Indigenous Rights

COP30 ends — with a few achievements to move forward

With more than 25 hours of delay, the 30th UN Climate Change Conference (COP30) has come to an end. The so-called "Amazon COP," held in the Brazilian city of Belém do Pará, leaves behind disappointment for failing to change course, but also some advances that can help push climate action forward. It was not a total failure: multilateralism remains intact, though battered.COP30 was marked by the presence of Indigenous peoples, especially from the Amazon basin, who filled the streets and side events. However, according to reports, only a fraction of these delegations gained access to the formal negotiation rooms, while a disproportionate number of representatives from the fossil fuel industry participated in the official event. This imbalance reflects the democratic health of the climate regime: at the Amazon COP, the power of Indigenous and Afro-descendant peoples was felt in the streets, but their voices remained underrepresented in decision-making spaces.A few days into the conference, the latest synthesis report of updated nationally determined contributions was released. Its message was more bitter than sweet, but it offered one important takeaway: although the gap to keep global warming below 1.5°C remains enormous and complex, the report confirms that the Paris Agreement has indeed helped steer the challenge. We are in a better position than in a scenario without the agreement: projected emissions growth has been slowed, though not nearly enough.At this point, it is clear that COPs will not "save the world," but it also seems impossible to overcome this crisis without the cooperative platform they provide. From that perspective, it is worth asking what COP30 leaves us. The approved agreement: Global MutirãoThe word "Mutirão" references the spirit of collective effort—body and soul—that Brazil sought to bring to the international negotiation process at this COP.The approved agreement reiterates the goal of keeping the planet’s temperature increase below 1.5°C, acknowledging that time is running out. To that end, it proposes two voluntary mechanisms, led by the Presidency, which for now seem more like statements of good intent than tools with teeth: a "Global Implementation Accelerator" and the "Belém Mission for 1.5°C."On financing, the text establishes a two-year work program on Article 9.1 of the Paris Agreement, which concerns the public resources developed countries must provide, understood in the context of Article 9 as a whole.A footnote was added to clarify that this does not prejudge the implementation of the new global goal. Civil society organizations warn that this formulation risks further diluting developed countries’ specific obligations under the narrative of "all sources of financing," without clear rules on who must actually provide the resources and under what conditions. The real value of all this remains to be seen in practice. What was gained: A new mechanism for a just transitionA major achievement of COP30 was the adoption of the Belém Action Mechanism (BAM), a new institutional arrangement under the Just Transition Work Programme. It was the main banner carried by organized civil society.The mechanism is designed as a hub to centralize and coordinate just transition initiatives around the world, providing technical assistance and international cooperation to ensure the transition does not repeat the mistakes of the fossil era.The text incorporates many of the principles championed by Latin American civil society—including human rights, environmental and labor protections, free, prior and informed consent, and the inclusion of marginalized groups—as essential elements for achieving ambitious climate action.Even with gaps in safeguards and governance definitions, the BAM is a concrete step forward for this COP on climate justice. It creates a starting point to discuss not only whether there will be a transition, but how it will be done and under what rules, so as not to replicate the logic of the fossil economy. Its design and implementation will be debated at upcoming COPs, where it will be crucial for the region to arrive with solid, united proposals. Ending fossil fuels and deforestation: Two “almosts” that move us forwardAn agreement to leave behind fossil fuels and end deforestation—directly addressing the main drivers of the climate crisis—"almost" made it into the final decision.More than 80 countries from both the global north and south called for a roadmap to exit oil, gas, and coal. More than 90 supported a roadmap to stop and reverse deforestation by 2030. Although these requests made their way into drafts of the closing decision, they disappeared from the final text after resistance from major fossil fuel producers.Still, we do not leave empty-handed: Brazil, as COP30 Presidency, announced it will advance these roadmaps outside the formal framework of the UNFCCC. For the fossil fuel phaseout, Colombia committed to co-organize, with the Netherlands, the first global conference on the topic in April 