions to mitigate climate change. Improving the food system: this includes changes in irrigation and soil management, as well as producing healthier food and reducing food waste. Leaving no one behind: the measures described above must be carried out simultaneously and with a focus on protecting human rights, as they represent an opportunity to reduce the inequalities that are both a cause and a consequence of the crises. Making progress before the triple crisis These crises threaten not only our basic sources of livelihood, but even our mental health. And while much remains to be done, progress has been made that demonstrates the global cooperation needed to advance on a large scale. We’re happy to share some recent examples of global progress: The High Seas Treaty, designed to protect two-thirds of the ocean, was adopted in June 2023, and will need to be ratified by 60 countries before entering into force. The United Nations recognized the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment as a universal right. 175 nations agreed to develop a global instrument to address plastic pollution. The steps we take as individuals help us to act locally: to live our values and contribute to our communities. But it’s also important we think globally, and demand that our representatives in decision-making bodies guarantee widespread participation and commit to taking key and concerted actions.