2026.Although these items were not secured within the official negotiations, it is worth celebrating that—for the first time—such a broad coalition of countries united to achieve them. These two "almosts" matter: they set a new political and legal baseline for the rounds ahead. Two tools to advance adaptationCOP30 delivered tools to keep adaptation negotiations moving forward.The Mutirão decision calls for tripling collective adaptation finance by 2035, tied to the $300 billion USD per year agreed under the new global goal. This falls short of what the poorest countries asked for (tripling by 2030, with an explicit figure) and lacks clarity or guarantees regarding the role of developed countries. But it is a political anchor worth building on.At the same time, a first package of 59 indicators was adopted for the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA). Several African countries and experts described them as "unclear, impossible to measure, and in many cases unusable," because they sacrifice precision and grounding in community realities in order to unblock the agreement. In response, the text included the "Belém–Addis Vision," a two-year window to correct flaws and make the framework operational by 2027.In short, we have more promises of money and an indicator framework weaker than necessary, but also a process through which the region can continue pushing for a useful GGA and for fair, sufficient adaptation finance. Loss and damage: Slow and uncertainProgress on this issue has been painfully slow compared with the urgency of the problem. At COP30, the third review of the Warsaw International Mechanism was finally approved. The result is frustrating: discussions have taken a decade while communities are already paying the cost of warming.On the other hand, the Loss and Damage Response Fund, created two years ago, issued its first call for proposals, with an initial package of $250 million USD in grants available over the next six months. The Fund has $790 million USD pledged, but only $397 million USD actually deposited—an enormous gap compared to the hundreds of billions estimated annually for developing countries.The expected political pressure for developed countries to scale up contributions was largely diluted in the final text, although the Fund was at least linked to the new global financing goal agreed at COP29. A new Gender Action PlanCOP30 concluded with the adoption of a new Gender Action Plan under the renewed Lima Work Programme. The Plan identifies five priority areas: capacity-building and knowledge; women’s participation and leadership; coherence among processes; gender-responsive implementation and means of implementation; and monitoring and reporting. It also provides a roadmap to ensure climate action is truly gender-responsive, with indicators to track progress. Methane: A super-pollutant still lacking the spotlight science demandsAt COP30, short-lived climate pollutants—especially methane—gained visibility thanks to a dedicated pavilion and dialogues with regional and global actors. The Global Methane Status Report 2025 was also presented, noting “significant” progress since the 2021 launch of the Global Methane Pledge. However, it warns that current progress remains far from the goal of reducing methane emissions by 30% by 2030.In the official negotiations, the draft of the Sharm el-Sheikh Mitigation Ambition and Implementation Work Programme included an explicit reference to methane mitigation through proper waste management, but that mention was removed from the final text, leaving only a general call to improve waste management and diminishing the focus on the urgent need to reduce emissions of a pollutant whose mitigation is essential to achieving the Paris Agreement goals. Still, during COP30, the global “No Organic Waste (NOW) Plan to Accelerate Solutions” was launched, aiming to reduce methane emissions from organic waste by 30% by 2030.Overall, this COP missed a crucial opportunity to advance its core objective. If we truly want to stay on track with the Paris Agreement, we must treat methane as what it is: a decisive opportunity we are still not seizing. How we close COP30 and prepare for the nextCOP31 will be held in Turkey, under the presidency of Australia. And despite the shortcomings of COP30, there are at least four things to defend and build on:The normalization of the debate on phasing out fossil fuels, with more than 80 countries openly calling for a roadmap and Colombia–Netherlands taking that discussion to a dedicated conference in 2026.A forest agenda that, although left out of the text, carries the promise of a Brazilian roadmap and explicit support from a wide group of countries.A small but real advance on adaptation, with the decision to triple finance and a first set of indicators that, while weak, offer a basis to push for improvements.The creation of a new mechanism for a just transition, which can shape how the transition unfolds—bringing together and strengthening efforts that support and protect workers, communities, and Indigenous peoples. 

Protecting the Environment Through Collaboration: A Community Science Experience

When environmental damage occurs, the first warning often comes from the people or communities directly affected. Residents living near a river are usually the first to notice waste being dumped or fish dying when the water is polluted. Similarly, who live near an open pit mine are the who see when illness becomes more common or when water begins to run scarce.One powerful way to turn lived experience into scientific evidence is through community science. This approach allows people to share, validate, and integrate local knowledge into scientific research and efforts to defend their territories.At AIDA, we believe in the power of science to advance environmental justice. That’s why we generate and apply scientific knowledge in the legal cases we support. Recently, we had the opportunity to take part in a community science initiative that helped us reflect on—and learn from—the value of this collaborative methodology and the shared knowledge it produces.  Local Knowledge: A Powerful Response to Environmental Degradation In April 2024, at the request of the Poqomam Maya community of Santa Cruz Chinautla—a village near Guatemala’s capital—AIDA senior scientist Javier Oviedo and attorney Bryslie Cifuentes carried out a field visit to gather information and assess the solid waste pollution that has affected the community for years.One of their main objectives was to identify illegal dump sites on the banks of the Chinautla River. The disposal of waste and debris in this area has contaminated both the soil and waters of this tributary of the Motagua River, the longest river in Guatemala.While preparing for the trip, Javier realized the team would face several challenges. The time available would not be enough to collect all the necessary data, and the team’s limited familiarity with the area could make locating the dumpsites difficult and potentially unsafe.Then Javier had an idea: to involve members of the community in supporting the team with this task.His plan made perfect sense—after all, who better to locate the illegal dumpsites than the people who know the territory best? Beyond that, by witnessing the impacts of pollution firsthand, community members could also appreciate the importance of documenting these issues.I spoke with Javier about how this idea came about, and he shared the following:  Beyond seeking support from community members, this approach was rooted in a recognition of the irreplaceable value of their knowledge as residents of their territory.  How the Work Was Carried Out Javier’s idea was that, with the help of an accessible and easy-to-use mobile app, community members could send information about illegal landfills directly to the AIDA Science team, who would then validate and analyze the data.To make this possible, the team designed a form specifying the data they needed to collect: the location of the landfill, its dimensions, the type of waste identified, associated social issues, and other relevant details.In Chinautla, two community residents, along with authorities from the Poqomam Maya village, visited several landfills they had previously identified with Javier and Bryslie. During these visits, Javier showed them how to use the app and fill out the form. Later, one of the residents continued the process independently.Thanks to this collaborative effort, data was collected on 10 of the most critical illegal dumpsites. While this does not capture all of them—unfortunately, many more exist—this sample allowed the team to estimate the extent of waste and debris pollution in the community and to illustrate how poor management has exacerbated the problem.The information gathered was crucial in highlighting the severity of the pollution, demonstrating the continued use of illegal dumping, and exposing the municipal authorities’ failure to meet their legal obligations regarding waste management.This evidence formed the basis for the lawsuit the community filed against the municipality of Chinautla in October 2024, citing the lack of measures to address river and soil contamination caused by inadequate waste management and illegal landfills. In June 2025, an appeals court ordered the municipality to take action to address the serious environmental crisis affecting the community.  Lessons Learned from the Experience According to Javier, involving the people of Chinautla in a knowledge-building process led to mutual learning.For community members, it meant acquiring new technological skills. For the AIDA team, it prompted new questions about how to move knowledge-sharing with a community beyond simple collaboration.Javier summarized his learnings in three points:   At AIDA, science is a core part of our work and a key element of the strategic litigation we pursue to protect and defend a healthy environment across Latin America. Involving the communities we support in this process broadens our perspective, allowing us to integrate their knowledge and experiences into the science we seek to build.  

New European Union policies for mineral supply: What are the implications for Latin America?

Amid the global race for minerals for the energy transition, digitalization, and the defense and aerospace industries, the European Union (EU) has adopted an industrial policy to secure its access to "critical" raw materials, including lithium. According to the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean, 25 of the 34 raw materials the EU considers essential are found in Latin America's indigenous territories and strategic ecosystems. Civil society warns that the Critical Raw Materials Act (CRMA) and other recent policies aimed at deregulation and promoting the defense sector (Omnibus I and II) could deepen historical inequalities between Europe and Latin America.In this webinar, we addressed the threats to Latin America by the European Union's new policies and what the region's states and civil society can do to address them. To this end, we focused on the significance of the "strategic partnerships" that the EU has signed with Chile and Argentina, and explained what the so-called "strategic projects" that the EU intends to consolidate at the global level to maintain the flow of minerals from South to North consist of. Indigenous leaders denounced how excessive water use in lithium mining has already degraded Andean wetlands and caused the loss of biodiversity and culture.In this session, we debated the justice of the "European green transition," which, in the name of decarbonization, threatens to open up new sacrifice zones in the Global South, while erasing ancient knowledge and causing irreversible damage to carbon sinks that are essential for tackling the climate crisis. PanelAlejandro González, Senior Researcher and Advocate in SOMO's Climate Justice team and member of the EU Raw Materials Coalition.Pía Marchegiani, Deputy Executive Director and Director of the Environmental Policy area of the Environment and Natural Resources Foundation (FARN).Joám Evans Pim, Coordinator of the Confederal Mining Area at Ecologistas en Acción and Director of the Montescola Foundation.Ramón Balcázar, Director of the Tantí Foundation.Román Elías Guitián, Community Atacameños del Altiplano, Argentina.Moderator: Yeny Rodríguez, Senior Attorney and Area Coordinator, Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA). Recording (in Spanish) 

Circular economy: what is it and what role does it play regarding the climate crisis and energy transition?

Life on the planet, including our own, depends on nature.To create more sustainable ways of life and keep global warming under control, we need to ensure healthy, resilient, and productive ecosystems.The climate crisis, as well as the pollution and biodiversity loss crises, stem from human activities that exploit nature beyond its limits, without giving it a chance to recover, degrading ecosystems and pushing them to points of “no return.”These activities are based on the conventional economic model, which is linear and follows the logic of extracting, producing, using, and discarding resources.A more sustainable use of natural resources requires a different economic model.One option among many is the circular economy, an economic model of production and consumption traditionally described as a combination of reduction, reuse, and recycling activities.However, most current approaches to the circular economy, incorporated into various public policies, focus on extending the life cycle of products that have already been manufactured. They do not comprehensively incorporate the processes of extracting the materials needed to manufacture the products or their final disposal. This considerably reduces the protection of nature and territories during the economic cycle.That is why it is important to understand what the circular economy is and what it should include, in theory and in practice, so that it can truly contribute to a more sustainable and fair world. Circular economy: Definition and challengesAs an alternative to the linear economic system, the circular economy involves closing the economic cycle through various mechanisms. These include reducing the use of virgin natural resources, increasing the use of recycled materials, and minimizing waste through the repair and reuse of products, keeping them in circulation for as long as possible.It also means creating additional value for products whose useful life has ended when their materials are used again and again.  In the face of our continued and unsustainable use of resources, the concept of the circular economy is becoming increasingly prevalent in different areas.Although it is a living and evolving concept, when it becomes public policy, most definitions of the circular economy consider its main objective to be economic prosperity, with environmental care as a secondary result.In 2020, a legal definition of the circular economy in the European Union considered it to be “aneconomic system whereby the value of products, materials and other resources in the economy is maintained for as long as possible, enhancing their efficient use in production and consumption, thereby reducing the environmental impact of their use, minimising waste and the release of hazardous substances at all stages of their life cycle” …This and other definitions show that the positive effects of the circular economy on nature tend to be taken for granted, when certain theories or practices associated with the concept may actually hinder the protection of ecosystems and the people who depend on them.This is happening with the type of circular economy promoted to make extractive processes linked to the energy transition, designed to address the climate crisis, environmentally friendly. Circular economy and energy transitionHistorically, extractive activities such as mining have degraded ecosystems and violated human rights in Latin America, creating so-called “sacrifice zones.”Today, to address the climate crisis, several international organizations have positioned an energy transition that requires doubling the production of renewable energies and electromobility to decarbonize the global energy matrix.This also implies intensifying the extraction of so-called "critical" minerals for the development of clean technologies. One of these is lithium, a mineral of which the region has large reserves.Thus, far from putting an end to it, the energy transition promoted by the Global North is renewing the historical extractivist trend, generating great pressure on Latin American territories rich in minerals for the transition, affecting ecosystems and populations near extraction areas.In this context, the circular economy is promoted as a tool to make mining an environmentally responsible process. However, international proposals in this regard do not guarantee the resilience of ecosystems or the well-being of communities.This is evident in countries such as Argentina, Bolivia, and Chile due to the growing global demand for minerals such as lithium.Currently, the circular economy applied to mining in Latin America focuses on the internal processes of mining companies, but not on the consequences that their interactions with ecosystems and communities generate in the extraction territories, without stopping the expansion of extractivism or the high socio-environmental impacts caused.Obtaining lithium for electromobility, for example, involves a complex, transnational supply chain. This includes mineral extraction, refining, the production of electrodes for batteries, battery manufacturing, and finally, the manufacture of electric vehicles.From a global northern perspective, the circular economy is mainly applied here to battery recycling and industrial improvements for mining. However, it does not include measures to protect the biophysical limits and resilience of the ecosystems where lithium is extracted, ensure environmental restoration, prevent damage to local economies, guarantee human rights, and repair those that have already been violated. Proposals from Latin America for a just circular economyTo ensure that the energy transition does not become a new extractive process that generates the same conflicts and environmental impacts that it has systematically caused and that are precursors to the current climate crisis, it is essential that the circular economy comprehensively integrates the mineral extraction territories.Circular economy schemes must avoid the creation, expansion, and/or deepening of “sacrifice zones.” They must also recognize the strategic value of ecosystems as natural capital for countries and communities, given the ecosystem functions they provide, including freshwater supply and carbon capture.To move towards a just circular economy in the extraction territories, the following principles must be respected:Protection of the human rights of local populations, guaranteeing their permanence in the territory and the continuity of their economic activities, linked to their livelihoods and their relationship with ecosystems.Promotion of environmental balance in accordance with the biophysical limits of ecosystems, recognizing their intrinsic values, which favor the conservation of their functions.Internalization of environmental costs in mineral value chains, incorporating the value of ecosystem services used for extraction into prices.Learn more in our policy brief Reimagining the circular economy from the extraction territories. Proposals from Latin America. 

Mapuche defend against extractive industry and forced evictions from ancestral lands in Argentina

Mapuche communities urge Inter-American Commission on Human Rights to further investigate abuses at nexus of extractive industry and land dispossession.Río Negro, Neuquén, Mendoza, Argentina - Organizations of the Indigenous Mapuche People addressed the urgent situation arising from conflicts with extractive projects on Indigenous land in Argentina in a public hearing before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights today. The human rights body of the Organization of American States heard testimony of those impacted by mining, oil, and gas projects that have been compounded by the lack of territorial recognition, ongoing evictions, and the criminalization of indigenous communities."The rapid expansion of extractive projects across ancestral Mapuche territories in Argentina is driving the eviction of our communities as projects proceed without their free, prior, and informed consent," emphasized Mirta Ñancunao y Hugo Aranea, werken (spokespeople) of the Mapuche-Tehuelche Parliament of Río Negro. This includes new mining projects across 1,800 square kilometers in Malargüe, oil and gas developments stretching 600 kilometers along the Vaca Muerta shale formation in Neuquén, and at least 53 new mining and energy projects in Río Negro, particularly in the Calcatreu open-pit gold and silver mining project, which threatens nearby water sources."The exploitation of natural resources has been accompanied by the intention to vacate traditional territories," said Lorena Bravo of the Mapuche Federation of Neuquen, Xaunko Regional Council. "The evictions have direct consequences including preventing the use of and access to land, sacred sites, impacts to health, access to water, impacting indigenous economies and traditional practices."Gabriel Jofré, werken of the Malalweche Organization, asserted that the "advance of extractive companies into the traditional territory of Mapuche communities is predicated on the lack of effective state recognition of Mapuche communities." He emphasized that the state has dismantled the processes used by Mapuche communities to assert their territorial rights, including the recognition of their legal status. Jofré also noted that the national government rolled back protections in Law 26.160, which had suspended evictions of recognized indigenous communities."The advance of land extraction is not possible without installing a racist and discriminatory discourse," which Jofre maintains endangers human rights and environmental defenders. Both national and provincial politicians have fueled racist and hateful discourses against Mapuche communities, labeling them "terrorists" and denying their Indigenous identities. This rhetoric has further stigmatized Indigenous defenders and increased the risks they face for engaging in rights advocacy.The communities urged the Commission to further investigate human rights violations occurring at the intersection of extractive industry expansion and the dispossession of Mapuche communities from their ancestral lands. In December 2024, the Commission issued a public statement calling on Argentina to respect the land rights of Indigenous Peoples.Organizations participating in the hearing included the Malalweche Organization from Mendoza, The Mapuche Confederation of Neuquén, and the Coordination of Mapuche Parlement of Río Negro, with support from the Observatory on the Human Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense. Earthjustice has partnered with the Malalweche Organization in defending territorial rights of the Mapuche people since 2022.Entre las organizaciones que participaron en la audiencia se encuentran la Organización Malalweche de Mendoza, la Confederación Mapuche de Neuquén y la Coordinadora del Parlamento Mapuche de Río Negro, con el apoyo del Observatorio de Derechos Humanos de Pueblos Indígenas, la Asamblea Permanente por los Derechos Humanos (APDH), la Asociación Interamericana para la Defensa del Ambiente (AIDA) y Earthjustice.Press contactVíctor Quintanilla (Mexico), AIDA, [email protected], +52 5570522107 

Human rights and the rights of nature in the governance of minerals for the energy transition

A reading of Advisory Opinion 32 of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights by the Andean Wetlands Alliance The Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR) outlined in its Advisory Opinion No. 32 (OC-32), released on July 3, 2025, how human rights must be upheld in the face of the climate emergency. The Court also recognized the rights of nature and the responsibilities of States and companies regarding climate change. This advisory opinion followed more than 150 oral interventions and over 260 written submissions—including those from organizations that are part of the Andean Wetlands Alliance.This pronouncement sets a course for protecting valuable ecosystems and the rights of people in Latin America, a region deeply affected due to its significant reserves of minerals increasingly in demand for the global energy transition.Human rights and "critical" mineralsThe IACHR, a central institution in setting human rights standards for Latin America and the Caribbean, provided through OC-32 a set of tools for moving toward policies grounded in equity and justice. These tools align with the principles put forward by the UN Secretary-General in relation to the minerals value chain for the energy transition.Minerals such as lithium and copper are at the heart of current energy transformation policies due to their value for battery manufacturing. This value chain begins in territories such as the high Andean wetlands of Argentina, Bolivia, and Chile, with the exploration and extraction of mineral deposits. It continues with their processing and refining in specialized facilities for the production of cells, which are later integrated into batteries that power a range of devices—mainly individual electric vehicles.The Court placed special emphasis on the protection of human rights during the extraction of so-called “rare or critical” minerals for the energy transition, which make up the first links in this value chain. This directly reflects Principle 1 of the 2024 Report of the UN Secretary-General’s Panel on Critical Minerals for the Energy Transition and offers a key legal instrument for protecting human rights in Latin American countries. It also outlines essential elements for respecting the integrity of ecosystems (Principle 2) from the most biodiverse region on the planet, as well as advancing justice and equity (Principle 3), transparency and accountability (Principle 6), and strengthened multilateral cooperation (Principle 7).Rights of Nature in a Megadiverse RegionAmong its conclusions, the Court recognizes the rights of nature, referring to the need to preserve its essential ecological processes. This contributes to consolidating a development model that respects planetary boundaries and ensures the availability of vital resources for present and future generations.This recognition is especially critical in Latin America, one of the most biodiverse regions in the world. It holds 50% of the planet’s biodiversity in ecosystems such as wetlands and tropical forests—especially the Amazon. It is home to 12 of the 14 terrestrial biomes and is a key epicenter for nature’s contributions to people.These issues are particularly relevant for a region whose historical role as a provider of natural resources has helped build the global economy, yet at great cost—causing severe ecosystem damage and violating community rights. The protection of nature’s rights provides a central tool for managing the mineral wealth essential for the energy transition, especially given that the region holds more than 50% of the world’s lithium reserves and 40% of its copper reserves.Latin America is also one of the most culturally diverse regions: approximately 54.8 million Indigenous peoples live across its territories, representing 8.5% of the total population—the highest global proportion relative to total population—and occupying over 20% of the land.OC-32 particularly highlights the role of communities in preserving ecosystems and a healthy climate, free from human interference. It acknowledges the importance of local, traditional, and Indigenous knowledge for informed decision-making and cultural preservation. This approach empowers local and Indigenous communities—long-standing guardians of ecosystems who possess deep traditional knowledge—yet who are often excluded from decision-making processes and denied their rights to free, prior, and informed consultation and participation.The right to a healthy climate: Promising newsOC-32 recognizes the right to a healthy climate as part of the broader right to a healthy environment, free from human interference. States are thus required to prevent any irreversible harm to the planet’s ecological balance and exercise heightened due diligence—taking into account the degree of potential harm, the best available science, and the specific vulnerabilities of at-risk groups, without creating or exacerbating such vulnerabilities.In their mitigation strategies, States must prioritize both people and ecosystems—particularly those that play a vital role in regulating the Earth’s climate systems and natural cycles.In this regard, the Court’s acknowledgment of the Andean wetlands of Argentina, Bolivia, and Chile is especially significant. These ecosystems contribute to climate adaptation through water regulation. They also have the capacity to mitigate climate change by acting as carbon sinks: studies have recorded significant levels of carbon dioxide absorption through their vegetation and extremophile microorganisms.Ironically, these very wetlands are now under threat from the expansion of mining for the energy transition.Corporate Obligations on Human RightsOC-32 makes it clear that, in addition to States, companies also bear obligations concerning the climate emergency and its impact on human rights. The Court calls on States to regulate and oversee corporate due diligence across the entire value chain, in accordance with the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs). These obligations include identifying, preventing, mitigating, and accounting for business-related impacts on the environment, climate, and human rights. These are non-transferable obligations—they cannot be outsourced to third parties, such as certification bodies. The advisory opinion also calls for the avoidance of greenwashing and undue influence from third-party actors in corporate decision-making.A perspective on Advisory Opinion 32 from the Andean wetlandsSpanning more than 200 pages, OC-32 provides tools to ensure the protection of human rights throughout the mineral value chain, as well as the integrity of ecosystems, from a Latin American perspective. It also promotes implementation of the UN Secretary-General’s Panel principles on critical minerals for the energy transition.No less important, it upholds the interdependence of democracy, the rule of law, and human rights protection within the Inter-American system, and strengthens the role of access rights and the protection of human rights, environmental, and climate defenders, in accordance with the Escazú Agreement. This recognition is especially crucial for the most dangerous region in the world for defending nature.In a context of climate denialism, fueled by political leaderships that reject humanity’s role in the climate crisis, OC-32 stands as a vital roadmap to urge States to meet their climate commitments through a human rights-based approach.From the Andean Wetlands Alliance, we view this opinion with hope—as a key tool to help ensure the rights of those who have inhabited these wetlands for generations and to protect these vital ecosystems. Reactions from Members of the Andean Wetlands Alliance to Advisory Opinion No. 32 of the Inter-American CourtPía Marchegiani, Deputy Executive Director, Fundación Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (Argentina):"In a context where discussions on critical minerals are increasingly shaped by security and military interests, and unilateral or bilateral agendas from the Global North seek to control mineral supply chains, the Inter-American Court has taken a clear, strategic step in defining how the balance must be struck: placing human rights and nature at the center. Only in this way can we move forward toward justice and equity, as proposed by the UN Secretary-General’s Panel on Critical Minerals."Ricardo Frez, Director, ONG Defensa Ambiental (Chile):"This unprecedented recognition of nature as a rights-bearing subject marks a shift toward ecocentric approaches in international human rights law. It is especially significant amid the growing—and often irreversible—impacts of mining for critical minerals like lithium and copper in the Global South. The Court affirms the autonomous protection of nature, not only as a means to secure human rights, but as an end in itself. It reinforces States’ obligations to prevent irreparable climate and environmental damage. In a context where the energy transition risks replicating extractivist models, this advisory opinion provides crucial normative tools to defend territories and life."Vivian Lagrava Flores, Empodérate, Human Rights Collective (Bolivia):"Although communities may not be familiar with technical terms like climate, energy transition, and so on, they have welcomed with hope the fact that Advisory Opinion 32/25 places greater obligations on States. Laws, constitutions, and human rights standards are being ignored, while all kinds of impacts are overlooked. Wetlands—especially freshwater bofedales—are nature’s miracle that sustains our way of life and are essential for mitigating climate change. Yet they are being destroyed by extractivism. The Bolivian State must grasp the magnitude of its obligations."Ezio Costa Cordella, FIMA NGO (Chile):"The concept of a just transition appears in several parts of the advisory opinion issued by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. There is a specific and explicit mention of this type of transition, and the Court refers to the obligation of States to uphold this principle when developing climate policies and strategies. This means they must avoid deepening situations of multidimensional poverty and instead assess how a transition will affect a given territory and the people who live there—including, of course, the workers in industries undergoing change. In this sense, it is important to understand that the ecological transition is not limited to policy measures; it also concerns how a range of social systems, including those of production and consumption, will adapt to the new climate and environmental reality. In this process—from the present state of affairs to what will emerge as a result of this new environmental condition—we must ensure that no further violations of human rights occur. On the contrary, we should create conditions that lead to better protection and fairer distribution of those rights."Oscar Campanini, CEDIB (Bolivia):"The advisory opinion of the Inter-American Court is an enormously important reinforcement of civil society’s defense of the environment, water, Indigenous peoples’ territories, and life itself—a defense that benefits not just specific groups but is, in fact, the only way to ensure our survival as a species. In the case of the high Andean plateau, this opinion supports the struggles of communities defending water and wetlands against growing pressure from critical mineral extraction projects such as lithium."Verónica Gostissa, Asamblea PUCARÁ (Argentina):"We are at a turning point for climate justice and human rights. The Inter-American Court now recognizes the autonomous right to a healthy climate. In regions like northwest Argentina—where ecosystems of high ecological value, such as high Andean wetlands, coexist with intense extractive pressures from lithium mining—this decision directly challenges the current mining and energy model. This legal milestone reinforces a truth that communities and peoples have long upheld: if it dries up rivers, it’s not an energy transition. And there can be no true transition without environmental justice."Paulina González Quiroga, Fundación Tantí (Chile):"We deeply value the statement issued by the Inter-American Court at a strategic moment for our bodies and territories, especially for those of us living in the Global South—in the highland and coastal desert regions of Chile. This is a mining and productive zone where both continental and marine waters are being affected by the entire value chain operating in the area. In our territory, marked by a history of environmental sacrifice, there is no real transition. On the contrary, the same communities and ecosystems are now facing an intensification of extractivist practices—now labeled ‘green.’ We are witnessing an unimaginable increase in the impacts on our high Andean and marine ecosystems, and on the ways of life that exist here. In this context, the Court’s opinion will be crucial in strengthening the legal defense of our territories in various processes of Indigenous consultation and environmental justice that are already underway and will undoubtedly continue within the framework of these policies." Yeny Rodríguez, senior attorney and Line Coordinator, Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA)"The Advisory Opinion No. 32 of the Inter-American Court recognizes the high degree of vulnerability and risk in which strategic ecosystems in Latin America are found for the water cycle and climate, such as the Andean salt flats, and sends a very clear message to the governments of the region and to the companies operating in our territories: in application of enhanced due diligence, they must avoid mining activities that could generate irreversible damage to ecosystems and aggravate the situation of vulnerability of indigenous peoples or communities at risk." 

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

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 

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

Among the various global commitments to address the current climate crisis, international governance bodies — such as the United Nations — have highlighted the need to double renewable energy production and expand electromobility to decarbonize the global energy mix, calling this process the "energy transition." However, this transition entails intensifying the extraction of minerals essential for developing these technologies. Each region of the world plays a distinct role in the supply chains of minerals used in decarbonization processes. Latin America has been identified as one of the regions with vast mineral reserves capable of fueling this transition. Yet, in this context of growing mining interest, there is a tendency to render invisible the populations who inhabit these territories, as well as the hydrogeological systems of local, regional, and global significance that exist there.Lithium is one of the minerals whose commercial demand has grown significantly in connection with progress toward energy decarbonization. It is in the Gran Atacama region — located in the border area of Argentina, Bolivia, and Chile — where the largest global reserves are found. Nevertheless, for lithium to become available, it must pass through a complex international supply chain, which includes mineral extraction, refining, production of battery electrodes, battery manufacturing, and, finally, the production of electric vehicles.This surge in mineral demand within complex global supply chains raises concerns for the region about the risk of reproducing a new cycle of extractivism, unless public policies are devised and implemented that effectively integrate environmental, social, and territorial development standards.The circular economy, closely linked to the energy transition, emerges as a key strategy to overcome the logic of the traditional linear economic model ("take–make–consume–dispose"). Its aim is to reduce pressure on territories and common goods by incorporating sustainability criteria into supply chains and promoting more rational management of extracted mineral resources.However, this vision of the circular economy — when applied to minerals for the energy transition — can also perpetuate extractivism, particularly in the Global South. Decarbonization options often require vast quantities of minerals for energy storage, extracted at the cost of high environmental and social impacts. This threatens the resilience of the ecosystems from which they are taken and poses risks to the populations that inhabit them.Given these limitations, a circular economy proposal — from the perspective of Latin American extraction zones and applied to transition minerals — should contribute to ensuring that changes in the energy mix toward technologies with lower greenhouse gas emissions (commonly referred to as the energy transition) are truly just throughout all stages of the process. This entails avoiding the creation, expansion, and/or deepening of sacrifice zones; ensuring environmental restoration; guaranteeing the protection of human rights; and securing reparation where rights have been violated. It also requires respecting biophysical boundaries and the resilience capacity of ecosystems.   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.